HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 09-26-19900
llz 6 A 4b
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: Sept. 19, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: Sept. 26, 1990
FILE NO.: 90028
PETITIONER: U.S. Homes Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division
REQUEST: RPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit 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 Restricted Development)
BACKGROUND:
On June 4, 1990, the City Council, by Resolution 90 -335, approved an RPUD
Concept Plan for this 116 -acre site for development into 256 single family
detached lots. The Concept Plan approval was subject to 11 conditions.
The 1990 -1994 Capital Improvements Program includes public water and sewer
trunk line extensions that will include this site within the public and water
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.
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet has been prepared by the City of
Plymouth as the Responsible Governmental Unit since the project, at 256 single
family units, exceeds the threshold established in the rules of the
Environmental Quality Board with respect to a mandatory Environmental
Assessment Worksheet. On August 22, 1990, the 30 -day mandatory review period
for the Environmental Assessment Worksheet was completed, and the City Council
will consider a recommendation by staff that no Environmental Impact Statement
be prepared at its meeting September 10, 1990.
Proposed is an RPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for a
256 -lot subdivision for single family detached housing units on a site of 116
acres.
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.
see next page)
File 90028
Page Two
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
A. Section 9, Subdivision B,
provides that the Planning
its recommendations conce
including, but not limited
1. Compatibility with the
Development.
paragraph 5j of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance
Commission shall forward to the City Council
rning a PUD Preliminary Plan based on and
to:
stated purposes and intent of the Planned Unit
The purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance are
found in paragraph 1 of Subdivision B, Section 9. The five expected
attributes of a Planned Unit Development found in this section are the
standards upon which PUD Proposals are measured to determine
consistency with the purpose and intent of the PUD Ordinance.
No specific benefits from new technology and building design,
construction and land development are emphasized by the applicant.
The applicant has retained the services of trained and experienced
professional to assist in the design of this Planned Unit Development.
Through the use of cul -de -sac streets and reduced lot size /frontage,
the developer may realize a lesser cost in producing single family
detached housing than would be realized through use of conventional
subdivision platting. It is difficult to determine whether the lower
cost to the developer will result in lower cost to consumers.
The developer proposes providing 12 acres of private common open space
net of the storm water drainage area of Pond BC -P1. This amounts to
approximately 11 percent of the overall acreage of the site.
The developer has, by his "Natural Features /Site Analysis" of May 7,
1990, identified approximately 500 existing trees of 8 inch diameter
or greater for hardwoods and 12 inch or greater diameter for softwood
all deciduous -no coniferous trees found). Of that number,
approximately 125 are located within the storm water drainage area for
Pond BC -P1, and therefore those trees will not be lost to the
development grading activities whether approved as a conventional plat
or a PUD.
Of the remaining 375 trees found on -site, the developer proposes a
grading plan that will result in retaining approximately 100 of the
375 significant trees above the 100 -Year Elevation of Pond BC -P1.
Over 70 percent of the trees that exist outside of the storm water
holding area would be lost upon the execution of the grading plan that
is now proposed for this PUD.
see next page)
File 90028
Page Three
2. Relationship of the proposed plan to the neighborhood in which it is
proposed to be located, to the City's Comprehensive Plan, and to other
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
The site is bounded on the east by the Greenwood Elementary School; on
the south by existing single family detached Amber Woods development
and the recently approved "Leuer 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) an existing greenhouse development in the FRD District
Len Busch Roses) and vacant agricultural land. The land 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 operation and greenhouse construction are
responsive to agricultural definitions of the FRD District.
The proposed Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit is
responsive to the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan,
including transportation, utilities, parks, and land use - -with respect
to the proposed dwelling unit density and intrastructure design.
The PUD Plan proposes building setbacks that differ from Zoning
Ordinance standards as follows:
a. Minimum front setback of 30 feet versus the Ordinance standard of
35 feet.
b. Minimum side yard setback of 10 feet (to living portions of
structures); and 6 feet (for garage portions of structures where
3 -car garages are proposed) versus the Zoning Ordinance standard
of 15 feet.
c. Minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet versus
of 25 feet.
d. Minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet
standard of 18,500 square feet. The plat
lots) that meet or exceed the 18,500 square
size; 40 percent of the lots to be 12,000
and, approximately 20 percent of the lots
or less.
the Ordinance standard
versus the Ordinance
proposes 3 percent (8
foot R -1A minimum lot
square feet or less;
are 11,000 square feet
e. Proposed minimum lot width at the front setback is 75 feet versus
the Ordinance standard of 110 feet.
The internal organization, circulation, recreation areas and open
spaces are proposed consistent with the approved Concept Plan,
including modifications to the Trail System recommended by the
Planning Commission and approved by the City Council.
see next page)
File 90028
Page Four
B. The resolution approving the RPUD Concept Plan specified a number of
design - related conditions as well as the standard Concept Plan findings
and conditions with respect to project density. Specific conditions of
that resolution that have been complied with by this RPUD Preliminary
Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit are as follows:
1. Draft restrictive covenants for the private open areas have been
submitted.
2. The Environmental Review Process has been completed.
3. The Preliminary Plan /Plat includes trail linkages modified with
respect to location consistent with a condition found in the Concept
Plan approval resolution.
4. The plan shows more than 10 percent open space (common) above the 100 -
Year Storm Water Elevation and net of required open space, rights -of-
way, rear yards, and ponding areas.
C. Section 500 of the City Code specifies the standards and process for the
review of Preliminary Plats, including Planned Unit Development
Preliminary Plats. Section 500.15, Subdivision 5 provides that all
developers are required to retain and maintain the features of the natural
environment as much as possible by such measures as preservation of
desirable trees, shrubs, land forms, wetlands, and ponding areas.
The Code provides that the Planning Commission shall pay particular
attention to the proposed measures to preserve or mitigate the impacts
upon natural features, and the degree to which a maximum reasonable effort
has been demonstrated to preserve and conserve the natural features, and
the degree to which minimum adverse impact upon the natural environment
will be realized as a result of the proposed development. The discussion
above with respect to the developer's plans concerning preservation of
existing trees on site is equally applicable within this context of the
Subdivision Code requirement for conservation and preservation of natural
environment.
3. Portions of the site are located in the Bassetts Creek, Minnehaha Creek,
and Elm 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.
see next page)
File 90028
Page Five
4. 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 Preliminary Plan /Plat recognizes the existence of the physical
constraints noted, and the design incorporates and accommodates those
physical constraints.
PLANNING STAFF CObMENTS:
1. The Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit proposed is
responsive to the approved Concept Plan, including those conditions that
affect design contained in City Council Resolution 90 -335 approving that
Concept Plan.
2. Both the Planned Unit Development attribute regarding preservation and
enhancement of natural features, and the Subdivision Code section
specifying a need for conservation of natural site features relate to the
developer's tree preservation plan. With the substantially greater detail
available to us at the Preliminary Plan /Plat stage versus at the Concept
Plan stage, with respect to the relationship of the project design to the
existing tree stands, we find that nearly 75 percent of the existing
significant trees on the site, not located within the drainage area for
Pond BC -P1, will be "lost" in the execution of the grading plan for the
preliminary plat that is proposed.
The developer has not significantly altered the grading plan for the site
responsive to the details of the tree inventory that were developed during
this stage of review.
We note that the Preliminary Plat
become common area for the benefit
F) is located in an area that will
existing tree resources on the
substitute common areas and /or
significant additional preservation
provides for four outlots that will
of the development. Only one (Outlot
result in preservation of any of the
site. By providing additional or
adjusting the location of roadways,
of trees could be accomplished.
Significant tree inventory exists in the areas of Lots 1 and 2, Block 10;
Lot 7, Block 21; Lots 1 and 2, Block 11; Lots 8 -12, Block 22; Lots 11 and
12, Block 16; Lots 1, 4 and 5, Block 8; and, Lots 2 -4, Block 9. Were some
or all of these lots designated as additional common open space outlots or
provided as substitute for outlots that are proposed where no tree
preservation will result, a significantly larger percentage of the
existing trees could be preserved.
We recognize that 100 percent of existing tree inventory can rarely be
retained with a development plan. However, this is a proposed Planned
see next page)
File 90028
Page Six
Unit Development where extra efforts with respect to preservation of
natural resources are expected as PUD attributes as well as for any
subdivision (PUD or conventional) responsive to Section 500 of the City
Code. The developer expects significant flexibility in the design to
realize the desired density.
The potential conflict between the existing tree inventory and the
proposed grading plan was brought to the attention of the developer during
the Development Review Committee (DRC) review of these plans. Responsive
to that concern, the developer prepared a "blowup" of the three areas of
the plat with the greatest number of trees to be impacted, showing the
exact tree locations with respect to the grading plan and lotting details.
Even though the grading plan still showed the 75 percent tree loss noted
above, no additional design modifications have been suggested by the
developer to reduce this loss. We believe such modifications are
warranted for a Planned Unit Development where substantial design
flexibility is requested.
3. The standard that has been established by the Council with respect to the
side yard flexibility in single family detached projects has been a
minimum of 10 feet on both sides of the primary structure including the
attached garage. There have been several previous requests to allow less
than 10 feet on the garage side, none of which have been approved. We
find 10 feet is appropriate here and is possible.
4. Proposals to reduce front setback
to a lesser amount have recently
single family detached proposals.
feet have not been approved on
developer has been encouraged to
setback will result in the pres
case -by -case basis. We find that
case of this PUD Plan as well.
from the Ordinance standard of 35 feet
been made with a number of other RPUD
Reduction to a setback of less than 35
a blanket basis. In each case, the
demonstrate how the reduction of front
arvation of natural site features on a
this approach will be appropriate in the
5. Rear yard setback should remain at the 25 -foot Zoning Ordinance standard.
It is a minimum. The proposed 20 feet is slightly more than a parking
stall.
6. In several locations throughout the plat, the developer has proposed 10-
foot wide private common open space corridors between single family lots
on which an 8 -foot wide private trail is proposed for construction. The
developer has also proposed a landscape treatment for the entrance to
these corridors.
A 10 -foot trail corridor, whether private or public, is of insufficient
width to provide the required separation between the users of the trail
and the private interests of the adjoining property owners. City public
see next page)
File 90028
Page Seven
trail corridors and most corridors in other private open space are 20 feet
in width and often as much as 30 feet in width to insulate the trail user
from the private property owner by as much distance as possible.
7. Planning Commission consideration of the Concept Plan addressed the
assignment of a density bonus point for 10 percent open space. The
Preliminar Plan does provide in excess of 10 percent open space (private
and public exclusive of required street right -of -way, required public
park and trail dedication, required storm drainage areas, and required
rear yards, as specified for such density credit by the Zoning Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Our finding with regard to the inconsistency of proposed Preliminary Plan /Plat
with the preservation of natural resources PUD attribute and the Subdivision
Ordinance preservation requirement does not readily lend itself to specific
directions for redesign that could be provided as conditions of approval.
We recommend that the Preliminary Plat be tabled, and the developer be advised
to reconsider the plan design in those areas where significant existing stands
of trees are present, with the design goal of preserving a larger percentage
of those trees through the introduction or relocation of common open space
outlots; rerouting of streets; or /and reconsideration of the grading plan
details. The developer could also then demonstrate on lots where less than 35
foot front yards are sought, how preservation efforts would be realized.
We have included draft resolutions for approval and denial with findings or
conditions that either standard or appear appropriate to assist the Planning
Commission should it cide redesign is not appropriate. We recommend denial
of the applicationsrtabling fgw- -r\ede,,.- is not deemed appropriate.
Submitted by:
arTtrf E. Dillerud, Commu-n—ity Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Denying RPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit
2. Resolution Approving RPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit
3. Engineer's Memorandum
4. Location Map
5. Resolution 90 -335
6. City Council Minutes of June 4, 1990
7. Planning Commission Minutes of May 23, 1990
8. Large Plans and Petitioner's Narrative Submission
pc /cd /90028:dl)
DENYING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN /PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR U.S. HOMES CORPORATI%Thompson LAND DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION FOR THE "MITCHELL- PEARSON" PROPERTY (9002,
WHEREAS, U.S. Homes Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division has
requested approval for a Residential Planned Unit Development Preliminary
Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for the creation of 256 single family
lots and 13 outlots on 116 acres for the "Mitchell- Pearson" 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;
SNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the request by U.S.
Homes Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division for a Residential Planned
Unit Development Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for the
Mitchell- Pearson" property located at the southeast quadrant of the west City
limits (Brockton Lane) and Medina Road, based on the following findings:
1. The plat and plan do not comply with the Planned Unit Development
attribute of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance regarding affirmative design
efforts toward the preservation and enhancement of natural site features.
The plan proposes to remove a significant percentage of existing trees on
the site above the 100 -Year Flood Elevation.
2. The plat does not com ly with Section 500.15 of the Plymouth City Code
Subdivision Ordinance regarding retention and maintenance of desirable
trees. The plan proposes to remove a significant percentage of existing
trees on the site above the 100 -Year Flood Elevation.
3. The proposed development, while requesting design flexibility possible
with Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) does not provide corresponding
features that we delineated for PUDs in Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN /PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR U.S. HOMES CORPORATION THOMPSON LAND DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION FOR THE "MITCHELL- PEARSON" PROPERTY (90028
WHEREAS, U.S. Homes Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division has
requested approval for a Residential Planned Unit Development Preliminary
Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for the creation of 256 single family
lots and 13 outlots on 116 acres for the "Mitchell- Pearson" 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 Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for
the "Mitchell- Pearson" 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. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
3. No building permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
sewer and water.
4. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of filing the Final Plat with
Hennepin County with credit for dedication of and trail construction in
Outlot I.
5. Street names shall comply with the City Street Naming System.
6. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to, or containing any open
storm water drainage facility.
7. Rezoning shall be finalized with the filing of the Final Plat.
8. No building permits shall be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
9. Maximum allowed density shall be 2.5 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. Five density points
are assigned. The maximum number of dwelling units allowed is 256.
see next page)
Resolution No.
File 90028
Page Two
10. No private drive access shall be permitted to Medina Road; all private
drives shall be directed to internal public streets.
11. The minimum side yard setbacks for all detached dwellings and accessory
buildings shall be 10 feet; the minimum rear yard setback shall be 25
feet; and the minimum front yard setback shall be 35 feet, except on lots
specified by the City Council in the Final Plan and Development Contract,
where it has been demonstrated that preservation of natural site features
requires a reduced front setback.
12. The design of proposed private open space areas and Medina Road landscape
screening shall be specified with the Final Plat. The approved
improvements shall be installed prior to issuance of building permits for
homes on the adjacent lots.
13. Compliance with the terms of City Council Resolution 89 -439 regarding tree
preservation.
14. Redesign of private open space areas to increase the width of trail
corridors to a minimum of 20 feet.
DATE:
FILE NO.:
PETITIONER:
PRELIMINARY PLAT:
LOCATION:
N/A Yes No
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
September 20, 1990
VI1I1YV
Mr. William Pritchard, U.S. Homes Corporation, 300 South Highway
169, Suite 870, St. Louis Park, MN 55426
MITCHELL PEARSON PROPERTY
South of Medina, east of the City of Medina, in the southwest 1/4
of Section 18.
1. _ _ X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These Are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2•
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of final plat approval.
4. Area assessments: Watermain area assessments based on 256 units x
790 per unit = $202,240. Sanitary sewer area assessment based on
256 units x $440 per unit = $112,640.
5. Other additional assessments estimated:
Medina Road Project 010 - Street - $184,100. Watermain - 525,875.
Pond BC -P1 Project 016 - $17,778.54.
N/A Yes No
6. _ _ X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet (10')
in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in width adjoining
side and rear lot lines.
N/A Yes No
7. X All standard utility easements required for construction are provided
The City will require twenty foot (20') utility and drainage
easements for proposed utilities along the lot lines where these
utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has been reviewed
with the final plat and final construction plans.
g. _ _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's comprehensive
storm water drainage plan.
Drainaze easements for ponding shall be provided to the 100 year
elevation of 1002.5 for Pond BC -P1 and to the 100 year high water
elevation for the following ponds within* Outlot A - 1001-0. Outlot
C North Pond 1002 0, South Pond - 1001-5. Outlot F - 1003.0. For
the Pond in the following blocks• Block 16 - 1000-0- Block 25
1003.0. Block 23 - 1003.0.
g. X _ — All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way to
facilitate the development. This is not an automatic process in
conjunction with the platting process. It is the owner's
responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal descriptions of
easements proposed to be vacated.
10. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application - If it is subsequently determined that
the subject property is abstract property, then this requirement does
not apply.
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
11. X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
X DNR
MnDOT
Hennepin County
X MPCA
X State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
X Minnehaha Creek
X Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
X Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
2 -
TRANSPORTATION:
N/A Yes No
12. X Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to the
City grid system for street names. The following changes will be
necessary. The Building_ Department will review the street names when
a 200 scale drawing is submitted for review.
13. _ X Conforms with the City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the City's
adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
14. X _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
15. _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
N/A Yes No
16. X Conforms with City standards requiring the developer to construct
utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the developer shall be responsible
for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and
streets needed to serve this plat. A registered professional
engineer must prepare the plans and profiles of the proposed sanitary
sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities and streets to serve the
development. See a„pec al conditions.
3 -
N/A Yes No
17. _ _ X Preliminary utility plans submitted comply with all City requirements
The developer has submitted the required preliminary plans for the
proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities. 3_"
special conditions.
18. X Per developer's request a preliminary report and plan will be
prepared by the City -
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities as
part of its Capital Improvements Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October 1,
of the year preceding construction. The developer shall submit a
petition for the construction of Medina Road Project No. 010 and Pond
BC -P1 Project No 016 and sanitary Sewer Trunk Project 014.
19. _ _ Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots. The minimum basement elevations will be noted in the Final
Plat Memo when the final grading plan is received.
N/A Yes No
20. _ X The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
21. _ X The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
4 -
PRELIMINARY GRADING DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL:
N/A Yes No
22. X It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility
foreman, 24 hours in advance of making any, proposed utility
connections to the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The
developer shall also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the
Public Works Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging
within the City right -of -way. All water connections shall be via
wet tag.
23. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been submitted to
the City's Consulting Engineer for review to see if it is in
conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All
of their recommendations shall be incorporated in a revised plan.
The grading and drainage plan shall also indicate proposed methods of
erosion control, including the placement of silt fence in strategic
locations. Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary:
Shall comply with all agency permits,
24. A. The sanitary sewer on and around Elvarado Avenue is only 5 feet deep. The
engineer must verify that the lots can be served with the shallow sewer.
B. An 8 inch watermain shall be extended on Zircon Avenue from the proposed
Lundgren Development to 37th Ave.
C. On sheet 6 the outlot pipe from the pond in Outlot F has arrows in the wrong
direction.
D. On the final grading plan a detail shall be furnished showing the outflow to
Medina from the pond within Outlot A.
E. The 12 inch watermain in the southeast corner of the site shall be extended to
the existing lift station south of the proposed plat. The developer will be
reiumbused for the difference between an 8 inch and 12 inch watermain within
the plat, and .100% of the cost for the 12 inch watermain from the south plat
line to the lift station.
F. All storm water drainage from the plat shall not exceed in quantity or rate of
discharge that which now exists from this proposed plat as undeveloped.
G. All access shall be from internal streets, no access shall be provided to
Medina Road for the individual lots.
H. The street width on Zircon Avenue, Yellowstone Avenue and 38th Avenue and
Urbandale Avenue North shall be 36 feet wide back to back of curb 7 ton design
and shall be noted on sheet 6 Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan.
5 -
I. A Final Plat shall not be considered until a contract has been awarded for
Medina Road Project No. 010, Sanitary Sewer Project No. 014, and Pond BC -Pl
Project No. 016.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
M
LPC M P
o zs
i
i
Nq R -
r
r
SITE °z
L tl•
A AMMO
r
r-
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 4th day
of June , 19_20- The following members were present:
Mayor Bergman, Councilmembers Relliwell Ricker Vasiliou and Zitur
The following members were absent: None
Councilmember Zitur introduced the following Resolution and
moved its adoption..
RESOLUTION 90- 335
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. Density bonus points are assigned as follows:
a. +4 for Project Size (Maximum Available for Size)
4. If the bonus point for open space is achieved, maximum density shall be
2.5 units per net acre. Density shall be no more than 2.4 units per net
acre until it is demonstrated that the plan achieves qualified open space
sufficient to achieve the bonus point.
5. Draft restrictive covenants for the private open areas shall be submitted
with Preliminary Plat /Plan application.
see next page)
Resolution No. 90 -335
File 90028
Page Two
6. 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.
7. No private drive access shall be permitted to Medina Road; all private
drives shall be provided by internal public streets.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. The RPUD Preliminary Plan shall include private trail linkages southwest
from "Walnut Grove Lane" to "Yellowstone Lane "; from "Yellowstone Lane"
westerly to the north end of the pond area of "Outlot E"; from "Alvarado
Lane" west to "Outlot D" at the north and south ends of "Outlot D "; and
southerly from the "Alvarado Lane" cul -de -sac at the southwest corner of
the plan to the "Outlot G" trail corridor. .
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded
by Councilmember Ricker , and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Bergman, Councilmembers
The following voted against or abstained None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
RBGULAR
jum 4,
VAGS 192
COUNCIL WSTING
1990
MOTION as made by Councilmember Ricker,
seconded Counciimem' er Vasiliou, to direct
the Plannin ommiaion to consider revision
of the Zoning inance minimum 15' side yard
setback in the R District, for dwellings
and accessory stru ea.
Motion carried on a row call vote, five
ayes.
Councilmember Zitur asked if the trail
proposed in the Concept Plan for the
Mitchell- Pearson Property" Mould connect
with Greenwood School.
Director Tremere stated the trail would
connect with Greenwood School.
Councilmember Zitur asked if assignment of
density bonus points would be resolved by the
Planning Commission.
Director Tremere stated four points would be
assigned due to the size of the development.
An additional point will be decided at the
preliminary plat stage. If the developer is
unable to convince the Planning Commission
that an additional bonus point is warranted,
ten dwelling units will need to be eliminated
from the development. The development would
then consist of 246 dwelling units, rather
than the 256 now proposed.
Councilmember Vasiliou shared the concerns
expressed by Planning Commissioners Plufka
and Stulberg of allowing the petitioner to go
below the 10 percent open space requirement.
She stated that other designs to minimize
open space have not worked, and she will be
looking critically at how the open space is
used at the Preliminary Plat stage. Delay in
assigning bonus points could mislead the
developer and residents nearby as to size of
the development.
i
REGULAR COUNCIL Mr"ING
JUNE 4, 1990
PAGE 193
Councilmember Ricker echoed Councilmember
Vasiliou's concerns regarding use of open
space.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur,
seconded by Councilmember Ricker, to adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -335 APPROVING RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN FOR
U.S. HOMES CORPORATION /THOMPSON LAND
DEVELOPMENT DIVISION (90028) .
Bill Pritchard, petitioner, stated the
original concept plan showed the storm water
drainage area incorporated as open space.
Since that time, they have considered
including a ponding area, but not storm water
drainage, in the open space calculations.
This would create homeowner association
amenities and provides a passive type of open
space. He asked if the Council would
consider a ponding area as open apace.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated she supports
the concept of passive open space in
developments; however, it must clearly be
delineated who will maintain the open space.
Councilmember Zitur stated he is also not
opposed to the use of ponds as passive open
space.
Councilmember Helliwell asked whether the
ponds were natural. Mr. Pritchard responded
they were not.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five
MOTION was made by Councilme r Zitur,
seconded by Councilmember Rid to adopt
RESOLUTION N0. 90 -336 APPROVI SI, TE PLAN AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT R TRAMMELL CROW
COMPANY FOR NEW HORIZO AY CARE (90030).
Motion carrie:f a roll call vote, five
ayes. "
RESOLUTION 90 -335
APPROVING RPUD
CONCEPT PLAN FOR
U.S. HOMES
CORPORATION /THOMP
SON LAND DEV.
90028)
Item 8 -B
APPROVING SITE
PLAN AND UP FOR
NEW H ZON DAY
90030)
I M *8 -C
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 23, 1990
The Regular Meeting of the City of Plymouth Planning
Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Plufka, Commissioners
John Wire (arrived at 7:40 p.m.), Hal
Pierce, Joy Tierney, Larry Marofsky, and
Michael Stulberg.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Dennis Zylla.
STAFF PRESENT: Coordinator Charles Dillerud and Sr.
Clerk /Typist Denise Lanthier.
MINUTES
mmissioner Pierce, seconded by Commissioner
Tierney, to appr utes for the May 9, 1990,
Planning Commission Meeting.
Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried.
Chairman Plufka introduced the request by U.S. Homes
Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division for an RPUD
Concept Plan for the "Mitchell- Pearson Property" located at
the southeast quadrant of the west City limits (Brockton
Lane) and Medina Road.
Coordinator Dillerud gave an overview of the May 15, 1990,
staff report.
Chairman Plufka asked staff why the petitioner's failure to
achieve 10 percent open space consistent with the Sketch
Plan approval is not included in the resolution.
Coordinator Dillerud responded that the failure to provide
10 percent qualifying open space results in the inability to
gain a bonus point in the PUD. The Sketch Plan approval
condition is not the same issue.
Chairman Plufka introduced Bill Pritchard of Orrin Thompson
Homes, representing the petitioner. '
Mr. Pritchard stated that Orrin Thompson Homes is an
integral part of the community. He stated they strongly
MOTION TO APPROVE
IED
U.S. HOMES CORPORATION/
THOMPSON LAND DEVELOP-
MENT (90028)
Planning Commission Minutt
May 23, 1990
Page 79
believe in customer satisfaction, and their primary goal is
to cooperate with the City of Plymouth in order to maintain
a long working relationship. He stated upon approval of the
Sketch Plan, they were directed to create more open space,
and he feels they meet or exceed the 10 percent open space
requirement by making some minor adjustments. Mr. Pritchard
stated that the adjustment of the collector street has
resulted in more lots and less cul -de -sacs. He stated their
trade -off is to create more active and passive open space.
Mr. Pritchard asked for direction from the Planning
Commission regarding setbacks. He asked for front setback
of 30 feet for garage space and 35 feet for living space.
Mr. Pritchard stated he agrees with the Ordinance regarding
side yard setbacks with the exception of homes with three
car garages. He stated that the Ordinance allows a setback
of 6 feet for detached garages, and asked the Commissioners
to view a three car garage the same as a detached garage.
Commissioner Wire arrived at 7:40 p.m.
Chairman Plufka introduced Greg Frank of McCombs, Frank,
Roos and Associates, representing the petitioner.
Mr. Frank stated that they have provided much open space for
amenities. He stated that the southwest portion of the site
is wooded and would be preserved. He stated that the BC -P1
ponding area extends into the rear yards and that there is
no standing water in most of the pond area. Mr. Frank
stated that when they create the ponds, they will be
creating amenity. He stated the trails will be maintained
by an association in order to create a good linear
neighborhood. Mr. Frank stated that the average lot size
would be 12,000 + square feet, and no lots would be less
than 10,000 square feet.
Chairman Plufka opened the Public Hearing. There was no one
present to speak on the issue.
Chairman Plufka closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Pierce asked Mr. Pritchard why the trail that
ties into the school adjacent to the "Mitchell- Pearson
Property" jogs as it crosses a collector street.
Mr. Pritchard responded that they will propose to change
that in their Preliminary Plan.
Commissioner Pierce stated he was concerned that the lots
backing up to Medina Road in Block 1 were too shallow.
Commissioner Tierney asked staff what the name of one of the
proposed streets would be (Alvarado Lane or Zircon Lane).
Planning Commission Minut'.
May 23, 1990
Page 80
Coordinator Dillerud responded that the naming of streets is
the decision of the Chief Building Official. Street naming
will be reviewed at later plat stages.
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner
Stulberg, to recommend approval of the request by U.S. Homes
Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division for an RPUD
Concept Plan for the "Mitchell- Pearson Property" located at
the southeast quadrant of the west City limits (Brockton
Lane) and Medina Road, subject to the conditions set forth
by staff in the memorandum of May 15, 1990.
MOTION TO APPROVE
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO AMEND
Stulberg, to amend Condition #3 by stating that the maximum
density shall be 2.5 units per acre resulting in 256 units,
only if the plan meets the 10 percent open space requirement
of the PUD Ordinance.
Chairman Plufka stated he was against the motion to amend
because he finds open space deficient. He stated that he
feels the petitioner is "shoehorning" more density than the
property can handle.
Roll Call Vote. 3 Ayes. Commissioners Wire, Pierce, and
Chairman Plufka Nay. MOTION to amend failed.
MOTION by Commissioner., Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner
Stulberg, to add a condition stating that the RPUD
Preliminary Plan shall include private trail linkages
southwest from "Walnut Grove Lane" to "Yellowstone Lane ";
from "Yellowstone Lane" westerly to the north end of the
pond area of "Outlot E "; from "Alvarado Lane" west to
Outlot D" at the north and south ends of "Outlot D "; and
southerly from the "Alvarado Lane" cul -de -sac at the
southwest corner of the plan to the "Outlot G" trail
corridor.
Commissioner Wire asked staff if this Concept Plan has been
reviewed by Parks and Recreation.
Coordinator Dillerud responded that the plan has been
reviewed by the Director of Parks and Recreation, and he had
no comments regarding the trails proposed.
Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. Commissioners Wire and Tierney
Nay. MOTION to amend carried.
MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner
Marofsky, to amend Condition #3 by deleting the first
paragraph and assigning another +1 bonus point for qualified
open space in excess of 10 percent of the net site area, if
achieved.
VOTE - MOTION TO AMEND
FAILED (TIE VOTE)
MOTION TO AMEND
VOTE - MOTION TO AMEND
CARRIED
MOTION TO AMEND
Planning Commission Minut,
May 23, 1990
Page 81
t
Commissioner Stulberg stated he feels Condition #3 as it
reads is in conflict with the Sketch Plan approval by
allowing the petitioner to go below 10 percent open space.
Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. Commissioner Wire and Chairman
Plufka Nay. MOTION to amend carried.
Chairman Plufka stated that the reason for his vote against
the amendment was because he feels Condition #3 is in
compliance with the Zoning Ordinance, as drafted.
Roll Call Vote on Main Motion. 5 Ayes. Chairman Plufka
Nay. MOTION carried.
Chairman Plufka introduced the request by Trammell Crow
Company for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a day
care facility located on the west side of Berkshire Lane and
north of County Road 9.
Chairman Plufka waived the overview of the May 15, 1990,
staff report.
Chairman Plufka introduced Peter Hilger of Portfolio Design
Services, Inc., representing the petitioner.
Mr. Hilger stated he was in agreement with the May 15, 1990,
staff report and had no additional comments.
Chairman Plufka opened the Public Hearing. There was n one
present to speak on the issue.
Chairman Plufka closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded y Commissioner
Tierney, to recommend approval Ztheest uest by Trammell
Crow Company for a Site Plan anal Use Permit for
a day care facility located on ide of Berkshire
Lane and north of County Road o the conditions
set forth by staff in the memor 15, 1990.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOON carried.
Chairman Plufka introd d the request by Independent School
District 284 (Wayza for a Site Plan, Conditional Use
Permit, and rezon' g from FRD to R -1A 'for an elementary
school located b ween County Road 9 and Highway 55, east of
Peony Lane.
Coordin;Dillerudr gave an overview of the May 15, 1990,
staff r .
mfissioner Pierce asked staff how staff planned to reguide
s area.
VOTE - MOTION TO AMEND
CARRIED
VOTE ON MAIN MOTION -
MOTION CARRIED
TRAMMELL CROW COMP
90030) z
MOTION TO APPROVE
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
DISTRICT 284 (WAYZATA)
90031)
zoo.
z 9
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
REPORT DATE:
FILE NO.:
PETITIONER:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
GUIDE PLAN CLASS:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
Sept. 21, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: Sept. 26, 1990
90082
St. Philip the Deacon Church
Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Zoning Ordinance
Variances for Remodeling and Enlargement of the St. Philip
the Deacon Church
17205 County Road 6
LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
The original church was constructed during the 1960s.
In 1981, a Site Plan amendment was approved to expand the parking facilities;
and, in 1986, a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan amendment was approved to
allow further parking lot expansion.
Since the early 1970s, there has been a separate Conditional Use Permit for a
nursery school -- "Peppermint Fence Nursery School." The most recent
application concerning this Conditional Use Permit was considered by the
Planning Commission at its meeting September 12, 1990. This application
requested a change in the permittee for the nursery school Conditional Use
Permit. The matter will be considered, with the positive Planning Commission
Recommendation, by the City Council on September 24, 1990.
This application is for a Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan, and Zoning
Ordinance variances to demolish a 7,200 square foot portion of the existing
St. Philip the Deacon Church; construct a 32,050 square foot 2 -level addition
to the church; and construct an upper deck level to the existing parking area
located east of the church structure.
Notice of this Public Hearing 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.
Page Two
File 90082
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. This Conditional Use Permit to permit a place of worship in the R -1A
Zoning District is processed consistent with the provisions of Section 9
of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance where six specific standards are required
to be complied with before any Conditional Use Permit may be issued by the
City Council upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission. A copy
of those Conditional Use Permit standards is attached, and the petitioner
has provided narrative response to those standards, and a description of
his project, also attached.
2. The Site Plan presented provides for the redevelopment of the site
involving the demolition and reconstruction of the main church structure
increasing auditorium seating from the existing 380 to 800) and,
increasing the off - street parking from the existing 278 to a proposed 260
at grade, and an additional 92 on the upper level of a proposed parking
structure.
Except for the variances noted below, the Site Plan meets the several
ordinances, codes, and policies of the City of Plymouth regarding
construction of this type of facility in this Zoning District.
Specifically, landscaping is consistent with the City of Plymouth
Landscape Policy; trash will be handled with the existing board-on- board-
trash enclosure; no roof top units are proposed, and therefore no
screening is required; proposed off - street parking exceeds Ordinance
requirements for a structure of this use and size; exterior illumination
down to .5 -foot candles is retained within the property lines; and all
parking /drive areas are designed consistent with the standards of the
Zoning Ordinance.
3. The site is located in the Gleason Lake Storm Water Drainage District, and
a portion of the site (east extremity) is a part of Storm Water Holding
Pond GL -P22. There is no Shoreland or Flood Plain Overlay Districts that
include the site, but the extreme east portion of the site (related to
Pond GL -P22) is a part of wetlands regulated by both the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Corps of Engineers. The site
does not contain, any woodlands of significance, nor areas of slope in
excess of 12 percent. This site is considered, in the Plymouth Physical
Constraints Anal sis, as suitable for urban development (except with the
GL -P22 pond area . By the use of retaining walls, no encroachment of
significance can be expected on the identified City storm water drainage
area and state /federal wetlands.
4. The application proposes Zoning Ordinance variances as follows:
a. Front setback from the proposed parking structure to the front
property line (after County Road 6 right -of -way is deducted) of 37
feet versus the Ordinance standard of 50 feet. Note that the parking
deck is considered a "structure" by the Zoning Ordinance, and
therefore is subject to the structure setback provisions.
Page Three
File 90082
b. Setback to the County Road 6 property line for the existing
identification sign to permit retention of the sign at its current
location 4 feet from the new right -of -way line of County Road 6 versus
the Ordinance standard of 20 feet.
c. Lot coverage by all structures (including the parking deck) of 35.6
percent versus the Ordinance standard of 20 percent.
d. Impervious surface coverage of 66.2 percent versus the_ Ordinance
standard of 50 percent.
5. Section 11, Subdivision A, paragraph 12 of the Zoning Ordinance provides
that when Zoning variances are proposed in conjunction with a Site Plan
requiring approval by the City Council, the City Council shall serve as
the Board of Zoning Adjustment, with the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, concerning the variances requested. The Zoning Ordinance
provides six specific criteria which must be complied with before a Zoning
Ordinance variance may be granted. A copy of those six criteria is
attached to this staff report together with a narrative statement by the
applicant as to how this proposal meets those criteria.
6. The architectural treatment of the reconstructed main structure will be of
brick to match the existing brick with a "metal standing seam roof." The
concrete parking deck is proposed to be of an untreated concrete surface
for the 4 -foot high walls that will screen parking to the south and east
sides of the site; and cables forming a 4 -foot high barrier to the north
County Road 6) side. The terms and provisions of the City Council
resolution regarding "Policy, Standards and Criteria Regarding Site and
Building Aesthetics and Architectural Design" are applicable to this
proposed Site Plan.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. With respect to the proposed demolition and rebuilding of the church
structure, we find the proposal meets the standards for a Conditional Use
Permit specified by the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance.
2. The existing 278 off - street parking spaces and the proposed 260 off - street
parking spaces at grade level, both exceed the minimum number of off -
street parking spaces required by the Zoning Ordinance for a place of
worship with a seating area for 800 people (200 required).
The proposed parking structure would add 92 off - street parking spaces to a
parking component already in excess of Zoning Ordinance requirements (for
a proposed total of 352 spaces). The variances proposed for structure
setback and site coverage by structures are a direct result of the
proposal to construct the parking deck.
3. The variance requested for front structure setback to the County Road 6
property line relates to reduction in the available area for front setback
for this parcel by the dedication of 13 feet additional right -of -way for
Page Four
File 90082
County Road 6; but this factor is not the sole reason for the variance
request. Even if no right -of -way were to be dedicated for County Road 6,
a variance from the 50 -foot standard (to provide a 43 -foot setback) would
be required to construct the parking deck as proposed.
The parking that would be created by the proposed parking deck is in
excess of the Zoning Ordinance requirements for a church facility of the
proposed size, and therefore only "necessary" from the perspective of the
petitioner - -at least at the size proposed. A somewhat smaller parking
deck could be designed to overcome the front setback variance problem.
We find the request for the front setback variance to not meet the
criteria of the Zoning Ordinance for variances with respect to hardship,
uniqueness of the site, and the requirement that the variance no be a
result of a hardship caused by the persons having interest in the
property.
4. The variance request to exceed the Zoning Ordinance standard of 20 percent
structure coverage relates to the proposal to construct a parking deck on
this site. The deck is a "structure" and results in the proposal for 35.6
percent coverage of the site by structures versus the Ordinance standard
of 20 percent (the existing coverage is 9.2 percent).
Without the parking deck considered, the Site Plan proposes a 14 percent
site coverage - -well within the Ordinance standard. Approximately 1/4 of
the parking deck could be constructed without requiring a variance for
structure coverage, assuming the balance of the Site Plan is constructed
as proposed.
We find that the requested variance for structure coverage of the site
fails to meet Zoning Ordinance criteria with respect to hardship,
uniqueness of the parcel, and source of the hardship or difficulty not
being the persons having interest in the property at the present time.
The parking deck is not required for the site to meet off - street parking
requirements. It is contrary to the intent of the standards established a
couple of years ago for places of worship in residential districts.
5. The variance requested to exceed the impervious surface requirements of
the Zoning Ordinance is not directly related to the proposal to construct
the parking deck. The Site Plan design proposed results in the request
for the variance, with or without the parking deck. As noted, the site,
as existing, exceeds the Ordinance standard for impervious surfacing at
59.7 percent (after County Road 6 right -of -way is deducted).
The variance requested, therefore, is to cover approximately 13,500 square
feet additional site with this new Site Plan than is currently covered
with the existing development level. We find no specific hardship or
unique qualities of this particular site in response to the Zoning
Ordinance criteria. While an increase in value or income potential are
not terms that are generally related to places of worship, the increased
utilization of the site that will result from the variance, if granted,
Page Five
File 90082
becomes of similar nature to increased income or value. We can find no
reason for the variance other than increased utilization of the site,
therefore, we find this variance proposal to be inconsistent with criteria
of the Zoning Ordinance related to exclusive desire to increase the value
or income potential of the parcel and design standards for places of
worship in residential districts.
Were this variance request to increase site impervious coverage from the
existing 57.6 percent to nearly 60 percent as a result of the loss of site
area due to County Road 6 right -of -way dedication, we could find a basis
for granting the variance. However, the applicant proposes to, in fact,
increase the impervious surface of the site beyond the mathematical
adjustment for the right -of -way dedication.
6. The proposed Site Plan, due to the number of and type of variances
requested is a proposal to utilize the parcel in excess of the intent of
the Zoning Ordinance. We recognize the existence of a minimal amount of
wetlands at the east periphery of the site, but we do not find that
preservation of the wetlands contributes to a hardship that should serve
as the basis for the several variances requested.
7. The variance request with respect to the setback of the existing church
identification sign complies with the six criteria listed in Section 11,
Subdivision C. Specifically, the variance is a result of actions by
Hennepin County to increase the right -of -way width for County Road 6; such
actions are unique within the R -1A Zoning District since identification
signs for places of worship are not a common occurence - -but allowable; the
exclusive purpose for the variance is not to increase the income potential
or value of the property; the hardship or difficulty is not caused by
persons presently having interest in the property; the granting of the
variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or other standard
improvements in the neighborhood; and the variance will not impair the
adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property, or diminish or
impair property values in the neighborhood.
RECOhMENDATION:
We recommend the petitioner reconsider these Site Plan proposals to carefully
analyze the proposal for the elimination of the parking structure or a
redesign of that structure to reduce the size, to overcome structure setback
and structure coverage variance requirements. We also recommend the Site Plan
be redesigned to limit impervious surface coverage to no more than the
existing site exhibits, after netting out the County Road 6 right -of -way
resulting in a reduced site area (59.7 percent).
We note the site area to be 4.77 acres (net of the County Road 6 right -of-
way). The R -1A Zoning District standards provide that nonresidential
conditional uses may have a site area of up to 10 acres. We recommend that
the church consider additional property acquisition if it is their decision to
grow "on- the - spot," particularly with respect to the perceived need for off -
street parking to service the church where such parking is in excess of the
Page Six
File 90082
Zoning Ordinance standards for the use.
While we are recommending deferral of these applications to allow redesign by
the church, we have presented resolutions of denial and approval, consistent
with prior Planning Commission direction. The denial resolutions relate to
the variances requested that we find do not meet the criteria of the Zoning
Ordinance. Without the benefit of those variances, the Conditional Use Permit
and Site Plan cannot,ta, acted upon since both would be in violation of Zoning
Ordinance standards,( ,
Submitted by:
arTg—s E. Dillerud, Community Development
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Denying Variance for Structure Setback,
Structures, and Impervious Coverage of the Site
2. Resolution Approving Site Plan, Conditional Use
Ordinance Variances
3. Engineer's Memorandum
4. Conditional Use Permit Standards
5. Variance Criteria
6. Petitioner's Narrative
7. Location Map
8. Large Plans
pc /cd /90082:dl)
nator
Site Coverage by
Permit, and Zoning
DENYING VARIANCES FOR STRUCTURE SETBACK TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, SITE
COVERAGE BY ALL STRUCTURES, AND SITE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE PERCENTAGE FOR ST.
PHILIP THE DEACON CHURCH (90082)
WHEREAS, St. Philip the Deacon Church has requested approval for Zoning
Ordinance variances for structure setback to the front property line, site
coverage by all structures, and site impervious surface coverage for property
located at 17205 County Road 6; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends denial;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the requests by St.
Philip the Deacon Church for Zoning Ordinance variances for structure setback
to the front property line, site coverage by all structures, and site
impervious surface coverage for property located at 17205 County Road 6, based
on the following findings:
1. The petitioner has demonstrated no particular physical surroundings,
shape, or topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved
to create a hardship as distinguished from an inconvenience. The
variances requested relate to off - street parking construction on the site,
and adequate off - street parking, consistent with Ordinance standards, can
be provided without the construction that results in the request for the
variances.
2. The conditions upon which the petition for variance is based are not
unique to this parcel of land for which the variance is sought. Numerous
other parcels throughout the community include places of worship in the R-
lA Zoning District. A desire to realize greater utilization of the site
by request for Zoning variances would be applicable generally to other
property within the same Zoning classification of the same use.
3. The petitioner has not demonstrated that the Zoning Ordinance variances
requested are based on any factor other than the petitioner's desire to
gain greater utilization of an existing site, and therefore gain a greater
value to that site for the use.
4. The petitioner ,has not demonstrated that the alleged hardship or
difficulty is caused by the Zoning Ordinance, and not created by the
petitioner through his desire to gain greater utilization of the existing
parcel of land.
APPROVING SITE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCES ,
FOR ST. PHILIP THE DEACON CHURCH (90082)
WHEREAS, St. Philip the Deacon Church has requested approval for a Site Plan,
Conditional Use Permit, and Zoning Ordinance variances to construct a 32,050
square foot addition and a 44,590 square foot parking deck for property
located at 17205 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 requests by
St. Philip the Deacon Church for a Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and
Zoning Ordinance variances to construct a 32,050 square foot addition and a
44,590 square foot parking deck for property located 17205 County Road 6,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing any open storm
water drainage facility.
3. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements within one year of the date of this
resolution.
4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance and the specific
variance approved by this resolution.
5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
6. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
7. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the existing
enclosure, and no outside storage is permitted.
8. An 8k x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan,shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
9. No building permit to be issued until the is filed and recorded with
Hennepin County.
10. Provision of an easement for 13 feet additional right -of -way along the
entire frontage of County Road 6 as recommended by Hennepin County at no
cost to the City.
see next page)
Resolution No.
File 90082
Page Two
11. The following variances are aproved on the basis that the Zoning Ordinance
Variance criteria have been satisfied.
a. Front setback from the proposed parking structure to the front
property line (after County Road 6 right -of -way is deducted) of 37
feet versus the Ordinance standard of 50 feet.
b. Setback to the County Road 6 property line for the existing
identification sign to permit retention of the sign at its current
location 4 feet from the new right -of -way line of County Road 6 versus
the Ordinance standard of 20 feet.
c. Lot coverage by all structures (including the parking deck) of 35.6
percent versus the Ordinance standard of 20 percent.
d. Impervious surface coverage of 66.2 percent versus the Ordinance
standard of 50 percent.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 20, 1990
FILE NO.: 90082
PETITIONER: Pastor David Hoffman, St. Philip The Deacon Lutheran Church, 17205
County Road 6, Plymouth, MN 55447
SITE PLAN: ADDITION TO THE ST. PHILIP THE DEACON LUTHERAN CHURCH INCLUDING
PARKING RAMP
LOCATION: South of County Road 6, east of County Road 101, west of Garland Lane
in the southwest 1/4 of Section 29.
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.
0
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. A drainage easement for
ponding orFoses shall be Rrovided to an elevation of 963.0 for Pond
SL-22s
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities.
N/A Yes No
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
12. — _ X
13. _ XX _
N/A Yes No
14. X
15. _ X —
16. _ X _
All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
X DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
Bassett Creek
X Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
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:
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.
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.
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. Sanitary
sewer is already connected to existing church site
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 Additional right -of -way
will be required for the reconstruction of County Road 6 to a width
of 13.03 feet at the west property line and to an additional width
of 10 05 at the east property line
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. XX 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. XX 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. The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual. Note Items 7 8 11 12, 20, 25. 27A.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
27. A. Watermain shall have a minimum of 7j feet of cover.
B. The drainage and utility easements, drainage easement for ponding and
additional right -of -way for County Road 6 were a condition of approval for
file 86071.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
Ma
11
r. fRI ", " w Zo Cr'. 1 V • ''I.
FKK SWNCH 9, 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 recommendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Cc mission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Compliance with and effect upon the Cmprehensive 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.
forns:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
1. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, a
particular hardship to the owner would result, as dirt' ,;Shed from a
mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be
carried out.
2. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are
unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not
applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning
classification.
3. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire
to increase the value or incase potential of the parcel of land.
4. That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Ordinance and
has not been created by any persons presently having an interest in the
parcel of land.
5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in
which the parcel of land is located.
6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light
and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of
the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety, or substantially diminish or inpair property values within the
neighborhood.
forms:o >pl /zon.stnd /s) 10/89
UETBTf 01
ZONING ORDINANCE SEP 5 M
VARIANCE STANDARDS
CITY OF P L`r' UL R-
VARIANCE REQUF_STS : 0MUNITY JEVEL01 _ !i jLrT-
The Lutheran Church of St. Philip the Deacon has been a
goad citizen" of the City of Plymouth for over twenty - eight::
28) years. We have tried hard to be a good neighbor in our
own neighborhood. We provide services to an ever growing
congregation (of which 85% are residents of Plymouth) with
all of its many needs. We are very happy at our location,
but growing pains have forced us to look at expanding our
facility and parking. Expansion has necessitated our need
to request the following Variances:
1. Additional parking, beyond the Zoning Ordinance
requirements, is required to adequately service our
congregation. We have considerable overlap during Sunday
morning services. Approximately 60 spaces will be needed
for overlap because of choirs, Sunday School teachers, adult
education and staff. Because we have fully expanded our on
site parking (we cannoi move any further east because of the
wetland area) , we are proposing a one level park. i ng deck for
ninety -two (92) cars on the east side of the property which
would be directly above the existing (redesigned) parking
lot. We do not believe the granting of this variance will be
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to ether land
or improvements i n the neighborhood, nor will it impair'
light, air or increase congestion, increase danger of fire
or endanger public safety. We do not believe it will
diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
2. County Road G widening has taken thirteen feet (13' )
from our northerly property line further reducing our site,
therefore, we are requesting a building (structure) front
yard setback variance of thirteen feet (131) for the parking
deck. We will be fifty feet (501) from the old property
line, but only thirty -seven feet (371) from the new property
line.
3. The maximum lot coverage of all structures, by Zoning
Ordinance, is 20%. Our existing lot t coverage is 8.8% (9.2%
with new north property line). With our proposed building
expansion this will increase to 13.6% (14.1% with new north
property line). However, with the single level parking deck
considered as a structure the total lot coverage will
increase to 34.3% (35.6% with new north property line) and
for this we are requesting a variance. We do not believe
the granting of this variance will be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to ether land or improvements in
the neighborhood, n or will it impair light, air or increase
congestion, increase danger of fire or endanger public
safety. We do not believe it will diminish or impair
property values within the neighborhood.
4. "The maximum impervious surface of all nonresidence
conditional uses is 50 in a R -1A District." (Ord. 89-02).
The existing area of impervious surface is 57.6% (59.7% wit:t -i
new north property line) which predates the current
ordinance. With our proposed expansion the impervious
surface w i l l increase to 63.7% (66.2% with new north
property line) and for r this we are requesting a variance.
We believe our plan t o collect storm water runoff internally
by means of an on site storm sewer system for the new
building roof drainage and the parking lots will provide an
adequate means of controlling storm water runoff. This
water will be taken t a new sedimentation pond at the
southeast corner of our property before it is allowed to
enter the wetland area.
5. The request for variance from the twenty foot (20' )
setback requirement for the identifying sign is a result of
the change in pr operty line caused by the County Road 6
widening.
6. Due to the increase, in cast caused by additional.
structural loading, we are requesting a variance 1 i m i t i n!a
fire apparatus access to the parking deck.
7. The steep terrain on the south side of our property
plus the low headroom below the proposed single level
parking deck on the east would prohibit a fire lane around
the building. As an alternative we will be sprinkling the
entire existing and new facility, plus adding a separate
interior standpipe system f or fire protection. UN w i . 1
address the fire lane var y ''f
Plymo _,e Chief.
Zoning Ordinance
variance Standards
1. Front yard setback variance:
The widening of County Rd. 6 by Hennepin County has taken 13 feet from our
northerly property line. In order to build the necessary 94 car parking deck,
it is necessary to'request the building front yard setback variance for the deck.
This condition is unique to St. Philip Church in this district, as far as we know.
The purpose of this request is not based on a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel, but it is based upon parking need. This
difficulty was created, frankly, by Hennepin County taking 13 feet. We do not
believe the granting of this variance will be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood, nor will it
impair light, air or increase congestion, increase danger of fire or endanger
public safety. We do not believe it will diminish or impair property values
within the neighborhood.
2. Height variance of an additional 5 feet:
We are requesting this increase to a maximum height of 40 feet to accommodate
an existing organ which the church owns. We also believe it will be an important
consideration of the overall space relationships of the sanctuary. We do not
believe the granting of this variance will in any way be detrimental to the
neighborhood or the public welfare or diminish property values or endanger
public safety.
3. Variance requesting limiting access of fire vehicles to the parking decks
Due to very significant costs caused by increased load bearing capabilities,
we are requesting a variance limiting access of fire vehicles to the parking deck.
We are proposing a sprinkler system for the new and existing building as an
alternative. Due to the contours of the land and the lack of full access around
the building, we believe this variance to be important. We believe sprinklering
would provide an acceptable system of fire control and there would be no impairment
to the public safety or increase in the danger of fire.
4. Request for variance from the 20 feet setback for identifying sign:
This request for variance is also caused by the County Rd. 6 widening. Due to
the loss of an additional 13 .feet of property it is impossible to meet the
required setback. We do not believe this request will endanger public safety
or be detrimental to public welfare.
Conditional Use Permit Standards
a. The Planning Commission shall review the application and consider its conformance
with the following standards:
1. In the current Comprehensive Plan, Churches are allowed under Conditional
Use Permits.
2. St. Philip the Deacon has existed in this location for over 20 years.
It provides a Church home for a very significant part of the Plymouth
Community. It's operation will not be detrimental to the district.
3. We believe the existence of the Church in this location enhances the
quality of life in the neighborhood.
4. During the existence of this Church, there has been significant development
in the district, including residential, commercial, educational and
recreational. We do not believe this expansion will impede any future
development in the district.
5. We will use existing curb cuts for ingress and egress to and from County Rd.6.
Parking will be expanded to accommodate need as indicated by the request
for a 94 car parking deck.
6. To the best of our knowledge the Conditional Use does conform to the
regulations of the district.
VARIANCE REQUESTS:
l - Additional parking is required to adequately service our congregation.
Because we have fully expanded our on site parking, we are ,proposing a
one level parking deck for 94 cars on the east end of this property.
County Road 6 widening has taken thirteen (
131) feet from our northerly
property line further reducing our site, therefore, we are requesting a
building front yard setback variance for the parking deck.
Z - To accommodate our existing organ, we believe we will need a variance of
an additional 5' in height. This will also be an important consideration
of the overall space relationalships of the interior of the church.
3 - Due to cost considerations, we are requesting a variance limiting fire
vehicle access to the parking deck.
The request for variance from the 20' setback requirement for the
identifying sign is a result of the change in property line caused by the
County Road 6 widening.
L, 0
IL
sea.
i
on'
0
tile s A
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: Sept. 20, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: Sept. 26, 1990
FILE NO.: 90070
PETITIONER: Hoyt Development Company
REQUEST: Site Plan Amendment and Variance to construct additional
parking
LOCATION: Southeast corner of County Roads 6 and 61
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: IP (Planned Industrial)
ZONING: I -1 (Planned Industrial)
BACKGROUND:
This site was platted as Plymouth Orchards 2nd Addition in 1984. In November,
1989 a Site Plan was administratively approved for a 45,000 square foot
office /warehouse facility with 49 percent office and 51 percent warehouse
occupancy specified. The building has been constructed.
The City Council on May 7, 1990, by Resolution 90 -290 approved an amendment to
the Conditional Use Permit for this structure to allow office finish in the I-
1 Zone of 65 percent along with a Site Plan Amendment and deferral of
offstreet parking involving 55 offstreet parking spaces on a parking structure
in the center court yard of the building that would be deferred until needed.
The parking deferral related to the requirement that the office occupancy
formula be applied to this structure for parking purposes since the occupancy
portion exceeds 50 percent. Proof of parking must be demonstrated at the
office parking ratio rather than the previous manufacturing parking ratio
because of the Conditional Use Permit Amendment to bring office occupancy from
49 percent to 65 percent.
The current application is to amend the Site Plan and request a variance from
Zoning Ordinance Standards to construct 37 at -grade parking stalls, all of
which will encroach upon the minimum setback area to County Road 6 and County
Road 61.
A courtesy notice of the proposed variance action has been mailed to all
property owners within 100 feet.
see next page)
File 90070
Page Two
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Section 11, Subdivision A, Paragraph 12 of the Zoning Ordinance provides
that on development proposals requiring Site Plan review the City Council,
upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, shall act as a Zoning
Board of Adjustments and Appeals with respect to variances from the Zoning
Ordinance proposed by the Site Plan. Because a Site Plan is involved in
this request, the variance provisions of this Zoning Ordinance section
apply.
2. The Zoning Ordinance specifies that the City Council will not approve any
application unless it is found that six specific standards specified by
the Zoning Ordinance in Section 11, Subdivision C, Paragraph 2d have been
complied with. A copy of those six Zoning Ordinance Standards has been
attached to this staff report together with the applicant's letter of July
18, 1990 in which he reviews compliance with those six standards as well
as the details of his proposal.
3. The specific proposal is to locate the 34 additional parking stalls at a
setback of 25 feet versus the Zoning Ordinance Standard of 50 feet along
County Road 61; and 15 feet versus the ordinance standard of 50 feet along
County Road 6.
4. The proposed location for the parking stalls is removed from the County
Road 6 /County Road 61 intersection so as to preclude a site distance
encroachment with respect to the safe operations of that intersection.
5. As a component of the previous approval of the Conditional Use Permit
Amendment to allow up to 65 percent office occupancy of the structure, a
parking deferral was granted to allow construction of 155 offstreet
parking spaces on site, with the balance required for 100 percent office
occupancy (57) to be constructed as a parking structure in the interior
court yard.
The building has been constructed with the 155 offstreet parking spaces
all within the Zoning Ordinance standard setbacks). The applicant now
desires to, in effect, substitute the proposed parking for the parking
that was to be constructed as a parking structure.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. While we concur that this particular site may exhibit a topographical
relief that is more prominent than the "normal" industrial site, there has
never been a question with respect to the land use guiding or zoning of
the site or any application to amend that land use guiding or zoning based
on the topographic conditions that exist.
see next page)
File 90070
Page Three
By previous plan submissions the applicant has demonstrated the ability to
develop the site consistent with the approved Conditional Use Permit
without the need to encroach on street setback areas.
We find further that the site, at 3.9 acres, exceeds the two acre minimum
site size provisions of the I -1 Zoning District and, therefore, from a
size perspective is sufficient for industrial development.
2. We do not find the site conditions at this location necessarily unique to
this site. While industrial properties are generally of minimal
topographic relief, there are a number of sites within the industrial
districts of Plymouth that require creative site design to overcome
substantial topographic relief, even though located in the I -1 Zoning
District.
3. We find the purpose of the variance is exclusively to increase the value
or income potential of the parcel of land.
4. We find the alleged hardship to be the result of decisions made by the
applicant with respect to the type of building to be constructed on the
site and the type of use to be carried out within that structure. We
cannot discern persons other than the applicant causing any difficulty or
hardship in this regard.
5. We do not find that the granting of the variance would be detrimental to
the public welfare of injurious to other land or improvements in the
neighborhood in which the parcel plan is located.
6. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air
to adjacent property owners substantially increasing congestion on public
streets, or increase danger of fire or endanger the public safety, or
substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
7. It is doubtful a Conditional Use Permit would have been granted previously
if a Zoning Ordinance Variance had been involved, such is now proposed per
Standard No. 6 of the Ordinance Conditional Use Permit standards
attached). With the Conditional Use Permit Amendment to permit the 65
percent office occupancy in hand, the petitioner now requests substitution
of parking within the setback areas for most of the deferred parking that
would have been required to be constructed as a ramp without variances.
RECOMMENDATION:
The application does not meet the standards of the Zoning Ordinance for the
granting of a variance to the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, standards 1 -4
are not found to be met. The ordinance is clear that all standards must be
met prior to granting of a variance from the Zoning Ordinance.
see next page)
File 90070
Page Four
Planning staff concludes that the petitioner is not adhering to the original
assurance he represented to the City as the basis for intensifying the use of
the building. There have been no new standards or requirements adopted by the
City that require the extensive variances required for this "alternative"
design. Perhaps the petitioner should adjust the occupancy to pre - Conditional
Use Permit levels so the additional parking is not even required.
The requested variances would establish an undesirable precedent since the
only apparent basis is economic gain. The original ramp is a physically
feasible alternative; this petitioner represented it as such and the City
accepted that in good faith.
We have attached a recommended resolution for denial of the variance and Site
Plan Amendment. We have also included a resolution providing for the approval
of the variance and Site Plan Amendment to assist the Planning Commission
should they decide to proceed on that basis. An approval should specify the
finding(s).
Submitted by:
s E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Denying Site Plan Amendment and Variance
2. Resolution Approving Site Plan Amendment and Variance
3. Engineer's Memo
4. Petitioner's Letter of July 18, 1990
5. Location Map
6. Large Plans
pc /cd /90070:jw)
DENYING SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE FOR HOYT DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY FOR 6 & 61 OFFICE - WAREHOUSE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF COUNTY
ROAD 6 AND COUNTY ROAD 61 (90070)
WHEREAS, Hoyt Development Company has requested approval for an Amended Sit
Plan and Zoning Ordinance Variance for property located at the southeast
corner of County Road 6 and County Road 61; and,
WHEREAS, A Site Plan has been administratively approved for this project by a
letter dated November 9, 1989 under file 89075;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the request by Hoyt
Development Company for an Amended Site Plan and Zoning Ordinance Variance
for property located at the southeast corner of County Road 6 and County Road
61, based on the following findings:
1. By previous plan submissions the applicant has demonstrated the ability to
develop the site consistent with the approved Conditional Use Permit
without the need to encroach on street setback areas. The site, at 3.9
acres, exceeds the 2 -acre minimum site size provisions of the I -1 Zoning
District and therefore from a size perspective is sufficient for
industrial development.
2. The site conditions at this location are not unique within the I -1
District. While industrial properties are generally of minimal
topographic relief, there are a number of sites within the industrial
districts of Plymouth that require creative site design to overcome
substantial topographic relief, even though located in the I -1 Zoning
District.
3. The alleged hardship is the result of decisions made by the applicant with
respect to the type of building to be constructed on the site and the type
of use to be carried out within that structure.
4. No purpose for the variances has been demonstrated beyond a desire to
increase the value or income potential of this parcel of land.
5. The proposed parking can be provided without the need for variances per a
Site Plan previously approved for this parcel depicting a parking
structure.
APPROVING SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE FOR HOYT
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR 6 & 61 OFFICE - WAREHOUSE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 6 AND COUNTY ROAD 61 (90070)
WHEREAS, Hoyt Development Company has requested approval for an Amended Site
Plan and Zoning Ordinance Variances for property located at the southeast
corner of County Road 6 and County Road 61; and,
WHEREAS, A Site Plan has been administratively approved for this project by a
letter dated November 9, 1989 under file 89075;
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
Hoyt Development Company has requested approval for an Amended Site Plan and
Zoning Ordinance Variances for property located at the southeast corner of
County Road 6 and County Road 61, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. The petitioner shall comply with all applicable terms and conditions of
the Administrative Approval letter and Resolution 90 -290 regarding the
Conditional Use Permit for 65 percent office occupancy.
3. A variance is approved to permit off - street parking to within 25 feet of
the County Road 61 right -of -way; and, to within 15 feet of the County Road
6 right -of -way line consistent with the Site Plan submitted, based on the
following findings:
I City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 20, 1990
FILE NO.: 90070
PETITIONER: Mr. Brad Hoyt, Hoyt Development Company, 5555 W. 78th St., Edina, MN
55435
SITE PLAN: HOYT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY WAREHOUSE /OFFICE BUILDING (REVISED PARKING
LAYOUT)
LOCATION: South of County Road 6, east of Xenium Lane, north of 15th Avenue in
the southeast 1/4 of Section 27
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: done
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.)
g, X _ _ Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100
year high water elevation and conformance with the City's
comprehensive storm water requirements.
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities.
N/A Yes No
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
t UTTLITIES AND TRAFFIC:
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
X Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
13. _ X _ Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The site plan will be submitted to the City's consulting engineer
for review to see if it is in conformance with the City's
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations
shall be incorporated in a revised plan. The grading and drainage
plan shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary:
N/A Yes No
14. _ X Necessary fire hydrants provided -
The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such as
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance.
15. _ X Size and type of material proposed in utility systems has been
provided
The utility plan shall be revised to indicate the size and type of
material required in the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain services
and storm sewer.
16. _ X _ Post indicator valve - fire department connection
It will be necessary to locate the post indicator valve in such a
manner that it will not render any of the existing fire hydrants
inoperable.
3-
N/A Yes No
I
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. A detail shall be Rrovided for the B -612
curb and Rutter.
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. A typical section shall be provided for the parking
lot standard
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 No's 12 22 and 23.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
6-
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Telephone Engineers
612/476 -6010 Planners
612/476 -8532 FAX Surveyors
July 18, 1990
n
Mr. Charles Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
City of Plymouth'``
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 ,; , - z = rEL, ;TMEivt
SUBJECT: Hoyt Development Company
Southeast Quadrant of County 6 & County Road 61
MFRA #9286
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
This letter accompanies an application seeking a variance from the 50 foot
parking setback requirement along portions of the subject site's frontage along
County Road 6 and County Road 61.
You will recall a prior application was filed for a similar request. The
prior request however was different from the current request in that no
amendment to the Conditional Use Permit is being requested and secondly, only
portions of County Road 6 and County Road 61 frontages are affected by this
request.
With regard to the first matter, the following table is a summary of the
current leasing of the 45,000 square foot office /warehouse building.
Tenant Total F.A. Office F.A. Production F.A. Warehouse F.A.
Liesch 20241 9547 8788 1906
General Mills 11458 3677 4135 3646
Buhler 6788 3865 2923 -0-
vacant 6513 - - -- - - -- - - - --
With the exception of the unoccupied 6,513 square feet, the table is an
accurate statement based on "lease hold permits ". This information can be
corraborated through City files.
A summarization of this date reveals that the following percentage of the
building is leased as office, production and warehouse uses, or is vacant:
17,089 square feet
15,846 square feet
5,552 square feet
6,513 square feet
An Equal Opportunity Employer
38% office
35% production
12% warehouse
15% vacant
Mr. Charles Dillerud
July 18, 1990
Page Two
The previously approved Conditional Use Permit for this property
Resolution No. 90 -290) allows a maximum 65% office finish floor area. As
noted above, the current office finish area equals 38%.
The 6,513 square feet vacancy is proposed to be leased at 65% office and
35% warehouse. This would result in a tenant floor area mix for the 45,000
square foot building as follows:
TABLE
Use Square Feet Percent
Office 21,322 47
Production 15,846 35
Warehouse 7,832 18
Total 45,000 100%
Less than the 65% permitted)
The parking spaces required for each of these categories of use are as
follows:
Office area requires number of spaces = GFA /(0.0005 x GFA) + 190,
therefore:
106 spaces required for 21,322 square foot office area
Production area requires 1 space per 350 square feet, therefore:
46 spaces are required for 15,846 square feet
Warehousing requires 1 space per 2,000 square feet, therefore:
4 spaces are required for 7,832 square feet
The total parking requirement for the above mix of uses is 156 stalls.
Although the "Lease Hold Permits" and Building Improvements are reflective
of the above tenant mix and actual percentages of total finished floor area,
the approved CUP allows a maximum 65% office or 29,250 square feet. This would
increase the parking requirements to 143 spaces for the office area component,
compared with 106 spaces or 37 additional spaces.
The Developer proposes to add these spaces by placing 13 stalls in the
north parking area south of the County Road 6 right -of -way and the remaining 24
stalls along the County Road 61 right -of -way. As shown on the diagram which
accompanies this letter entitled "Site /Variance Application Sheet 1 of 1 ",
these additional spaces along the two county roads are proposed to be located
in the eastern and southern portions of the frontage and away from the county
road intersection. This consideration will allow for a continuance of green
space, 120 feet along County Road 61 and 180 feet along County Road 6.
9
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
July 18, 1990
Page Three
The area of setback variance is along the southern and eastern edges of the
property, a distance of 118 feet along County Road 6 and 216 feet along County
Road 61 (please refer to the shaded areas on the plan sheet entitled
Site /Variance "). The proposed variance is to allow parking within the 50 foot
parking setback, as shown on the Site /Variance Plan Sheet.
The variance request for parking setback is not related to an amendment to
the Conditional Use Permit or premised on a plan to increase office finish
space from the approved 65%. The request is to allow full use of the site
based on existing approvals, leasing and site conditions.
The building currently is 96% leased. It is a handsome structure, well
designed and landscaped in all details. The building site is located at a
prominent intersection and is elevated above County Road 61. The leasing of
the building has been relatively effortless and the tenants are pleased with
the structure, design and prominence as a new innovative structure in the
neighborhood.
The existing site conditions, prior to construction, reveal a site which
drops dramatically from the north boundary to the south boundary in the
magnitude of 28 feet. The developer has accomodated this topographic
constraint by designing a 2 story structure in the south elevation of the
building. Clearly the exterior elevations of the building fronting County
Highway's 6 and 61 are offices in appearance and consist of brick, copper
coping and the aluminum window and doorway opening casings. The City ordinance
identifies six "variance standards" each of which are addressed below:
1. The topography of this site dictates a design solution which includes
a 2 story elevation. This in turn dictates the lower level being set
aside for office uses and in general mandates a higher quality
appearance to the building exterior.
Although the neighborhood area tends toward warehousing and larger
bulk buildings, this site, only 3.9 acres in area, is elevated above
other properties to the northwest, west and south and demands a higher
quality aesthetic and a higher quality building appearance and image
because of its prominence and visibility.
I am confident that City representation and those that pass this site
frequently would agree that the design solution for this property is
appropriate, successful and the site is being used very appropriately.
Because of the above, a hardship to the owner and the tenants would
result by limiting the parking to the approved 155 spaces. The
building tends toward office uses and it is approved for more office
that is currently leased. This request is not a mere convenience to
the developer or tenants, it is the result of situating a well design
building on a relatively small site with extreme topographic relief at
a prominent location.
6
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
July 18, 1990
Page Four
2. The conditions upon which this variance is requested are unique to
this site. This uniquenes is in the fact that there is a 28 foot
grade separation from the north to the south. The site is relatively
small, i.e., 3.9 acres, it is located at the intersection of 2 major
roadways, the site fronts on three public right -of -ways. It's
prominent elevation above properties to the northwest, west and south
render views to the west and Interstate 494 (the site's elevation is
similiar to the City's water tower site) and all property boundaries
are fixed.
I seriously question whether conditions similiar to these exist on any
other parcel of land in the City for which one might pursue a similar
variance request.
3. This request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value
or income potential from the property. As stated previously,
reasonable and prudent use and the design of this property have
dictated the final solution as we see it today.
4. The difficulty associated with this request is in "balancing prudent
use" of the site with a development of high quality. This balancing
has resulted in constructing a project which has been deemed highly
desireable by the tenants and favors office uses with good exposure,
visibility and identity from the intersecting county roads. The
resultant problem is for more parking area, which under a current
setback requirements, predictates the need for a variance. However,
we do not believe this variance will in any possible way diminish or
degrade the aesthetics or other desireable aspects of this property
which have made it the success it is today. In fact, the grading and
landscaping along County Road 61 has been completed consistent with
approved plans. No additional site alteration is required beyond
moving the curb line paving the proposed 37 stall parking area.
5. No detrimental effects will result from this variance request. Other
properties in the immediate vicinity of County Road 6 and 61 will not
change from the existing conditions.
6. The proposed variance will not impair adjacent properties nor will the
requested variance substantially increase traffic congestion or
diminish property value or public safety.
In summary, this request for front yard variances, along a portion of
County Road 6 to accommodate 13 stalls and along the southern portion of County
Road 61 to accommodate 24 stalls is being requested as a reasonable and
somewhat predictable result of constructing a well designed building which is
responsive to the topographical conditions of the site.
It is obvious to me that this site is not "another mundane office shown
room development ".
1 Mr. Chuck Dillerud
July 18, 1990
Page Five
The site design landscaping and architectural design that Hoyt Development
Company has employed on this site represents a solution of high aesthetic value
and is responsive to the sites location and prominence.
We respectfully request your most objective and open minded view with
regard to this request.
Kindest regards,
McCOIJBS OOS CIATES, INC.
c
ichael J. G it
MJG:aju
Enclosures
cc: Brad Hoyt, Hoyt Development Company
Russ Saulon, Saulon Wilkes Architects
A u
m r ,r r r r
fir / /..
Mv
PARM
AP"
w
iIi
n
S
A, 0
a
1.
R.
l
r O
1
117 - \'i
5 i li
C UAW
T
1
J
2
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: Sept. 20, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: Sept. 26, 1990
FILE NO.: 90088
PETITIONER: Independent School District #284 /Plymouth Covenant Church
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit to Allow Public School Use of an
Existing Place of Worship
LOCATION: Northeast Corner of Vicksburg Lane and County Road 9 (4300
Vicksburg Lane)
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Residential)
BACKGROUND:
On October 6, 1980, the City Council, by Resolution 80 -750, approved a Site
Plan and Conditional Use Permit to construct a 5,776 square foot church
facility on a site of 20 acres.
On October 15, 1984, the City Council, by Resolution 84 -733, approved an
amended Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan and a zoning variance to permit
the construction of a 5,180 square foot addition to the existing Plymouth
Covenant Church at 4300 Vicksburg Lane.
The applicant proposes to utilize 3,231 square feet of the existing Plymouth
Covenant Church for public school community education services activities for
a one year period.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the official City
newspaper, and notices have been sent to property owners within 500 feet.
Also, a development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Section 9 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance provides six standards that
must be met on any application for a Conditional Use Permit. A copy of
those standards has been attached to this report, together with a letter
from the applicant addressing compliance of this application with those
standards.
see next page)
Do
File 90088
Page Two
2. The application proposes the use of four classrooms and the nursery of the
Plymouth Covenant Church for Early Childhood Family Education Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; Mondays and Thursdays, 6:00 p.m.
to 9:00 p.m.; and Saturdays 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Also proposed is the
use of three classrooms of the Plymouth Covenant Church for Special
Education Early Childhood classes from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
A copy of the proposed agreement between Independent School District #284
and the Plymouth Covenant Church regarding the use of the Plymouth
Covenant Church facility has also been attached.
3. The agreement noted above establishes a June 19, 1991, expiration, and
therefore, we are taking this to mean the need for a Conditional Use
Permit only through that date as well.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed use of the Plymouth Covenant Church for public school
functions listed in the application appears responsive to the six
standards of the Conditional Use Permit section of the Plymouth Zoning
Ordinance.
2. Based on the presentations of the applicant and the agreement between the
Plymouth Covenant Church and Independent School District #284, and our
knowledge of our building schedule and the availability of a new
elementary school to District #284 by fall 1991, we recommend the
Conditional Use Permit expire June 19, 1991.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the
approval of a Conditional Use Permit the temporary use of facilities of the
Plymouth Covenant Cj h by School Dot "c , #284 ',
Submitted by:
arses t.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Conditional
in a Church Structure
2. Conditional Use Permit Standards
3. Petitioner's Letter and Agreement
4. Location Map
pc /cd /90088:dl)
nity Deve na
Use Permit for Public School Activities
for Use
r
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #284 ON
BEHALF OF PLYMOUTH COVENANT CHURCH (90088)
WHEREAS, Independent School District #284 on behalf of Plymouth Covenant
Church has requested approval for a Conditional Use Permit to allow public
school use of an existing place of worship located at the northeast corner of
Vicksburg Lane and County Road 9 (4300 Vicksburg 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 on behalf of Plymouth Covenant Church for a
Conditional Use Permit to allow public school use of an existing place of
worship located at the northeast corner of Vicksburg Lane and County Road 9
4300 Vicksburg Lane), subject to the following conditions:
1. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, regulations and ordinances,
and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation.
2. The permit is issued to Independent School District #284 for Plymouth
Covenant Church and shall not be transferable.
3. The site shall be maintained in a sanitary manner.
4. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within approved designated
areas.
5. No signage is allowed relative to the use.
6. The permit shall expire June 19, 1991.
7. All parking shall be off - street in designated areas which comply with the
Zoning Ordinance.
FKX SBMCK 9, S[-- D A
2. Pte. Before any conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning CaTmission 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 Cannission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will pramte and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or canfort.
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
Ip
za ta
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
pendent School District 284
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 210 COUNTY ROAD 101 NORTH P.O. BOX 660 WAYZATA, MN 55391 -9990 (612) 476 -3100 FAX: (612) 476.3214
August 23, 1990
Charles E. Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
1 •
D t
AUG 21' --
C, ! - ,.
Within the past week it has become apparent to the Wayzata School
District Administration that the enrollment at Plymouth Creek
Elementary School is going to exceed the capacity of the
building. Last spring we projected that 708 students would be
enrolled in the school. As of Wednesday, August 22, 1990, 780
students have enrolled.
Enrollment projections are an inexact science at best, and the
District has been monitoring student enrollment closely. Listed
below is a chart indicating the weekly growth at Plymouth Creek.
Projected September 1990 Enrollment. . . . . . 708
Actual August 1 Enrollment - 738
Actual August 8 Enrollment - 764
Actual August 15 Enrollment - 776
Actual August 22 Enrollment - 780
Enrollment in the District's other elementary schools is at
projection or exceeds projections which eliminates the
possibility of moving students from Plymouth Creek to another
elementary school.
In exploring other options, the best choice at this late date to
house Plymouth Creek students would be to rent space at Plymouth
Covenant Church located on the northeast corner of County Road 6
and Vicksburg Lane. Church official have agreed to rent space to
the District for the 1990 -91 school year contingent on the
District receiving a conditional use permit from the City of
Plymouth.
August 23, 1990
Page 2
The District plans to move the early childhood education program
and a preschool special education program to the church if
approval is received from the City of Plymouth.
It would be my hope that you would consider our application in a
timely manner. Should you have any questions, please call me at
476 -3124.
Sincerely,
Bruce Halgren
Executive Director
Academic Services
LTTR:PlymouthCreek
Enclosure - Application
4.
The Wayzata Public Schools request the use of areas within Plymouth
Covenant Church for two programs during the 1990 -91 school year.
The times and areas are outlined on the attached sheet entitled
Lease Agreement. The Special Education Early childhood Program
would have 16 children (pre kindergarten) attending school daily
and the Early Childhood Family Education would have approximately
110 children and parents attending weekly. Both programs need to be
moved because of the large increase in students at Plymouth Creek
Elementary School.
The School District feels it would be in compliance with the
following standards:
1. Since this is a temporary use of the church it would not have a
permanent effect on the Comprehensive City Plan.
2. The two programs housed at Plymouth Covenant promote family
education and the education of handicapped children within our
learning community.It in no way endangers the public health,
safety, morals or comfort of the community.
3. Again this is a temporary use of the school property. Since the
church is fairly removed from residential property it shouldn't
diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
4. The establishment of this conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the city.
5. Since the church has little if any activities occurring during
the proposed use times; the parking, and ingress /egress should pose
little if any traffic congestion in the public streets.
6. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the city.
LEASE AGREEMENT
Plymouth Covenant Church, 4300 North Vicksburg Lane, Plymouth, MN
PCC) and Independent School District No. 284, Wayzata, MN ( "ISD 28411)
agree that:
1. PCC shall lease to ISD 284 space
ide
utilitiesCservicentoaISD3284rTorth
Vicksburg Lane, Plymouth, MN and pro
during _
respecting that space. ISD 284solishaseindicatedcinparagr
phs149&
51Of
school year. The space referred
this agreement.
ement shall begin on , 1990 and end
2. The term of this ag re
on June 19, 1991-
3. ISD 284 will, through its Community Education Services Department
and Special Education Department conduct a Special Education Early
Childhood Program (SEEC), and an Early Childhood Family Education Program
ECFE) in the space in the PCC building.
4. For the ECFE, PCC shall provide the following areas in the PCC
building: 674 sq. ft. (Children's Room)
Rooms 200D, 200E, 200F
225 sq. ft. (Parent's Room)
Room 2000 Z93 sq. ft. (Sibling Care)
Nursery 1 192 sq. ft.
5. For the SEEC, PCC shall provide the following areas in the PCC
building: 325 sq. ft. (Children's Room)
Room 201 297 sq. ft. (Children's Room)
Room 202 225 sq. ft. _(Conference Room)
Room 200B 847 sq. ft.
Total 2,039 sq. ft.
s and
Both programs will need to use the of
require some storage space availability
kitchen and refrigerator.
6. For the ECFE, ISD shall have the use of the areas of the PCC
building stated in paragraph 4 as follows:
Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. _ 5:00 P.m-
Monday and Thursday 9;fl a.m. 9:00 P.M.
m. _ 12.30 p•m-
Saturday
7. For the SEEC, ISD shall have the use of the areas of the PCC
building stated in Paragraph 5 as follows:
Monday through Friday
8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
a0mJ, LIM
Ar
Mrs.
as
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: Sept. 7, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: Sept. 12, 1990
FILE NO.: 90080
PETITIONER: OPUS Corporation
REQUEST: Amended PUD Plan and Conditional Use Permit for Project
Monument Signs at "Bass Creek Business Park"
LOCATION: Northwest Quadrant of County Road 10 (Bass Lake Road) and
State Highway 169
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: IP (Planned Industrial) and CL (Limited Business)
ZONING: I -1 (Planned Industrial) and FRD (Future Restricted
Development)
BACKGROUND:
On November 6, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution 89 -701, approved a Mixed
Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Preliminary Plat /Plan and Conditional Use
Permit for this project involving the development of a 210 acre site with a
combination of manufacturing, office, and service commercial mix of uses. The
approval was subject to 20 conditions.
On June 18, 1990, by Resolutions 90 -356 and 90 -357, the City Council approved
a Final Plat and Development Contract for a 185 acre portion of the project
with no individual Final Site Plans included. A previous Final Plat and Final
Site Plan had covered the portion of the site on which "Schneider U.S.A." is
now located.
Prior to approval of the Final Plat and Development Contract an Environmental
Impact Statement was approved for this project by Resolution 90 -194. The City
Council found the final Environmental Impact Statement for the project to be
adequate, thereby completing the Environmental Review process.
Proposed by this application is an amendment to the PUD Plan to include a
Master Sign Plan" that include two business park identification signs
project monument signs) to be located at the northwest corner of Nathan Lane
and the northeast corner of Trenton Lane respectively.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the Official City
Newspaper and all property owners within 500 feet have been notified. A
development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The proposed monument signs would be 6 feet in height and 20 feet in
length each, resulting in an overall size of 120 square feet. The sign
would be cast aluminum letters with a dark bronze finish placed on a
background of green glazed brick and Mankato stone veneer.
2. The Zoning Ordinance does not provide for project monument signs in the I-
1 or B -1 Zoning Districts that comprise the Bass Creek Business Park. The
Planned Unit Development section of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 9,
Subdivision B) does provide for Master Sign Plans to be reviewed and
approved by the City as an element of the PUD Plan. As such, the
principle of PUD flexibility with respect to sign type, location, and size
is available to the applicant in the same manner as Zoning Ordinance
dimensional standards.
3. No Master Sign Plan was presented for the Bass Creek Business Park with
the MPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit or the MPUD
Final Plan /Plat. The Landscape Plan that was included with the
Preliminary Plan submissions did depict a potential for project monument
signs at the locations that are now applied or but no specific signs were
proposed, nor was any approval granted.
4. Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance provides six specific standards upon
which the Conditional Use Permit must be reviewed in order for approval by
the City Council. A copy of those six standards is enclosed together with
the applicant's letter of August 8, 1990 describing the proposal.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. We find the Master Sign Plan to locate two 120 square foot project
monument signs at the northwest corner of Nathan Lane and the northeast
corner of Trenton Lane, respectively, to be consistent with the
Conditional Use Permit standards and the purpose and intent of the Planned
Unit Development section of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the
approval of an amendment to the PUD Plan for the "Bass Creek Business Park" to
permit project monument signs of 120 square feet each at the northeast corner
of Trenton Lane and the northwest corner of Nathan Lane, set back a minimum of
20 feet from the ,p Vrty 1 ine.,-.., lo`1 11-
Submitted by:
Ch es E. Di leru , unity Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving MPUD Plan Amendment
2. Conditional Use Permit Standards
3. Petitioner's Letter of August 8, 1990
4. Location Map
5. Large Plans
pc /cd /90080:jw)
APPROVING AMENDED MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR OPUS CORPORATION FOR "BASS CREEK BUSINESS PARK" (90080)
WHEREAS, OPUS Corporation has requested approval of an amended Mixed Planned
Unit Development Plan Conditional Use Permit for property located at the
northwest quadrant of County Road 10 and State Highway 169 for a Master Sign
Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council by Resolution 90 -356 approved the MPUD Final Plat
and Development Contract for this site; and,
WHEREAS, OPUS Corporation has requested an amendment to the MPUD Plan and
Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of project monument signs of 120
square feet, set back a minimum of 20 feet at the northeast corner of Trenton
Lane and the northwest corner of Nathan Lane, consistent with plans dated July
24, 1990; 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
OPUS Corporation for an amendment to the MPUD Plan and Conditional Use Permit
to allow construction of project monument signs of 120 square feet, set back a
minimum of 20 feet at the northeast corner of Trenton Lane and the northwest
corner of Nathan Lane, consistent with plans dated July 24, 1990, and subject
to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the applicable terms and conditions of City Council
Resolutions 89 -701 (MPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat Conditional Use Permit);
90 -356 (Final Plat and Development Contract; and 90 -357 (Setting
Conditions to the Final Plat and Development Contract).
2. No other signs are hereby approved for the project. Any other signage
shall be a part of an approved MPUD Final Site Plan and consistent with
ordinance standards.
FKM SSEMCK 9, S[- IVIS A
i' r 'ice •_ A . • ,$1,. ego _;-9
2. $ Before any Conditional Use Petit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Mmnission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recd, ration to the City Cciuncil, which
shall make the final deteamination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Catmi.ssion shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Co pliance with and effect upon the Calzehmaive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will prorate and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and itvement 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
OPUS CORPORATi. -A
DESIGNERS • BUILDERS • DEVELOPERS
Suite 800, Opus Center
9900 Bren Road East
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343
161211936-4444
August 8, 1990
Mailing Address
P0. Box 150
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440
U,
AUG 10 1990
Mr. Chuck Dil lerud ci `,}i' -(, ;QV i H
Community Development Coordinator COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPL
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Bass Creek Business Park; Master Sign Plan
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
V•i6
Enclosed you will find the following information and documents in support
of Opus Corporation's request for approval of a master sign plan for its
Bass Creek Business Park at Bass Lake Road and TH 169.
1. Approved MPUD Master Development Concept Plan for Bass Creek Business
Park.
2. Site Plan for Schneider (USA) showing locations for two (2) business
park identification signs proposed as the Master Sign Plan for Bass
Creek Business Park.
3. Design drawings providing areas, dimensions, and sign text for each of
the signs described in #2 above.
4. An application with fee in the appropriate amount for the MPUD Plan
amendment and signage approval needed as a prerequisite to
installation of the signs described in #2 above.
Our objective is to have the City of Plymouth approve the location and
design of the two (2) business park identification signs described above
for our Bass Creek Business Park. We are asking that these signs be
approved as an amendment to the MPUD Master Development Concept Plan
approved by the city for the Park in 1989.
It is our interest and intent to install the signs as shown in the design
drawings included as an exhibit with the application sometime in late
September or early October of this year. Therefore, we would appreciate
having the enclosed application scheduled for Planning Commission and City
Council consideration at their next available meetings in late August and
early September.
Opus and Aff'hates m Minneapolis • Chicago • Phoenix • Milwaukee • Tampa • Pensacola
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
August 8, 1990
Page -2-
If you have questions or require any additional information, please give
me a call.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Worthingt , AICP
Executive Director
Governmental Affairs
RAW /kk
Ilb
Y ,s.
W a
Z
Q litV
J
v
e/
ii
Q
W d Q°
V) § z
z
UWo- Z
1) R8
co mmie
4 Ir r
at
St
vil
A
AA %AA 10-A 'for-IM6 all
till
vim
ScWwktw IUSAI Wr- OWW ---- ---
Ll
I
t
4—
m
I I
i A
I
1/T11AN - — LAfi . --, / o o- o i \
1
o 0 o c
P iDp \ „ o 0 o J Q 1 I / i
r
60 L'O
X,
DAYC&AIE
or
1
L
o
fill
JI
m
i
g
eZ
V
e e
i
J
sce
r
O
t C
a
ARM
VAW
n
T
r A
N
rn
i
AZ
Z
T
T
N
1
x.71 i
Sam
Cb4fM4
46 *4p
VOO" sra
44a"W7 O'l oyL 40'MP" ;NCVJYA*W 71'1M
1
j
1
Nh * AW iYrd r}fwA 0'&4~ 'wd
1
h ter• +.M .'. W41Lt7 ONU M i Cy'07 MR"N " 7Cd
L.•.y. w9M1 . %t JM ,rf • FM MI ,t('I
rlYK"
y
9'fI`^irMe•,. i1e/0/(/ 7 W 'J it%4' a >JL_y i '?7 y0
row" aS .G'• - •FILM/ r•.il' !/2 fv]tlf7 I i/ *f 4 l.i
W ^> Lw" M9M. G 0 i
YI'Y :701
I
It
NVr'1d 3115
Im"WAN's .. Aw L J%
NDIIV'dOdVO3 Sndollo —Am lysm xop."*s w
DO
4
kill.
114-1 1!
sUhVii;
pill
own N*WM
I c-
f7-
1H
e Id
4 1 — %
I"if CP
4b<
S,
11
W1,
7 1 Is II