HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 09-13-1989CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE August 25, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 13, 1989
FILE NO.: 88035
PETITIONER: Wayzata Independent School District
REQUEST: Amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for the
Plymouth Creek Elementary School
LOCATION: Southwest Quadrant of Vicksburg Lane and 41st Avenue North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -2 (Low Medium Density Residential)
ZONING: R-2 (Low Density Multiple Residents District)
BACKGROUND:
By Resolution 88-389, the City Council on July 11, 1988, approved a Site Plan
and Conditional Use Permit for the construction of an elementary school of
80,000 square feet at the subject location. Concurrent with this action, a
Preliminary Plat was approved to create the site upon which the elementary
school is being constructed, and a Conditional Use Permit was issued to allow
alteration of the flood way adjacent to the school. By Resolution 89-31, the
City Council on January 23, 1989, approved an amended Site Plan and
Conditional Use Permit to allow for minor adjustments to the previously
approved Site Plan.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the official city
newspaper, and all property owners within 500 feet have been notified.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The petitioner proposes an adjustment to the previously approved
Conditional Use Permit/Site Plan, to eliminate screening of roof top
equipment as was approved with the previous Site Plan and as required per
the Zoning Ordinance where aesethetic or noise conflicts will occur with
adjoining residential areas.
2. Section 7, Subdivision F, Paragraph 3 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance
attached) provides for "multiple dwellings" to have rooftop units
effectively screened. Section 8, Subdivision G, Paragraph 2, g. provides
for all "nonresidential" buildings to screen rooftop units, "... where the
design, color, and location of equipment are found to not effectively
buffer noise or provide aesthetic harmony and compatibility..."
see next page)
0,
Page Two
File 88035
During review of the original Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit the
need for this nonresidential structure to comply was assumed. Plans
recommended by the staff and Planning Commission, and approved by the City
Council include screening of the roof top units.
3. The amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit remain in compliance,
except as noted above, with all provisions of the City of Plymouth Policy
Manual and Zoning Ordinance with respect to structured dimensions;
setbacks; parking design; landscaping; treatment of waste material
storage; and responsiveness to the various elements of the Comprehensive
Plan. In addition, the proposal continues to be responsive to the
elements of the physical constraints analysis.
4. The petitioner has submitted documentation in support of the proposed plan
amendments, including noise test information. All related applicant
submissions are attached.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The test results presented by the petitioner do not confirm a "worst case"
scenario existing during the test period. There remains a question of
whether all compressors were engaged. The noise level of an air
conditioner generally is higher when the compressor (rather that just the
fan) is engaged.
2. Regardless of the compressor status during the test, the finding of 42-46
decibels of sound pressure at the monitoring points confirms the need for
screening based on the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance standard of . not
transmitted beyond the boundaries of the property so to be perceptible in
any residential zoning district..." (emphasis added)
Compliance with some Stat (MPCA) standard does not qualify as compliance
with the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance.
3. Aesthetic compatibility is truly subjective. We find the roof top units
tend to blend in to the other architectural projections on the roof of
this school. The distance from which the units are viewed from public
streets contributes to this finding.
see next page)
Page Three
File 88035
RECOMMENDATION:
We find the existing roof top units do not meet the standard of the Zoning
Ordinance regarding noise suppression. We recommend the applications to
permit those units without noise screening (CUP and Site Plan) be denied, and
that screening sufficient to buffer noise to meet the ordinance standard be
required as originally planned.
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Finding for Denial
2. Recommended Conditions of Approval
3. Applicant's Submission
4. Related Zoning Ordinance References (Section 7 and Section 8)
5. Location Map
6. - Site Plan
pc/cd/88035:dl)
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING AMENDED SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SCHOOL IN AN R-2
ZONE (88035)
1. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
2. Compliance with all applicable conditions of Resolution 88-389 approving
the original Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit.
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING AMENDED SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SCHOOL IN AN R-2
ZONE (88035)
1. Test results submitted by the applicant confirm that noise from the roof
top units will be perceptable in the adjacent residential zoning district
inconsistent with the standard of the Zoning Ordinance for noise fuffering
of roof top mechanical units on non-residential structures.
Plymouth Creek Elementary School
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
Independent School District 284 wishes to appeal the city zoning official's
interpretation of the roof top equipment ordinance. (See attached) The District
received notice from the City on July 31, 1989, that a Plymouth ordinance
requires screening of roof top equipment at Plymouth Creek Elementary School.
It is our position that the McQuay roof top equipment installed at Plymouth
Creek Elementary School is not in violation of city ordinance since it is
neither noisy nor aesthetically displeasing. Consequently we do not believe
such screening is necessary and contend that its installation would be an
inappropriate use of public funds. (Est. cost $60,000) We therefore are making
application for an amendment to the Plymouth Creek Elementary School site plan
to permit the current condition as an alternative to additional screening.
Included as an attachment to this narrative is a diagram showing the locations
of the six roof top units and photographs of the school as built.
Also attached to this narrative is an environmental noise survey conducted in
the vicinity of Plymouth Creek Elementary School by Twin City Testing. The
measurements were taken between the hours of 12:30 and 1:30 A.M., July 28,
1989.
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 8, Subdivision G
5) All trash disposal facilities outside the approved principal building or
approved accessory building shall comply with the following:
a) All outside accessory enclosures shall screen the containers from
the public view.
b) The enclosure area shall include adequate buffering to minimize
visual and audible impact upon any adjacent residential uses.
c) Screen enclosures may be attached to, or detached from the
principal building.
d) Enclosures shall provide convenient access by the user and the
contracted hauler.
e) Enclosures shall not obstruct approved driveways, aisles, parking
spaces, fire lanes, or building ingress and egress.
f) Enclosures shall be constructed of wood and/or masonry materials
which are aesthetically compatible with the primary structure and
the site.
g) Where fencing is used, the design shall be vertical board, with
treated minimum 2 inches thick lumber and with minimum 6 inches x 6
inches support posts.
h) When gates and doors are used, they shall be equipped
with heavy-duty hardware and shall be kept closed at all times
other than during loading and unloading.
Amended by Ord. No. 82-08) ,
f. All public rights-of-way within NON -RESIDENCE DISTRICTS shall be constructed
to a nine -ton street design.
g. Rooftop Equipment. All heating and cooling equipment mounted on the roof of
of new approved NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS shall effectively buffer noise so
that it is not transmitted beyond the boundaries of the property so to be
perceptible in any residential zoning district. Such equipment shall be
designed (including exterior color) and located so to be aesthetically
harmonious and compatible with the building. Screening of the equipment may
be required where the design, color, and location of the equipment are found
to not effectively buffer noise or provide aesthetic harmony and
compatabilityScreening shall be constructed of durable materials which are
aesthetically compatible with the structure and which may be an integral part
of the structure. Applicable requirements. for access to the equipment shall
be observed in the design and construction of the screening. (Amended Ord.
No. 85-13)
3. Compliance
In order to insure compliance with the performance standards set forth above, the
City Council may require the owner or operator of any use to have made such
8-13
I
J
3NU
Iz
V
O
i
I
I I \ . • i i
I I I • • 11 i
yc.i t ..
r . •w w .rw ,1
I I 1
I -xIti
1
c : ............
I
1
I J
1 I
I _
I1 = - -
1 '
1
j •
sines>3in,
a=
i—' i
1 1
41%
71 7;2
1
I1 I
i 1
I1
4 ,
L 1 I
1
i
I
I I \ . • i i
I I I • • 11 i
yc.i t ..
r . •w w .rw ,1
I I 1
I -xIti
1
c : ............
I
1
I J
1 I
I _
I1 = - -
1 '
1
j •
a twin MY tescinq
cot=, tion
O 662 CROMWELL AVENUE
ST, PAUL, MN 55114
PHONE 612/6453601
REPORT OF: ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE SURVEY
LABORATORY NO: 4143 89-OSI1 DATE: August 16, 1989
PAGE: 2
TEST RESULTS:
The average (Leq) sound levels for each monitored. position are documented below:
Location MeasuredS Leal MPCA Maximum Permis ibie (L50)
Position #1 46 dBA 50 dBA
Position 02 42 dBA 50 dBA
Position 03 45 dBA 50 d8A
Note: The Leq (sound level equivalent) reported above is estimated to equal the L 50 (level
exceeded 50% of the time) as required by the MPCA Standard. IE: The steady state
sound level produced by the HVAC system is nearly constant in nature, therefore the
L50 would be represented by the Leq.
TWIN CITY TESTING CORPORATION
Mike E. Wakumoto, P.E.
Acoustical/Vibration Engineer
Acoustical/Fenestration Department
MEW/ROT/mw/389-0511
Reviewed by:
Q_ A;R v
Richard 0. Thomalla, Manager
Acoustical/Fenestration Department
Mechanical/Metallurgical Division
Iw • Aft"w a 11000rr4771000 ro "affm r..s Swabia .wm euft"ivea'sij. N.wA •.... . • -
41ST A:. N.
44
U.
1
I I
Q t I i! I
TWIN CITY TESTING CORPORATION
Mike E. Wakumoto, P.E.
Acoustical/Vibration Engineer
Acoustical/Fenestration Department
MEW/ROT/mw/389-0511
Reviewed by:
Q_ A;R v
Richard 0. Thomalla, Manager
Acoustical/Fenestration Department
Mechanical/Metallurgical Division
Iw • Aft"w a 11000rr4771000 ro "affm r..s Swabia .wm euft"ivea'sij. N.wA •.... . • -
tunn city testir%Q0
t' m 662 CROMWELL AVENUE
ST. PAUL, MN 5511A
PHONE 612/645.3601
REPORT OF: ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE SURVEY
PROJECT: PLYMOUTH CREEK SCHOOL
REPORTED TO: Wayzata Public Schools #294 DATE: August 15, 1989
Attn: Stan Tikkanen
218 State Highway 101 North cc: Bob Hansen
Wayzata, MN 55391 M A Mortenson
LABORATORY NO: 4143 89-0511
INTRODUCTION:
P.O. NO: n/a
This report documents the results of an environmental noise survey conducted in the vicinityofPlymouthCreekSchool, Plymouth, Minnesota. Noise generated by rooftop HVAC units were
monitored and compared with existing MPGA Standards. This work was requested by Mr. Bob
Hansen of M. A. Mortenson Company on July 27, 1989 with the test conducted July 28, 1989.
CONCLUSIONS:
Noise levels as established by the MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency) for nighttime
maximum permissible levels were not violated in any of the three locations monitored. Duringthetests, all fans (6 total) were reported to be running (not verified). The compressors
were cycling during the tests, therefore an accurate worst case condition was not attainedie. 6 compressors on simultaneously). (See "TEST RESULTS" section of this report for the
exact locations and measured values.)
Note: This conclusion is based on an abbreviated test of noise levels
monitored for a 3 minute period. An actual full scale test as specified
by the MPCA Standard Chapter 7010 involves a I hour monitoring period.
HVAC noise is generally steady state in nature and can be monitored over
a shorter duration and still attain accurate results.
INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENTPROCEDURE:
A Bruel & Kjaer Type 2209 Precision Impulse Sound Level Meter and associated 1/2" condenser
microphone and windscreen were used to obtain the noise levels. The meter was set in theA -Weighted, "Fast" response mode. The meter was calibrated before and after the measurements
with a Bruel and Kjaer Type 4230 sound level calibrator with no drifting observed.
The meter was set 4.5 feet above the ground and pointed in the direction of the school. Measurements were obtained every ten seconds over a 3 minute period. The measurements wereobtainedbetweenthehoursof12:30 and 1:30 AM, July 28, 1989.
cwftns. Two .wue .w aww Vee. Ali A/PON"s &y aynM1R10 4; "IN CMIMQtMYIw.c.+o.. e •.nw+n. eeMeir wti d.r...... — --
b T Z£91.b6 Ol Irldd 1S ON I 1S31 Al I 0 N I fel WMW 8S : 60 .686T -9T-911-1
Z0•d
September 1, 1989
Mr. Stanley Tikkanen
Independent School District #284
P.O. Box 660
Wayzata, MN 55391
SUBJECT: Amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for Plymouth Creek
School (88035)
Dear Mr. Tikkanen:
This letter is written to forward review comments and observations submitted
by the staff members at the August 29, 1989 staff review committee meeting
regarding the above referenced application. During the staff discussion of
the application materials submitted, the following items were addressed:
1. We note the information you submitted from Twin City Testing concerning
the noise level of the rooftop units at the three monitoring points. It
appears the noise level observed, with an unknown number of compressors
engaged, range from 42 decibels to 46 decibels depending on the location.
2. The report of Twin City Testing makes reference to an MPCA standard of 50
decibels for "nighttime maximum permissible levels". The Plymouth Zoning
Ordinance, referencing the buffering of noise from a nonresidential
building, states that the noise shall be so buffered as to preclude the
transmission of noise "beyond the boundaries of the property so to be
perceptible in any residential zoning district". The key word would
appear to be "perceptible". Certainly a noise level of 42 to 46 decibels
is perceptible, regardless of what MPCA standard is applied. It does not
then appear that the rooftop units meet the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance
standards, and should be buffered so as to reduce noise to below the level
of perceptibility at the property lines.
3. We have tentatively scheduled a hearing before the Plymouth Planning
Commission for 7:30 p.m., September 13, 1989 to consider your application
for Amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit. The meeting will be
held at the Plymouth Center, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
Mr. Stanley Tikkanen
September 1, 1989
Page 2
Please review the foregoing comments with respect to relationship of your test
results to the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance. It would be helpful for you to
prepare a written response to our observations that can be presented to the
Planning Commission together with the Staff Report.
Sincerely,
Qes.lDiYeru
Community Development Coordinator
W
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 7, Subdivision E
d
300) square feet per dwelling unit for that portion of the multiple d ling
site within one -hundred fifty (150) feet of the R -1A Residence Distri
8. For each unit containing bedrooms in excess of two (2), add hree-hundred
300) square feet per dwelling unit.
SUBDIVISION F - STANDARDS FOR RESIDENCE DISTRICTS
1. Site Plan
For all permitted developments in th esidence Districts, except those contain-
ing only permitted single family ached dwellings, a site plan must be reviewed
by the Planning Commission approved by the City Council as set forth in
Section 11, Subdivision A
2. Projecting Air Condoning and Heating Units -- Multiple Dwellings and
Rooming Houses
Air condi ' ning or heating units projecting through exterior walls or windows
shall located and designed so that they neither unnecessarily generate or
tran it sound nor disrupt the architectural amenities of the building. Units
p jecting more than twelve inches beyond the exterior finish of a building wall
hall be permitted only with the written consent of the Building Official, which
hnl l
3. Rooftop Equipment. All heating and cooling and other mechanical equipment
mounted on the roof of new approved MULTIPLE DWELLINGS shall effectively buffer
noise so that it is not transmitted beyond the boundaries of the property so to
be perceptible in any residential zoning district. Such equipment shall be
designed (including exterior color) and located so to be aesthetically
harmoniousand compatible with the building. Screening of the equipment may be
required where the design, color, and location of the equipment are found to not
effectively buffer noise or provide aesthetic harmony and compatibility.
Screening shall be constructed of durable materials which are aesthetically
compatible with the structure and which may be an integral part of the
structure. Applicable requirements for access to the equipment shall be
observed in the design and construction of the screening. (Amended Ord. No.
85-13)
Il
a. Except forsidences with private entrances to the ground level, multiple
residenc uildings shall be equipped with at least one trash chute on each
f, hich is connected directly to a compactor, container, or approved
inci erator located in a proper room in the basement or ground floor level.
Pr visions must be made to deliver residual trash to grade level for
ickup. (Amende
7-9
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 8, Subdivision G
ras h buildi
approved accessory building shall comply with the following:
a) All outside accessory enclosures shall screen the contain s from
the public view.
b) The enclosure area shall include adequate buffer g to minimize
visual and audible impact upon any adjacent resi ntial uses.
c) Screen enclosures may be attached to, r detached from the
principal building.
d) Enclosures shall provide convenie access by the user and the
contracted hauler.
e) Enclosures shall not obstct approved driveways, aisles, parking
spaces, fire lanes, or b lding ingress and egress.
f) Enclosures shall b constructed of wood and/or masonry materials
which are aesth ically compatible with the primary structure and
the site.
g) Where f Ging is used, the design shall be vertical board, with
treat minimum 2 inches thick lumber and with minimum 6 inches x 6
in es support posts.
h When gates and doors are used, they shall be equipped
with heavy-duty hardware and shall be kept closed at all times
other than during loading and unloading.
Amended by Ord. No. 82-08)
All public rights-of-way within NON -RESIDENCE DISTRICTS shall be constructed
to a- on street desiqn.
g. Rooftop Equipment. All heating and cooling equipment mounted on the roof of
of new approved NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS shall effectively buffer noise so
that it is not transmitted beyond the boundaries of the property so to be
perceptible in any residential zoning district. Such equipment shall be
designed (including exterior color) and located so to be aesthetically
harmonious and compatible with the building. Screening of the equipment may
be required where the design, color, and location of the equipment are found
to not effectively buffer noise or provide aesthetic harmony and
compatabilityScreening shall be constructed of durable materials which are
aesthetically compatible with the structure and which may be an integral part
of the structure. Applicable requirements, for access to the equipment shall
be observed in the design and construction of the screening. (Amended Ord.
No.' 85-13)
tompi 1Aa ce
order to insure compliance with the performance s et forth above, the
or of any use to such
8-13
all
I 3
Z
iv
Zi
0P
gill
O
J j
I 3
Z
iv
Zi
0P
r 9 -
I F-v2n'
O
J j
i
W W
W C• W W
Z N W
o - Z:)
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE August 21, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 13, 1989
FILE NO.: 89072
PETITIONER: Judy Miller, K & D Construction
REQUEST: Lot Division and Variance from the minimum lot size
requirements (8,591 square feet versus 9,250 square feet)
on the "East Tract".
LOCATION: 235-237 Zinnia Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -2 (Low Medium Density Residential)
ZONING: R-2 (Low Density Multiple Residence)
BACKGROUND:
The City Council approved the Preliminary Plat for what was then called
Carlson Center Annex under Resolution 81-259. They subsequently approved the
Final Plat under Resolution 85-63.
Property owners within 100 feet have been notified of the public meeting.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The purpose of the request is to accommodate individual ownership of each
unit of a duplex structure now under construction on the existing lot of
18,520 square feet.
2. The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance as to specific properties when, in its judgement, an
unusual hardship on the land exists. A copy of the Zoning Ordinance
standards is attached.
The applicant has been informed of the six Zoning Ordinance criteria and
has not provided a narrative response to those criteria.
3. The physical constraints analysis identifies this property to be located
within the Minnehaha Creek Drainage District. It is not located within a
Shoreland Management area or contain any wetlands.
There are no major woodlands or severe slopes. The soils appear suitable
for urban capability with public sewers.
4. The lot division complies with the Ordinance minimum requirements
pertaining to lot width, and building setbacks.
see next page)
0
Page Two
File 89072
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The division of platted property responds to Ordinance standards for such
actions in the R-2 Zone, except the Zoning Ordinance standard of lot size
for the east parcel.
2. We find no basis or hardship for creating the "East Tract" at a size less
than the Ordinance standard of 9,250 square feet, except the drafting
convenience of a straight common property line. The Ordinance standards
for variance are not met and an undersirable precedent will result.
3. An approach that would yield a similar result would be condominiumize the
parcel.
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend approval of the division of platted land, but only on the
condition that the common property line be adjusted to provide 9,250 square
feet in the east r el. We als ecommend t variance be denied.
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Conditions of Approval
2. Recommended Findings for Variance Denial
3. Engineer's Memo
4. Location Map
5. Site Graphics
6. Variance Criteria
pc/cd/89072:dl)
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND REGARDING LOT
DIVISION/CONSOLIDATION FOR K & D CONSTRUCTION (89072)
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
3. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79-80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing open storm water
drainage facilities.
4. No Building Permit to be issued on the "East Tract" until the lot
division/consolidation is filed with Hennepin County.
5. The common property line between the "East Tract" and the "West Tract"
shall be adjusted such that the area of the "East Tract" is not less
than 9,250 square feet.
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
DENIAL OF A VARIANCE FOR LOT SIZE ON THE "EAST TRACT" FOR K & D CONSTRUCTION
89072)
I. The Zoning Ordinance standards for approval of a variance are not met.
2. The approval of a variance will create an undesirable precedent for R-2
Zoned property elsewhere in the City.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 7, 1989
FILE NO.: 89072
PETITIONER: Ms. Judy Miller, K & D Construction, 505 North Hwy. 169, Suite
100, Plymouth, Mn. 55441
LOT DIVISION/CONSOLIDATION:LOT 9, BLOCK 1, CARLSON CENTER SIXTH ADDITION
LOCATION: South of Zinnia Lane, west of Xenium Lane in the southwest one
quarter of Section 34.
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division/Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: , one.
LEGAL/EASEMENTS/PERMITS:
6. _ X Complies with standard utility/drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required,
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building
permits.) This proposed lot division is to separate a two family
dwelling, standard utility and drainage easements will not be
regyired.
N/A Yes No
7. X _ _ Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan.
g. X Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots:
g, X _ _ All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way to
facilitate the development. This vacation is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely
dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from
the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
12. _ X All existing street rights-of-way are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on
13. A.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
4
1
f- f/l AG4 - 4 qo-
7g4
64 9A P7tLSONCENitK
g
49.s1149.04 2-
02NADD. -H- --AVE—.--A.'25, GS 93 SL1c ?
1 2 (46) 50 3 2 3WENSOLEADD. (s0 j0)
8 _
1
I (57) (
58 /
t6. bi ,
0 3j N `h
BL K i ,o,, FRE%lCFilE;d-SLA C
0 44 L
4.45
9pA
c
50 (15)
POINT 2 (10-1 II io4•45
S
BLOCK a THIRD (61)o,'
Qom'
43 (L) ADDITION
3 cob) pgq.gtY ° 6 m C
LP
y
14)
Jotsa ° 41 qw ( W ° ADD, 50 50
p J W 2 k Q 170.70 /yLL
a2 a2
Z
o
J (12) ` W -
7 €
W
3 g ' ire Q
wZ 1 1 h"Jgo. J 0 8 Sl.i `^ Z
0 Ws
l / -J = to •. 1 1 ?40. 00 Z
v a ~ ° _ 9 •Z J
OUTLOT F u 4 w -.(
28) `
8 (
2o 2
Z (33) 8
4+ Z
a
X1015127
0 N x
s26 (25)
0
OUT LOT A
s , ; J
S (
22) (34)
Sero 100.00I.
y;) •sc.,• SfT x.79
4
450
2 HiQ '•. j
A (
23) ,?, (35R•xjl6 /
I..
J •4lR 30I ` C LS N :..
t
4 3(
151 ;
II U•i
C 4
Qui) 91
sr (6) (7y
10
Do
9 Cwt M (2)
8
1 .
a F (til 6 ro !
Y• g 0 his)
p o . , '` ,+, •' , ,
6c SUIV c
3,4 ZINNIA A.
Aooi' ION n
OCK I I
M, ZI .12
O• I
CARLSON CENTER ,
BLOCK I
k •
1
LOT I I
I
1
AiI vNORTH- 46T - o
o „o
o
I
l:
yJ "`
i
1
N
N
UZ
I
Surmountable Curb N
R=225
of'
N.89°11129"e, i e North linee=12°26' O r-0 N 89°11129''E L t 91=48.84
I
57.19--- ---
Draitv9e and Utility Easement o eor,
1 Loi
jc
Ln
LriI I
x
Qj
in
21.0
I .n
21.0 W
TWO
a/
9.0 DWELLING
CONS 7
IJo
W CJ W 1
Ma) C
H
N o
36.61 0 -
Z 1 xn n
N
1 1
I
s
Drainage --_
al 9--
and
FA M 1 LY
U N DER 9.0 I
RUCTION
I
I_
I
0........ 21.'14 i
T
Utility Easement ,
1
58.20 --- ----
N.89°11'29" E..
The 300 th !i„e Or L97' -
46 h0. 894CO
ZDN I N G 0 KW NANc.E
VPSK% NW`F.- .5'TAW D A R DS
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 distinouished 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 zon-
ing classification.
3) That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a
desire to increase the value or income 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.
S) 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 con-
gestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or
endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair
property values within the neighborhood.
a.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE August 14, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 13, 1989
FILE NO.: 89027
PETITIONER: Ben Roggeman, Jr.
REQUEST: Division of Unplatted Land via Waiver of Subdivision Code
LOCATION: 5030 Zachary Lane North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
There is no prior history of development applications concerning this parcel
in the Community Development Department files.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The applicant proposes a division of unplatted property to create 2 single
family building lots of approximately 24,000 square feet each from an
existing unplatted parcel of 48,488 square feet. The new building lot
created (the west parcel) is proposed to access Zachary Lane via a shared
driveway with the east parcel (containing the existing home). The east
parcel has public street frontage on 50th 1/2 Place North, an unbuilt half
street right-of-way.
2. Section 500.43, Subdivision 2 of the Plymouth City Code (the Subdivision
Ordinance) provides that where compliance with the provisions of the State
law with respect to platting of property creates an unnecessary hardship
and where failure to comply will not interfere with the purpose of this
Subdivision Ordinance, the City may waive compliance with the requirement
that land cannot be conveyed by metes and bounds.
The Council may thus grant the waiver if a finding has been made by the
Planning Commission that the request otherwise complies with the
Subdivision Code.
The applicant requests such a waiver based on a hardship as described in a
letter of June 26, 1989 (attached).
see next page)
Page Two
File 89027
3. The Physical Constraints Analysis identifies this property is within the
Shingle Creek Drainage District. The property is not located within a
Shoreland Management District nor does it contain any wetlands. The site
does not contain any major woodlands or slopes in excess of 12 percent.
The soil appears suitable for urban capability with public sewers.
4. The lot division complies with ordinance standards for lot dimensions and
lot area.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Staff has repeatedly advised the petitioner that we could not determine an
unnecessary hardship sufficient to justify a waiver of platting as
proposed. (See our letter of May 8, 1989, attached.) We do not view
economic circumstances to be a proper hardship.
2. The City Engineer is recommending the provision of an additional 7 feet of
right-of-way along Zachary Lane as a condition of the approval of this
action. It would be necessary for that additional right-of-way to be
handled by easement rather than the preferable method of (platted)
dedication.
3. We find, upon the advice of the Engineering Division, that the use of 50th
1/2 Place North as public street access to the proposed easterly parcel is
not feasible and that shared access to Zachary Lane --conditioned on the
property cross easements --is acceptable.
The use of 50th 1/2 Place is artificial in that, if it is not
needed/desired as a physically constructed street, it should be vacated.
The right-of-way (half street) was platted with the subdivision to the
south.
The request is altered somewhat, therefore: if 50 1/2 Place is vacated as
it should be, it cannot serve as frontage (vs. access) for the proposed
lot that does not abut Zachary Lane. That lack renders a waiver of the
platting procedure requirement unavailable (the Code requires compliance
with all standards in order to waive the platting requirement), unless a
variance from the frontage standard is granted.
Thus, the Subdivision Code variance standards should be considered if the
inclination is to allow the waiver.
4. The physical division of property that is proposed is perhaps, then,
technically responsive to both the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision
Ordinance, except with respect to the platting waiver method proposed. We
do not find an unnecessary hardship in that economic costs typically are
and can be here recovered through the sale of the new parcel.
see next page)
Page Three
File 89027
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend that the application to waive the Subdivision Code
Provision prohibiting conveyance of property by metes and bounds (Subdivision
waiver) be denied. The variance as to street frontage has merit, but should
be applied to a platted lot. I have attached both finding in support of the
denial recommendation and conditions to be attached to an approval
recommendation. „ _
Submitted by:
ATTACHMENTS:
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
1. Recommended Finding in Support of Denial of Subdivision Waiver
2. Recommended Conditions to Approval of Subdivision Waiver
3. Engineer's Memo
4. Location Map
5. Sketch of Proposed Division
6. Petitioner's Letter of June 26, 1989
7. Staff Letter of May 8, 1989
8. Section 500.43 of the Plymouth City Code
pc/cd/89027:dl)
RECOMMENDED FINDING FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING SUBDIVISION WAIVER FOR BEN ROGGEMAN, JR. (89027)
1. The applicant has not demonstrated an unnecessary hardship consistent with
the requirements of Section 500.43, Subdivision 1 of the Plymouth City
Code.
2. Costs of development can be recovered with the sale of the new parcel.
3. The petitioner should submit an application for preliminary plat and
variance as to public street frontage; the waiver fee may be applied as a
credit against the required fees.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING SUBDIVISION WAIVER AND VARIANCE FOR BEN ROGGEMAN, JR. (89027)
1. No Building Permits shall be issued to the west parcel until a contract
has been awarded for the construction of municipal sewer and water to
serve that parcel.
2. Approval includes a variance from the ordinance requirement for frontage
onto a dedicated public street based upon the findings that 50 1/2 Place
North is not needed or desired as a full public street as contemplated
when the current half width right-of-way was dedicated; 50 1/2 Place North
should be vacated; and adequate street access via private drive onto
Zachary Lane has been proposed. No other variances from the provisions of
the Subdivision Code or from the Zoning Ordinance are hereby approved or
implied.
3. Submission of required roadway, utility, and drainage easements, as
approved by the City Engineer, prior to submittal of the waiver resolution
to Hennepin County.
4. No Building Permit shall be issued until the Subdivision Code waiver
resolution is filed with Hennepin County.
5. Submission of private joint driveway and access easements for approval by
the City Attorney prior to submittal of the waiver resolution to Hennepin
County.
6. The petitioner shall request vacation of 50 1/2 Place North right-of-way
prior to submittal of the waiver resolution to the County.
7. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of land dedication in accordance
with the Park Dedication Policy. The fee for the parcel with the existing
home shall be paid prior to filing the waiver resolution. The fee for the
vacant parcel shall be paid at the time a Building Permit is issued. The
fee amount shall be per the Policy in effect at those times.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 6, 1989
FILE NO.: 89027
PETITIONER: Lily Roggeman, 5030 Zachary Lane, Plymouth, Mn. 55442
LOT DIVISION/CONSOLIDATION: PARCEL 12-118-22-23-0003
LOCATION: East of Zachary Lane, south of Schmidt Lake Road, north of 50th
Avenue in the northwest one quarter of Section 12.
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division/Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: Sanitary sewer area assessment $889.16. Water
area assessment S1,597,38, The owner has waived the right to special
assessment hearings.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: Sanitary sewer lateral
91-885,40, Water lateral S5.500, The owner has waived the right to
gap -Q al assessment hearings for these assessments
LEGAL/EASEMENTS/PERMTTS:
6. _ _ _g_ Complies with standard utility/drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required,
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building
permits.)
N/A Yes No
7. X —
B. X — —
9. —X-
10. --X
11. — _ X
12. --X
Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan.
Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots:
All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities
All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way to
facilitate the development. This vacation is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely
dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from
the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated. 50 1/2 Place North is only half a street I recommend
this street be vacated if the lot division is approved
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.
All existing street rights-of-way are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on An additional 7 feet of
right-of-way will be required for Zachary Lane.
2
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
13. A. The owner is responsible for the installation and cost of the watermain
services from the watermain on Zachary Lane to the property line and from the
property line to the homes.
B. Cross easements will be required for the driveway, water service and sanitary
sewer service.
C. The existing driveway shall be used for both parcels. No new access to Zachary
Lane shall be allowed.
Submitted by:
3
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
J '
n
0
a I Oro
min
K:
NM- I
FA
m
iz
A
August 14, 1989
Mr. Charles E. Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Re: Proposed Lot Division - 5030 Zachary
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
AUG II
ciT a L .;-Ll E
Lan(:(89027)
In reply to your letter dated July 28, 1989, we have worked out the
sewer issues with Mr. Dan Faulkner. I am forwarding this date, Waiver
of Assessment Hearing, directly to Mr. Faulkner's attention, with the
understanding this document is not enforceable until he receives a re-
cordable 20 foot sewer easement from Graham Development.
Our mother, Lily Roggeman, has lived on her present site and at 5100
Zachary Lane the past 53 years and would like to continue to do so.
Therefore, she elects to subdivide her lot and requests a waiver of
compliance with Subdivision Regulations to allow conveyance of the
property by metes and bounds because platting would create a financial
hardship. Her only income is Social Security Benefits of less than
630.00 per month with no additional income. Her real estate taxes, her
largest expense, are $1,250.96 per year. She sets aside each month
104.00 towards this expense leaving her with a balance of $526.00 to
pay the remainder of all her living expenses. Mother is aware the city
will require her to hook up to the sanitary sewer, which has recently
been installed in Zachary Heights, adjacent to her property, within
two years. In order for her to pay for this expense, she desires to
split her lot and sell the West portion and bring in sewer and water,
her well is 20 years old) to both sites and pay for all expenses from
the sale of lot proceeds. As you can see by the survey, the legal
description is not a difficult one. This split constitutes one addi-
tional lot. Per my telephone conversation with Mr. Jim Willes on July 26,
1989, he stated he would recommend this division to the city council
based on the fact there is only one lot that is being created. The
extra costs and time involved to plat two lots is much greater than
obtaining an attorney to provide the city with recordable easements
for right-of-way dedication involved with Zachary Lane. We are willing
to provide all necessary recordable easements required by the City of
Plymouth.
Please continue with processing our application to create two lots by
waiver of the Subdivision Ordianance--resulting in metes and bounds
descriptions.
We would appreciate a response from you as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
The Children of Lily Roggeman
Ben Roggeman
Karen Clare
Sharen Johnson
June 26, 1989
Mr. Charles E. Dillerud
Cm u unity Development Coordinator
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Subject: Proposed Lot Division
5030 Zachary Lane (89027)'
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
JU-N 281989
Ci T v OF PLYMOUTH
CONUN41 Y DEvaopmENT DEPT.
In referenced to your letter dated May 8, 1989, we are requesting
the Development Review Committee to reconsider a lot split approval
with access use of the present driveway and not 50-1/2 Avenue North.
The Roggeman home on the present site was built in 1968-1969. The
first proposed survey submitted to the City of Plymouth located the
house closer to the north lot line. The City requested the location
of the house closer to the lot line on the south. We were advised
by the City of Plymouth they had decided 50-1/2 Avenue North was
too dangerous of an access onto Zachary Lane and the street served
no purpose whatsoever. Therefore the City was going to vacate said
street. The City also made reference that the present Roggeman driveway
would most likely be used as future street, if the land was subdivided,
because it had a much better access from Zachary Lane. I have attached
a copy of the final proposed site survey submitted to the City by
Dickman Knutson of McCombs Knutson Associates, Inc., dated December
7, 1968, where he noted the proposed vacation of the street.
The following are a number of reasons why we feel strongly 50-1/2
Avenue should not be considered as an access to both of the resulting
parcels.
1. The approach of 50-1/2 Avenue onto Zachary Lane is extremely
dangerous. In a span of 15 feet, Zachary Lane drops two (2) feet.
50-1/2 Avenue is right in the middle of the hill.
2. There is 250 feet from the entrance of 50th Avenue to 50-1/2
Avenue. Because of the grade of the hill, you cannot see 50-1/2
Avenue from 50th Street. The speed limit is 40 miles per hall and
with the grade of the hill you just can't see the approaching cars
far enough in advance before your able to pull out onto either north
or south lanes of Zachary. Remember, this hill is very steep and
most cars are traveling 50 miles per hour before they reach the present
Roggeman driveway, bottom of hill, which is 450 feet from 50th Avenue.
In the winter months, the grade level prevents many cars from making
the hill on slippery or snowy days. It would even be more difficult
approaching it from the middle of the hill.
3. Please note the heavy traffic flow during the times we noted
on the following clear Jute days. We are only taking a count of the
number of cars going either north or south, not BOTH directions during
the time span indicated.
Wednesday, June 14, 1989
Going South on Zachary Lane 7:00 to 7:15 a.m. 166 cars
Going North on Zachary Lane 5:30 to 5:45 p.m. 130 cars
Thursday, June 15, 1989
Going South on Zachary Lane 7:30 to 7:45 a.m. 170 cars
Going North on Zachary Lane 5:30 to 5:45 p.m. 132 cars
Friday, June 16, 1989
Going South on Zachary Lane 7:15 to 7:30 a.m. 162 cars
Going North on Zachary Lane 4:30 to 4:45 p.m. 119 cars
Nur. Charles E. Dillerud
Page 2
June 26, 1989
How would you like to attest to enter onto Zachary Lane from a blind
approach with this heavy traffic flow?
4. We have discussed 50-1/2 Avenue with the neighbors (2) whose
back or side yards abutt up to this street and it would serve no
purpose to either one of them because of the extremely high drop
off from their yards. There is no way any vehicle could approach
their properties from 50-1/2 Avenue.
5. If this street was built, there would be no other street for
it to connect to. If cars came down said street, where would they
even turn around?
6. The only attractive view for the homeowner to situate a home
on the propose vacant lot would be facing the north. If said house
could be facing south, they would be viewing the etwknent.
7. If the present Roggeman driveway is used for the two parcels
of land, an easement would be granted for driveway purposes. Note:
there has been a driveway easement granted to the parties on the
original Roggeman homestead site (north) for many years with not
one problem.
Has anyone come out to the site from the City of Plymouth? If you
have, there should be no question in your mind regarding the use
of 50-1/2 Avenue as an access to the two parcels of land.
Our mother, Lily Roggeman, fee owner, is a senior citizen on a fixed
income (social security) and she is aware there may be a proposed
improvement for upgrading Zachary lane in the near future. It would
be an extreme hardship on her financially considering she has approxi-
mately 152 feet on Zachary Lane. She requests this split approval
so she is able to bring in the water and sewer to her site as well
as the vacant proposed lot and pay for said improvements and the
cost of splitting said lot from the proceeds of the sale of the future
vacant lot sale. She desires this work to be done now, because the
cost for bringing in these improvement would be Hoch greater after
the lots and streets have been fully developed surrounding her property.
Would the City of Plymouth take into consideration all of the above
concerns regarding proposed access to 50-1/2 Avenue and approve the
split based'on access from the present Roggeman driveway.
Sincerely,
The Children of Lily Roggeman
kvc2/?6ry ew/Z
Ben Roggeman
Karen Clare
Sharen Johnson
Enclosures: Photos of site
Drawing of sites
Copy of survey -1968 .
t
Me
AmcIATES , IKC.
w,7_4)
C rG SUITI«c tNOINcc t
t-r Q Wo lu4YtY641
SI?c 9u%«14cts
10601 OLIO« Hwy.- MPLI.) MINN. 55417
6 No. Male U.- Nu4chiesae) Minn• SS3Sb
qurvau For: BEN. H. ROGGEVIAN .'
3.01
319.48
51.91
o¢ ,
951.11
J
e/
Porck
til
v
03
Ln
J
i
v
3
6.b8
1 Z
s+teat
955A! Q (9563) (to be 1
N
r-50' 965.9j ----•203.4
319 b8.._._._....
South Ur -A of North 112 of SW V4
of NW. 114 of5et. It, T 118 N, R UW
94Ui
z 951.11
e/
Porck
v n
Ln
i
6.b8
051.81
955A!
S -J
n
951.8) - (9547)
Denotes Iron Nvwme4
1001 Deno+es ExA.Skin9 E1.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of
a survey of the boundaries of:
The '"gest 319.58 feet of the South 152.00 feet of the North One Half
of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12,
Township 118, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to an
easement for roadway purposes over and across the Westerly 33.00
feet thereof.
nd of -the location of all buildings, .if any, thereon, and all vis-
ible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. It also shows the
location of a proposed building but no stakes have been set for such
location. As surveyed by me this 7th day of December, 1968.
Land Surveyor, Minn. Reg. No. 7979
iw
p
July 28, 1989 CITY C
PUMOUTR
Mr. Ben Roggeman, Jr.
5030 Zachary Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55442
SUBJECT: PROPOSED LOT DIVISION - 5030 ZACHARY LANE (89027)
Dear Mr. Roggeman:
This shall be a follow up to my letter of May 8, 1989, and response to the
letter of Karen Clare dated June 26, 1989. This will also acknowledge several
telephone calls with various members of the City staff by Ms. Clare since June
26.
I have talked with the City Engineer, Dan Faulkner, regarding the need for the
construction of 50 1/2th Avenue North. He has indicated that he now does not
feel that it will be necessary to construct 50 1/2th Avenue North as a public
street to serve the two lots that are proposed to be created. Dan Faulkner
indicates that he has talked with Karen Clare regarding sewer issues as well.
I continue to have concern with respect to the present application to create
two lots by waiver of the Subdivision Ordinance --resulting in metes and bounds
descriptions. As I have indicated previously, I cannot refuse to accept your
application to waive the Subdivision Ordinance, but I cannot recommend that
procedure either. It is certainly much preferable to plat two lots --
particularly since there will be right-of-way dedication involved with Zachary
Lane.
Please advise me, at your earliest possible convenience, as to what you are
now intending to do with respect to this proposal. I do not intend proceed
until I have heard from you in writing with regard to both the Subdivision
waiver issue, and whether the sewer service assessment matters that have been
discussed with Dan Faulkner are currently understood by you, and will not
become an impediment to the division that you now propose.
Should you have any questions concerning these matters, please do not hesitate
to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ch s Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
dre/cd/89027:dl)
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
CITY OF
PLYMOUTFF
May 8, 1989
Mr. Ben Roggeman, Jr.
5030 Zachary Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55442
SUBJECT: Proposed Lot Division - 5030 Zachary Lane (89027)
Dear Mr. Roggemann:
At its meeting on April 25, 1989, the Development Review Committee considered
the captioned application. As a result of that meeting and subsequent review
by members of the city staff, we offer the following comments concerning the
subject proposal:
1. The Plymouth City Code with respect to Subdivisions is enclosed.
Because the subject property is unplatted, a relatively simple lot division bySection500.37 of the City Code is not possible. We strongly recommend that
you direct your Engineer to properly plat the property, consistent with the
proper provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance.
You may request a waiver of compliance with Subdivision Regulations
to allow conveyance of the property by metes and bounds if platting will
create an unnecessary hardship. Please refer to Section 500.43 of the
enclosed Subdivision Regulations. We fail to see how a hardship could be
established, but we can entertain such an application together with a complete
description of what hardship would result if the Subdivision Regulations were
not followed as we suggest.
2. Regardless of the method you propose to use for the division of this
property, we do not concur that use of the 50-1/2 Place North right-of-way foraccesstobothoftheresultingparcelsisphysicallyimpossible. The
topographic data supplied by your Engineer does not extend into the 50-1/2
Place North right-of-way, but city topographic maps appear to indicate that
the right-of-way area has been previously graded for potential use as a
street. Dedication of additional right-of-way and the construction of a
roadway to serve the two proposed lots does not appear to be out of the
question. It is recommended by staff due to the Thoroughfare status of
Zachary Lane.
3. At such time as a division is approved for this parcel, an
additional park dedication fee of $825 will be required to cover the new lot
created prior to the release of the Approval Resolution for recording withHennepinCounty.
3400 PLYMIOUTH BOULFVARD Pf YkAC !TN MINNESOTA 95447 TF1 FpHn Jr
t
Mr. Ben Roggeman
Page Two
May 8, 1989
Processing of your application will be on hold until such time as you advise
us whether you intend to process a standard preliminary plat (as we recommend)
or you intend to apply to the City Council for a waiver of the subdivision
rules.
Sincerely yours,
AA
aes illerud
Community Development Coordinator
Enclosure
corres: dre/cd/89027)
Plymouth City Code 500.39
evations a 11 surve ed in connecti
wi applications for waivers of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section
462. , Subdivision 4, or for division or consolidation of lots or tracts as
provide 'n Section 500.37 shall show thereon sea level elevations at 50 foot
intervals.
500.41. Va 'ances. Subdivision 1. General Conditions. The Planning
Commission may r ommend a variance from the provisions of this Section as to
specific propertie when, in its judgement, an unusual hardship on the land
exists. In granting variance, the Commission may prescribe conditions that
it deems necessary or sirable in the public interest. In making its find-
ings, as required below, he Commission shall consider the nature of the pro-
posed use of the land and a existing use of land in the vicinity, the number
of persons to reside or work n the proposed subdivision, and the probable
effect of the proposed subdivi on upon traffic conditions in the vicinity.
No variance shall be granted unl the Commission finds:
a) That there are special circ stances or conditions affecting the
specific property such thatstrict application of the provisions
of this Section would deprive a applicant of the reasonable use
of the land,
b) That the variance is necessary fora preservation and enjoyment of
a substantial property right of thea Iicant.
c) That the granting of the variance will n be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other proper in the territory
in which the property is located.
The Commission findings in granting or denying a variance 1 -be in writing
and filed with the City Clerk. _
Subd. 2. Application Required. Applications for any var nce under this
Subsection shall be submitted in writing by the owner or subdiv er at the time
the preliminary plat is filed for consideration by the Planning mmission, and
shall state all facts relied upon by the applicant, and shall be pplemented
with maps, plans or other additional data which may aid the Commis on in the
analysis of the proposed project. The plans for such development s 11 include
such covenants, restrictions or other legal provisions necessary to g arantee
the full achievement of the plan for the proposed project.
500.43. Compliance; Waivers; Building Permits. Subdivision 1. Conve a e of
Land. Any person who conveys land by metes and bounds or by reference to n
unapproved plat or registered land survey in violation of the provisions o
Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, Subdivision 4 is
Subd. 2. Waiver of Compliance. In any case where compliance with the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, Subdivision 4 will create an
unnecessary hardship and failure to comply will not interfere with the purpose
of this Section, the City Council may by resolution waive compliance with this
Subsection, provided, however, that the proposed conveyance has been reviewed
by the Planning Commission and the Commission has found that it complies with
all provisions of this Section.
c
t
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE August 25, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 13, 1989
FILE NO.: 89071
PETITIONER: Paul & Gladys Kariniemi
REQUEST: Lot Division and Variance From the Zoning Ordinance
Pertaining to the Lot Width of the Southerly Parcel.
Proposed is 90 Feet Versus the Ordinance Minimum 110 Feet.
LOCATION: 508 Pineview Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
There have been no previous planning applications involving this property.
Property owners within 100 feet have been notified of this public meeting.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance as to specific properties when, in its judgement, the
6 standards of the Zoning Ordinance have been met. A copy of those
standards together with the applicant's response are attached.
2. The lot division complies with the minimum lot size requirements of 23,100
square feet and 52,900 square feet versus the Ordinance minimum 18,500
square feet.
3. The physical constraints analysis identifies that the property is located
within the Bassett Creek Drainage District. The site is located within
the Shoreland Management Area but does not contain any wetlands. The site
contains some major woodlands and slopes in excess of 12 percent. The
soils appear suitable for urban capability with public sewers.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The division of platted property is responsive to Section 500.37 of the
City Code and meets all submission requirements.
see next page)
Page Two
File 89071
2. We find basis for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance to permit one parcel
with a 90 foot street frontage. The existing shape of the parcel in
relation to its area (76,000 square feet) creates a reasonably unique
circumstance, not found with the majority of Plymouth parcels.
3. While income potential may be the desire behind the variance request,
there will beug blic economies that would result to partially offset
personal gain to the applicant.
4. The proposed variance should not be detrimental to the public welfare,
diminish property values in the neighborhood or contribute to congestion
on public streets.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend approval of this application to divide platted property, including
a variance from the Zoning Ordinance to permit a lot width on Parcel B of 90
feet.
Submitted by:
Char es E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Conditions of Approval
2. Engineer's Memo
3. Petitioner's Narrative
4. Variance Criteria
5. Location Map
6. Large Plans
pc/cd/89071:dl)
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND REGARDING LOT
DIVISION/CONSOLIDATION FOR PAUL AND GLADYS KARINIEMI (89071)
1. Variance is approved by lot width of 90 feet on Parcel B based on
compliance with variance standards.
2. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79-80 regarding minimum floor
elevations for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing open
storm water drainage facilities.
3. No Building Permit to be issued on Parcel B until the lot
division/consolidation is filed with Hennepin County.
4. Submittal of all necessary utility easements prior to filing lot
division/consolidation with Hennepin County.
5. Payment of Park Dedication Fees consistent with the Park Dedication
Policy prior to filing lot division/consolidation with Hennepin County.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 6, 1989
FILE NO.: 89071
PETITIONER: Mr. and Mrs. Paul Kariniami, 508 Pineview Lane, Plymouth, Mn.
55441
LOT DIVISION/CONSOLIDATION:LOT 19 BLOCK 2 WILSHIRE GARDENS, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN.
LOCATION: South of 6th Avenue, east of Pineview Lane in the southwest one
quarter of Section 35.
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _X._ Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ x SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division/Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
6. _ _ X Complies with standard utility/drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required,
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building
permits.)
N/A Yes No
7. X — Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan.
g, X Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots:
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way to
facilitate the development. This vacation is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely
dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from
the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
12. X All existing street rights-of-way are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on
13. A. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of the sanitary sewer
and water services from the main lines to serve the new parcel.
B. Because of the length required for the sanitary sewer and water service, the
water service shall be 1 1/2". The sanitary sewer shall be 6" with cleanouts
every 100 feet
C. The certificate of survey shall detail the driveway grades and any grading
required for a new house.
i
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
2
S L)
2 L ESE 2 Of
El
0
f
Co E Q EJ #0 P0,66 6F VA P r AtJ6e- .S r , ( oocu-z-
QLE-D M A7 F -0 -Tu (ZE C o J S -rgo L7io k) OF S 4 jjy 7 r
SE -Wo_ A Njo wales S'E2v eC W,
A44 6
4a 1 tj7oj o e- )-07 11 1 W ILL n/07 A0 tPi-0l,
SANi,M y
ASSEc(Mex-r-"
r
iiLvi.Lvi'• .::F7 VL''.
o N t U .DI CC f}R t' S7,ga ("SF o l.S'
N E 10 rEL'T e FgONTM-6E V, _. _ lR n1 CE WE- nRe'
P0561811. I! Y op -awlDI 1G 4 f4ow 0 nl R
a TF4E T'U —(0 PC' o
rj4j C,3aI —I) o46 pop, -n4e VAR/AA/c4- RE sw,-r paom-bialou '
J b F(2 e7 D R F RoQJ7
I
ati u w ICH -vt oD.< rpgF5p 7 Nlr
Cjaumo:
I
F- '"I 7HE 7o 74 1- 400 F&-Zfr off rjpo A/M&6-
W H i e+ cJj a s FLq77ED YoAxs iQGo , 5 osi c A Fl Qg 6
1.0100- 19->L (o o Z" (,u i Scc s' o Q P o <` k, 7s
btu `JVD t 44w-
a,
4w -
3 -rH PQ ,mr4Y PvRPosE- OP- 7W vu)Afj6E ) s &G -S" 0t
Po S5 (814 rY k_ i r)4kV- F u s ' Y -s °F .T o e (D -7W `r°
rL I -I E, WE' PA& kITl0,W &bVL.
71::C, Us I r4 v rqR #*,(E greg()tIAL /S Al 107
5, 45 IN l
Is 110 Wr y r1 sN
Tf4EjW rb6Z, w o dLg NDS B
6 Q (\j4 7- r6)iARD 2/4-,o
7b 77-1& Pu.P" L
rj4/ t'o2o Q5 V 1 d tAJIL N 7 ! F A i .l)l liauisl*t10)6
l,,i7r4 4k- WLr 7 3 1; icy/
57 7 C 6'ES-Io,J pRoPF( Moe[ o i c6Z sE- 54E
6p lj eUGLIC 5Mr-rer
ZDN I v G 0 RW NAN(-oE-
VAKI NW 67NW D A R D5
1) That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land Involved, a
particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from
a mere inconvenience, If the strict letter of the regulations were to
be carried out.
2) That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based
are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance Is sought and
are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zon-
ing classification.
3) That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a
desire to increase the value or income 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 con-
gestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or
endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair
property values within the neighborhood.
63)
114 1. zr 1
20) N 09.24,M E
27)
12
ma 1.219 1
1.S o'-
4
28)
n
2
4A., f'r
32.60'
X344
401
45.0+
s
o 29 )
1 1.Sg 7(
fige. 82
see tH AVE. N.
o
11 TrQ RRi 410
0
sill
20
30) ( )
ISS 01 _ .•••
2)
lon -1l (,
y c
12
ma 1.219 1
1.S o'-
4) n
2J•
n
45.0+
392.06
113 D
10)
33
sso•zrsl•
60• 4 1
11 ! • Meg' 21. .
325,
5)
A t)
1
17) 1 T
2)
lon -1l (,
26) 7 (
35)
1
6 (
34)
s v
23) -
22) i
2
14)
a -
A
6) \ • +0 `(2)'
a (t)
13
12 11 (3)' R • .
2• ^
may, ,.
43100.2 :4 Is.e
j
4) n
2J•
392.06
113 D
33
r sso•zrsl• 1' {'
17) - t8) a 1
3)
R
2 )
2
czS
ro5 saT
S• Q
S
O
w5) ZT
r.7 -
36.89 10• ie
14
o
S\
IT. 67 \1 _ , _ a
II °
1 if.7d 40
i:5•p%10'E
R'293. ,6' pp•i5.
81.7E e
11) l
26) 7 (
35)
1
6 (
34)
s v
23) -
22) i
2
14)
a -
A
6) \ • +0 `(2)'
a (t)
13
12 11 (3)' R • .
2• ^
may, ,.
43100.2 :4 Is.e
j
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
FOR: PAUL KARINIEMI
e zol.00
r 9r Ndtillty
Y Nsee"nt
5 el
JIm
J,
o
o
I I
PARCEL—
ED
i
A ( l5
l 0 VV I I
0
N
C ST,NG `a
lJNE1
1 .
JmF+o u s E I I tD
14
I
u)
cp 3 o.
10.00
C, I.P.
z—Q
ScaUs 10 - 401
c Denotes 1/2" O Iron Pipe Set
e Denotes iron monument found
NOTE: NO GRADING PROPOSED,TO BE '
DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEW
HOUSE CONSTRUCTION.
J SVCP Sqn, MN53obv9SM+9151.-71
irAV-974.1 [e DJIC{'1.11` ri1 i( PINEVIEW LANE N Gu!c UD
Joe 31 1989
PARCEL A CITY OF PLYMOUTH
COMMUN11 DEVELOPMENT DEPT
The North 110.00 feet of the West 210.00 feet of Lot 19, Block 2,
WILSHIRE GARDENS, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Said parcel contains
0.53 acres, more or less.
PARCEL .b
Lot 19, Block 2, WILSHIRE GARDSENS, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except
the North 110.00 feet of the West 210.00 feet. Said parcel contains I1.21 acres, more or less.
We hereby artlfy that this It a true and cornet rprwntation of a survey of
M EM 1A 8401 73rd Ave. No., Suite 63 the boundaries of the above deaeAbad land "of site location of all bulldinmt,
Brooklyn Park, MN 55428.1293 If any, themort and MI visible encroachment% Nary, from or on ask! land.
Telephone (612) 533.7595
c ASSOCIATES Fax (612) 533.1937 alxveyed b
r~ day w TuiJ 6 tm ,
r Tn r 4,.- Mktn. RW No.
ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING
bb No. - 4;9 /07 Book - hp
5.$
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE August 25, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 13, 1989
FILE NO.: 89070
PETITIONER: Hazelden Pioneer House - Mike Schiks, Program Director
REQUEST: Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit Amendment
LOCATION: 11505 36th Avenue North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
By Resolution 75-678, the City Council on December 1, 1975, approved a Site
Plan and Conditional Use Permit for Pioneer House Chemical Dependency
Treatment Facility for Union City Mission at the subject location.
By Resolution 83-93, the City Council on February 22, 1983, approved a Site
Plan and Conditional Use Permit amendment for the construction of a two -car
garage at the Hazelden Pioneer House.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the official city
newspaper, and all property owners within 500 feet have been notified.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The Site Plan amendment is to expand the existing Pioneer House to include
a new lecture hall, new detoxification facility, and amusement center.
The total structure added will be 10,000 square feet in two phases.
In addition the petitioner proposed to add 59 new off street parking
spaces to compliment 56 existing spaces.
2. The Conditional Use Permit amendment is for the addition of an 11 bed
medical service unit" (four of which are proposed to be licensed for
detoxification); a 7 bed increase in the "evaluation" component; and an
increase in office/meeting room area. The applicant has submitted a
description of the proposed uses (attached).
see next page)
Page Two
File 89070
3. Before any Conditional Use Permit amendment may be granted, the Planning
Commission shall review the request for compliance with the Conditional
Use Permit standards set forth in Section 9, Subdivision A 2a of the
Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has submitted narrative response to those
standards.
4. The amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit are in compliance with
all provisions of the City of Plymouth Policy Manual and Zoning Ordinance
with respect to structure dimensions; setbacks; parking design;
landscaping; of waste material storage enclosure and roof top equipment;
none proposed) and is responsive to the various elements of the
Comprehensive Plan.
5. The physical constraints analysis identifies this property to be located
within the Bassett Creek Drainage District. The site is located within
the Shoreland Management District but contains no wetlands. The site
contains some major woodlands and severe slopes in excess of 12 percent.
The soils appear suitable for urban capability with public sewers, and the
site design acknowledges the observed development constraints.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed amended Site Plan meets all City of Plymouth policies, codes
and ordinances.
2. The Conditional Use Permit amendment involves no significant change to the
operation of the structure. The Conditional Use Permit criteria are met.
The 14 -acre site provides substantial buffering from any use impacts to
surrounding property.
3. There is no City record of verified complaints or code violations.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the amended Site Plan and Conditional Use
Permit. The attached draft resolution provides for that approval, subject to
conditions that aDDIv. _
Submitted by: l 'W-ga 1 Q'-A
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution Approving Amended
2. Engineer's Memorandum
3. Conditional Use Permit Criteria
4. City Council Resolutions 75-678 and
5. Location Map
6. Petitioner's Correspondence
7. Large Plans
pc/cd/89070:dl)
Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit
83-93
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING AMENDED SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HAZELDEN PIONEER
HOUSE (89070)
1. Provisions for a 20 -foot wide trail easement along 36th Avenue North as
verified by the Parks and Engineering Departments.
2. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 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.
4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
6. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the enclosure, and
no outside storage is permitted.
7. An 8 1/2 x 11 inch "As -Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted
prior to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City
Policy.
8. Specific Conditional Use Permit approval hereby granted is for an 11 -bed
medical service unit"; an additional 7 beds of "evaluation"; and
offices/meeting areas, totalling 10,000 square feet added.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 6, 1989
FILE NO.: 89070
PETITIONER: Mr. Mike Schiks, Program Director, Hazelden Pioneer House, 11505 36th
Ave. N., Plymouth, MN. 55441-2398
SITE PLAN: ADDITION TO HAZELDEN PIONEER HOUSE
LOCATION: South of 36th Ave., west of Zachary Lane in the northeast one quarter
of Section 23.
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Site Plan approval:
4. Area assessments estimated - None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
LEGAL/EASEMENTS/PERMITS:
6. _ X _ Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval.
N/A Yes No
7. _ - X
8. _ X _
9. _ X
10. X _
11. _. - 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.) The six foot drainage and utility easement will
be required along the west proRerty line and a ten foot drainage and
utility easement will be required adjacent to 36th Avenue
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.
All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities.
All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
12. _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
13. _ X _ Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Other
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:
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. Post indicator valve and Fire Department connection are
existing.
3-
N/A Yes No
17. X
18. X
19. X _
20. _ X
21. _ 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.
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.
Acceleration/deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration/deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
All existing street right-of-ways are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on
Complies with site drainage requirements -
The City will not permit drainage onto a City street from a private
parking lot; therefore, the site plan shall be revised accordingly.
4-
N/A Yes No
22. X Curb and gutter provided -
The City requires B-612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances
and where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where
it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either
B-612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced
parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance
with this requirement.
23. _ X _ Complies with parking lot standards -
The City will require that all traveled areas within the parking
lot, as well as the proposed entrances, shall be constructed to a
7 -ton standard City design with six inches of Class 5 100% crushed
limestone and three inches of 2341 wear or five and one-half inches
of 2331 base and two inches of 2341 wear. All parking areas may be
constructed to a standard 5 -ton design consisting of four inches of
Class 5 100% crushed base and two inch bituminous mat. The site
plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with these
requirements.
STANDARDS:
N/A Yes No
24. X It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility
foreman,
24 hours in advance of making any proposed utility connections to
the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The developer shall
also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the Public Works
Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging within the
City's right-of-way. All connections to the water system shall be
via wet tap.
25. _ X The City will require reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer,
water service and storm sewer As-Builts for the site prior to
occupancy permits being granted.
26. X The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual. See Items 7 11 and Special
Conditions.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
27. A. The proposed addition on the south side of existing building is proposed to be
constructed over the existing sanitary sewer service. A detailed plan shall
be provided with the building construction plans showing how this sewer is to
be protected.
B. A minimum of six inches of class five 100% crushed quarry rock shall be used
as base under the fire lane.
C. The following conditions must be met to meet Bassett Creek Conditions:
1. The storm sewer located on the east side of the site shown on sheet A-1
must be extended to be pond and must discharge at the normal water
elevation of the pond.
2. Silt fence or property installed hay bales must be installed around all
catch basin inlets on site.
4-
Submitted by: zLCE'/d1
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
1
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS
FROM SECTION 9, SUBDIVISION A
OF THE PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
2. Procedure. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the application
therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Commission for purposes of evalua-
tion against the standards of this Section, Public Hearing, and development of a
recommendation to the City Council, which shall make the final determination as
to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Commission shall review the application and consider its con-
formance with the following standards:
1) Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will
promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimen-
tal to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and 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.
5) The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the appli-
cable regulations of the district in which it is located.
Pursuant to An call and notice thereof, a 2pecial meeting of the City Council of
the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the ZZIM day of February . 1%3.
The following members were present: Mayor Daven20r ouncilmembe—r o nn, Neils_
SShngidg and Threinen
The foLLowina members were absents one
ata •a• - .
Councilmember Neils introduced the following Resolution and moved its
on:
RESOLUTION NO. 83-93
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR BRAD CHAZIN FOR HAIFLDON PIONEER NOIISE
A-643)
WHEREAS, the City Council approved a Conditional Ilse Permit and Site Plan through
Resolution No. 75-678; arid,
WHEREAS, Brad Chazin has requested approval of a Conditional Ilse Permit Amendment to
construct a double garage at the Hazeldon Pioneer House located dt 11505 36th Avenue
North; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called Public
Hearing and has recommended approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED PY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOIITH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the reouest of Arad Chazin for a
Conditional Use Permit Amendment for Hazeldon Pioneer Nouse to construct a douhle
garage at 11505 36th Avenue North subject to the followino canditions:
1. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, regulations and Ordinances.
2. The site shall be maintained in a sanitary manner..
3. Compliance with original Conditional Ilse Permit and Site Plan approved as
stated In Resolution No. 75-678.
The'ootion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Councilmember Moen , and upon vote beinq taken t err;on , the-
following he0owngvotednfavorthereof: a_yor avenport, Councilmembers Moen, Neils,
Schneider and Threinen
The following voted against or abstained: None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passe an a pte
dsk2B
CITY OF 'PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Plymouth. Minnesota, was hod iFe 1st day of
December , 19 75 . The following members were present:
ng mewers were aosent:
Councilman Neils introduced the following Resolution and moved
is adoption: - _
RESOLUTION 115-678
APPROVING CONDITIOWki. USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN FOR PIONEER HOUSE CHEMICAL
DEPENDENCY TREATMENT FACILITY FOR UNION CITY MISSION (A-643)
WHEREAS, Union City Mission has requested a conditional use permit and
site p';an approval for "Pioneer House" a chemical dependency treatment
face 1 i ty; and.
WHEREAS. the City Planning Commission has reviewed said requests and
recommends their approval;
NOW, THEREFORE. BE iT HERESY RESOLVED BY THE CITY LOUNCIL OF THE CITY OF0PLYNAUTH, MiNnES01A that it should and hereby does approve the requests
of Union City Mission for a conditimal use permit and site plan for
Pioneer House", a chemical dependency treatment facility, subject to the
following conditions:
1) Fire lanes and firt hydrants as per Fire Chief recoor!endations,
i.e. a fire land around the building's perimeter and hydrants
every 300 feet along a looped line as per the Fire Chief's
recommendations.
2) Additional road ROW along 36th Avenue North and Zachary Lane.
This would arount to 7 feet of additional ROW along 36th Avenue
North to provide a total roadway ROW width of 80 feet for this
street. Additional ROW along Zachary lane would amount to 17
feet for the first 500 feet south of 36th Avenue North and 7 feet
of ROW for the remainder.
3i One identification (or na.-* plate) sign to comply with City
Ordinance as per setbacks (20 feet from property line) and not
to exceed 32 square feet in area.
4) A 30 foot wide trail easenent along the west side of Zachary
Lane to extend from Kedicine lake to 36th Avenue Korth. This
trail easement would link up with the Mission Trails plat to
the north.
5) Funding and drainagt easements as per the City Engineer,
ice. a.• ' t_ Rs:otutio, 1W. 7S-678
Pap t
bYThegotiohfortheadoptionofthefo•egoing Resolution was duly seconded
ncile n Spaeth. and upon vote being taken thereon. the
Cou
o
nc lr
vot n favorthereof.-' Mayor Hilde CounCilwen Hunt Me"s
and S etfi
o ng vo a aga Cor abstained: one
TheWhereupon the Resolution was declared duly passa and a Opted.
t
1
a
N
N.
0
ARMSTRONG
SENIOR
N H I G H SCHOOL
1
HAZELDEN PIONEER HOUSE - SUMMARY OF SERVICES
Physical Characteristics
Hazelden Pioneer House (HPH) is located on 14 acres near the north
shore of Medicine Lake. It is nestled between French Park (western
boundary) and the Union City Mission property (eastern & southern
boundaries). Due to the wooded nature of its northern boundary, the HPH
building is totally screened from the adjacent residential area.
The building itself was built in 1977 with a natural cedar exterior.
Modern, attractive architecture and well maintained grounds blend in with
the scenic community. This is in accordance with the Hazelden philosophy
that providing quality rehabilitation services begins with the environment.
Currently HPH accommodates 64 residents in its two separate units.
Licensing
HPH is licensed as a Rule 35/Category 2 program by the Minnesota
Department of Human Services. It is also licensed by the Minnesota Health
Department as a Supervised Living Facility - B.
Annual inspections by the State Fire Marshal and the Plymouth Fire
Inspector verify HPH meets or surpasses all fire and safety requirements.
The building itself is fully sprinkled with an automatic fire alarm system
that ties in directly to the f ire department.
Besides the state and community mandated inspections, HPH
initiates and submits to survey by both the Joint Commission of
Accreditation of Health Organizations and the Commission on
Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities. Both are nationally recognized
accreditation groups for health care agencies such as ours. Both have
rigorous standards for physical plant and environment, as well as clinical
policy and procedure.
Target Population
HPH is nationally and increasingly internationally known for
helping young people with alcohol and drug abuse problems. The program is
geared specifically to youth. The vast majority of young people are
private referrals from parents or professionals. HPH provides a secure
environment in which young people can change. Indeed, many parents have
expressed that they referred their child to HPH because of its successful
reputation for providing quality rehab services within a safe, respectful
environment. Under 79 are referred by a county or court.
Page 2
Part of the criteria for admission into HPH is consent to
participate in the program. If an individual chooses to leave, they are
transported by either their parents or HPH staff. (Clients who have left
our program without our knowledge [AWOL] have averaged less than IX
over a 4 -year period.)
A carefully planned rehabilitation program with an intensive
schedule has been designed to foster a cooperative spirit at HPH. We are
not a correction or "correction type" facility. Our expectations are that a
young person who comes to HPH learns to conduct themself in a
responsible fashion. It is our experience that HPH youth are basically good
people who have been tangled up and confused by alcohol and drugs.
Description of Treatment Program
The Hazelden Foundation was established in 1949 to help people
with alcohol and drug problems. Hazelden is stable both as an organization
and in its mission - changes are carefully planned and evaluated.
Our treatment approach has been developed and ref ined over a
number of years. Each component in the rehabilitation process is
measured for its effectiveness through a sophisticated quality assurance
system.
The average length of stay for a client at HPH is 38 days. During
this time each HPH client is individually assessed for his/her specific
issues. They are provided basic information about changing their lifestyle
and begin practicing these changes. They are introduced or reintroduced to
day-to-day living without the use of alcohol and drugs. An action plan is
developed for each individual before their departure from HPH. Clients are
scheduled from 6:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. It includes lectures, groups,
counseling sessions, supervised recreation, reading times, school work,
etc. Approximately 80% "graduate" from the program. The others are
most often referred and transported to other programs or home.
HPH is staffed around the clock by well trained and dedicated
personnel from various disciplines including: consulting physicians,
chemical dependency counselors, nurses, family counselors, consulting
psychologists, recreational specialists, chaplains, etc. We employ over 70
staff. Patients are well supervised at all times.
Page 3
Community Interaction
We have appreciated the support of the Plymouth community.
Community support has perhaps best been demonstrated by extensive local
participation in our annual "Easy Does It" 8K race. This race draws over
600 runners annually from the local area, as well as other parts of the
state, and has become an annual community celebration. We greatly
appreciate this community involvement and look forward to a deepening
positive relationship with the Plymouth community.
We have sought to share with the community some of our
experience related to alcohol and drug use. An example of this is our
project with Armstrong High School. For the last six years, more than 550
students each year have spent a morning at Hazelden Pioneer House.
Hazelden Pioneer House clients volunteer, under supervision, to tell
Armstrong students about their personal alcohol and drug problems. We
believe this experience helps the youth of this community make
responsible choices about alcohol and drug use. The Armstrong teachers
involved with this project have told us that their students identify this
experience as one of the highlights of the class.
To my knowledge there has never been an incident or problem
between an HPH client and a neighbor. We are committed to continuing to
work cooperatively to contribute, not detract, from the community.
Proposed Building Project
The proposed building project is designed to meet the needs and
improve the care of our current population. The nature of the program or
types of clientele served will remain unchanged.
Medical Service Unit
An 1 1 -bed medical service unit is planned. This will be a
multipurpose unit designed to meet the needs of HPH clients. Four beds in
the plan will be classified through licensure as detoxification beds. This
does not mean we will be creating additional community
detoxificationservices These beds will be utilized by Hazelden Pioneer
House only for the medical needs of our clients. Currently our procedure is
to transfer clients who come to us in need of medical services such as
detoxification to our Center City location (60 miles away). Here they are
assessed and returned to Hazelden Pioneer House the next day. Since we
Page 4
work with youth, not that many of our clients have these types of medical
needs, but for those who do, we wish to spare the anxiety and discomfort
of the car ride to Center City.
While Union City Mission (Hazelden Pioneer House is not affiliated
with the Union City Mission) also provides detoxification services in the
immediate vicinity, it serves an older age group, many of whom are
brought by the police. This differs significantly from our clients who are
younger and who have agreed to enter a rehabilitation program.
Evaluation Services
As mentioned previously, HPH continues to grow in its reputation
for providing effective and affordable treatment for chemically dependent
youth. Professionals from around the world including the Soviet Union,
Japan and many European countries have travelled here to discuss our
rehabilitation program. At times we have a rather long waiting list,
particularly for our evaluation services. The addition of seven more beds
will help us shorten that list. Staffing will be increased to ensure proper
supervision.
I ncrease i n Of f i ce and Meet i ng Space
The remainder of the proposed building project is designed to
upgrade our current meeting rooms for families, provide additional office
space for our current staff and add a large meeting room which will hold
full group meetings for either clients or staff. It is envisioned that the
large room could also be used for community meetings upon request.
Since Hazelden acquired Pioneer House in 1981, we have nearly
doubled the size of our staff (without increasing the number of beds).
Many staff are sharing small offices. Currently the dining room doubles
for large staff meetings, client lectures and meals. In short, we need
additional space to accommodate the staff.
In Summary
Hazelden takes great care to ensure that its services and clients
are well supervised and cared for. The HPH building project will not have
any undesireable impact on the community. The project is designed to help
us better meet the needs of our current clientele. We appreciate the past
support we have received from the community, and it is our intent to
continue to build on this already strong relationship.
F t res
pioneer
by Dave Dahimeier
Although only a block west of
Robbinsdale-Armstrong, most
students don't know what
Hazelden Pioneer House is.
Hazelden Pioneer House is an
alcohol and chemical dependen-
cy treatment center for young
adults.
Hazelden Pioneer House has
been in operation since 1981, but
the Hazelden Foundation was
started in 1949 as a small alcohol
treatment center in Center City.
The Center City unit, the first
and oldest alcohol treatment
center in the country, is now an
adult facility treating all
chemical dependencies.
Mike Schiks
photo by John Dahimeier
A common misconception
among students and area
residents is that Mission Farms
is associated with the Pioneer
House. Originally, the Pioneer
House building was owned by
Mission Farms, but Hazelden
Foundation bought the building
in 1981 and now the businesses
are completely separate.
Another misconception is that
ny people think Hazelden is
the wealthy. In fact,
t szelden is a non-profit
organization. Mike Schiks, direc-
tor of the Pioneer House, said,
We take that very seriously."
Schiks also explained that
Hazelden "costs less than most
H o use Low-key policy makes
for a quiet neighbor
if not all other programs in Min-
nesota." Hazelden also offers
free care for those unable to
provide.
Hazelden uses the Alcoholics
Anonymous 12 -step recovery
program. Although used in
many other treatment pro-
grams, Schiks feels this
philosophy "can vary widely in
how it is interpreted."
Schiks feels the key part to
Hazelden's philosophy is there is
no concrete way of chemical
treatment. A facility must have
a "dynamic program" that can
change when new ideas are
learned.
Schiks explains, "Young peo-
ple in trouble with drugs are
capable human beings. They
deserve to be respected as such
and not treated as children."
Hazelden Pioneer House main-
tains an open-door policy, mean-
ing patients may stop treatment
and leave at any time. After be-
ing introduced to the program,
Schiks said about 80% will stay.
Another part of Hazelden's
philosophy is the peer groups. In
these groups, patients can talk
openly about their experiences,
which helps them feel the same
as the other people. Many pa-
tients feel this way, and this
aspect of the program helps
them feel good about
themselves.
ment. This referring is done by
patients themselves, parents,
counselors, and law enforcement
officials. The patient is then
usually contacted by phone, but
Kirchoff said, "We will never
determine if a patient is ap-
propriate for treatment over the
phone."
Next there is a 7-10 day
assessment as to whether the pa-
tient is to be taken in. If so, Kir-
choff recommends this to the
gatekeeper." The gatekeeper
reviews the case, and if he ap-
proves, the patient is ready for
treatment.
The patient's family can visit
Young people in trouble with drugs
are capable human beings."'
Schiks, a former counselor,
has great faith in the patients
and noted, "I have never met a
young person who wanted to
become alcoholic or chemically
dependent."
Pioneer House has a thorough
process of receiving their poten-
tial patients. Darlene Kirchoff, a
former nurse and now an admis-
sions specialist, was helpful in
explaining what is called "intake
screening."
First, the potential patient is
referred to Hazelden's treat -
with the counselor at the pa-
tient's arrival and once a week
during the treatment period.
The patients at Pioneer House
come from very different back-
grounds. They age from 14 to 25,
and the average age is about 18.
According to Schiks, over half
are 14 to 18, and one third are 18
to 22, while 10% age from 22 to
25.
In some rare cases Schiks
says, "Hard, hard, hard core
users under 18 go to Center
City."
photo by John Dahlmeier
Patients also come from all
over the world. Schiks estimated
that 75% of all patients are refer-
red from out of state. But
overall, half are from Minnesota
and half aren't. Right now,
Pioneer House has patients from
England, Austria and the
Bahamas.
One thing the patients do have
in common is the chemicals
they've used. Almost all have us-
ed alcohol, marijuana, and co-
caine. Schiks estimated that,
most used all three or at least
two."
Schiks figured a patient's
average stay is 38 days at a cost
of $5100.
One thing Schiks wanted peo-
ple to keep in mind about
chemical dependency is, "It can
happen to anybody."
He also noted his appreciation
for the community around
Hazelden. He said he is open to
questions from students and
residents about Hazelden.
Schiks summed up his feelings
about the community by
expressing, "In terms of the
community we try to be real low-
key. Our patients do not leave
our grounds without a staff
member. We're really grateful to
the community."
Page 10 The Odyssey November 6, 1987
Recovering author
rates treatment sites
Bob LwxwWmv !/Staff writer
Stan Hart hit rock -bottom In 1985 in Australia. A recovering alcohol-
i%he gone there to interview oW-time tennls players from Down
Under for a book hs was wridng.
1 knew I was going to drink when I went down there," he said. "I
convinced myself that I could pull it off because I was so excited
about the project. l mean, I'd be having a beer with tennis legends
MAAdrian Guist and Frank Sedgman ...
6.W the booze ran away from me and I went on a six-day bktge. I
scrapped the writing project because, In a moment of c ", I
realized that "life was at stake, and that If I was ever going to wrta
againj it would. "to be in a safe environment. Something
Involving rehabilitatlon."
That explains why the 59 -year-old
Hart, a former editor at Little,
Brown and onetime owner of a
bookstore on Martha's Vineyard,
was -In Minneapolis three years lat-
er, fortified by nothing stronger
than a morning cup of coffee. He
didn't scrap this project: he was M
town to promote it His book, "Re-
hab;A Comprehensive Guide to
Recommended Drug-Alcohoi Treat-
ment Centers in the United States"
422.95 hardcover, $10.95 paper-
back) has*atbeen published by
Harper 5 ow.
The 500 -page book is a firsthand
look at 150 such facilities in 40
states, believed to be the first of its
kind. Hart spent more than two
years traveling around the country,
visiting more than 300 centers and.
talking to counselors and patients.
He rates them on such standard
criteria as cost, length of stay and
type of treatment, as well as some
admittedly personal ones such as
whether boom boxes are permitted
on the premises (he thinks they
shouldn't be). .
What makes them so good? "Both
places have top staffs. It's very
hard to get wonderful people for
low salaries. You can do it hero, I
suppose, because it's so pleasant
to live here.
Hazelden is also good because It
has v r m ou got
out there by that lake, with deer
running around and the sky dear
and the people pleasant, and you
get a sense of a therapeutic com-
munity.'
Another w8Y that Hart measunss
the efficacy of a treatment center Is -
the percentage of recover n alco-
holics on the staff or HazelCen s
NJ "It should be at least wi per-
cent, but I'd rather have 75 percent.
A couple of places mentioned in my
book have 100 percent. but then it .
becomes like an AA clubhouse."
Why is it important to have recover-
ing alcoholics treating alcoholics?
When your whole life has revolved
around -drinking, you hang onto that
fantasy that you can stili drink in
moderation. And it takes someone
who's gone through it to break
through that denial and make you
see the truth of your condition."
That's why Hart knew he wouldn't
be abie to get away wiz,' an oi=a-
sionai drink during this projecL .'It
wasn't easy to fly in to Omaha.
spend the night at a Holidav Inn
and go by the bar, alms and tired.
But I knew that the next day I'd be
in a treatment center interviewing
somebody and I couldn't show up
shaky. They'd know in a second."
Hart said the "overwhelming cxiterl-
on" for whether a center would be
included in his book was "a general
felling of wellness. If 1 interviewed
the director and he seemed arro-
gant, I'd say, 'The hell with this
place.'
STAR TRIBUNE
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
DECEMBER 21, 19ee
J.y
SM Hart
The whole purpose of a place like
this is to give the patient the idea
that there's life after drinking, and
that idea from seeing a
staff, because they're all
rob models. Hell, the housekeep-
ers are rob models. When you're
an alcoholic, everyone's better than
YOU -
Hart remembers taking his first
drink when he was 5, swigging a
half-filled glass at one of his par-
ents' cocktail parties. ,I just loved
alcohol. I loved what it did to me.
But I didn't become a chronic drink-
er until I was about 38. By that time,
my central nervous system was
really affected."
One of his drinking jags cost him a
pert in "Jaws," which was shot off
Martha's Vinayard in the early '70s.
Director Stever, Spielberg had cast
him as the mayor, but Hart took a
camera crew around in his boat
while under the influence, *par-
dizing both lives and equipment,
and the next thing he knew he was
barred from the set
Hart has written two other books: a
mystery set on Martha's Vineyard,
where he still lives with his three
young children by his second mar -
nage, and a series of interviews
with American tennis stars of the
past.
I sold the bookstore when I start-
ed writing. I found it very hard to
write during the day with people
interrupting me all the time. I'd be
sitting there typing, surrounded by
other people's books, and some-
one would have the guts to come in
and try to buy a book while I was
working.,.
Hazelden Pioneer House Application for Amended AUG
Conditional Use Permit
C !I-
Ls:;f
Section 9: Conditional Use Permit Criteria COMA, h;J1!TY DEVTrR ;° H
i0P,.f T GCPT.
a. The Planning Commission shall review the application and consider
its conformance with the following standards:
1. Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
It is Hazelden Pioneer House's (HPH) intention to work in compliance
with the City of Plymouth towards full compliance with and effect
upon the comprehensive plan. To our knowledge based on informal
and formal review by City Planning and Development officials is in
compliance.
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.
We have felt great support from the people of Plymouth in the past.
It is our wish and commitment that our plans will enhance the
general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger
the public health, safety, morals or comfort. As outlined in our
narrative description Hazelden Pioneer House truly has both a
national and international reputation for providing quality
rehabilitation services for youth. We feel we have earned this
reputation. Our services are professional and well designed. This
includes a rigorous schedule and ample staff coverage. We do not
take our responsibilities lightly to either the community or to the
parents and youth that reach out to us for help.
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
or impair property values within the neighborhood.
The changed conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already submitted nor substantially diminish or impair
property values within the neighborhood. Hazelden Pioneer House
is screened naturally out of view of most area residents. Since
Page 2
the new building project will be attached to the current structure
this will not change. Part of Hazelden's philosophy is to provide
an attractive, well maintained environment. We take pride in this
and will continue to do so int he future. We feel this is further
supported by the site plans, which reflect that great care has been
taken to match the surroundings and current structure of HPH.
4. The establishment of the conditional permit will not impede
the normal and orderly development and improvements
surrounding property for uses permitted in the District.
Hazelden Pioneer House is located on 14 acres, surrounded on three
sides by the Hennepin County Park Reserve and the Union City
Mission. This project will not ii,ipeede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding property for use
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.
Careful consideration has gone into this project. Our residents most
often do not bring their automobiles, but rather they are transported
by Pioneer House personnel. Currently we have no problem
whatsoever with traffic congestion. We do not project this modest
increase in services will cause us any ingress and egress problems
in the future. Even so, we have expanded our parking areas at HPH to
ensure accommodations for the additional staff and visitors needed
to cover the expansion project.
6. The conditional use shall, in all other aspects, conform to
the applicable regulations of the district in which it is
located.
To the best of our knowledge, HPH shall in all other respects
conform to the applicable rules and regulations within
the district. Once again we reaffirm our commitment to work
cooperatively with the City of Plymouth in all applicable
regulations of the District.
Michael A. Schiks, Program Director August 14, 1989
t
G
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE August 21, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 13, 1989
FILE NO.: 89074
PETITIONER: Hennepin County
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 2455 Fernbrook Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: IP (Planned Industrial)
ZONING: I-1 (Planned Industrial)
BACKGROUND:
A property was purchased by the State in the late 1960s. The property was
rezoned to the Industrial District in 1970, and the maintenance building was
constructed the same year. In 1972, the Driver's Examination Station was
constructed. In 1985 the State received administrative approval for the
construction of an accessory structure for the storage of sand and salt
materials.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the official city
newspaper, and notices have been mailed to adjoining property owners within
500 feet.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The proposal calls for a temporary trailer to be located on the property
in order to route garbage trucks to an appropriate location to dispose of
their materials, whether it be a burn plant or a landfill. The petitioner
has submitted a detailed description of the proposed use. Generally the
temporary trailer will be used by a single person to record and dispatch
up to twenty trucks per day.
2. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the Planning Commission
shall review the requested proposal for purposes of evaluation against
these standards set forth in Section 9, Subdivision A, Number 2a and
develop a recommendation to the City Council which shall make a final
determination as to approval or denial. Attached is a copy of the
Conditional Use Permit criteria from Section 9, Subdivision A, Number 2a
of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. A physical constraints analysis identifies this property to be located
within the Basset Creek Drainage District. The site is not located within
y
Page Two
File 89074
a Shoreland Management District nor does it contain any wetlands. There
are no major woodlands or severe slopes on the property.
The soils appear suitable for urban capability with public sewers.
4. The site plan submitted along with the Conditional Use Permit narrative
identifies that the on-site circulation will not be effected due to the
placement of this trailer.
5. We note that the petitioner in his narrative submitted in support of this
Conditional Use Permit makes reference to the Waste Transfer Station
proposal for the City of Plymouth to be a "given". It should be noted
that this is definitely not the case. Hennepin County has filed an
application for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a Waste Transfer
Station at the northeast corner of County Road 6 and I-494 which is being
separately processed under the Waste Facility Section of the Zoning
Ordinance. The staff review process for an application responsive to the
Waste Facility Section of Plymouth's Zoning Ordinance is necessarily
complex and time consuming, involving outside consultants as well as City
Staff. At this time that review process has not been completed and no
estimate is available as to when a public hearing will be scheduled for
the Waste Transfer Station application.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed use will not have an impact on elements of the Comprehensive
Plan nor should it have direct impact on adjoining properties. It should
not diminish or impair property values in the immediate vicinity.
2. Based on the projected level of activity it appears that adequate measures
have been taken to provide ingress, egress, and parking so designed as to
minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. The only circumstance
upon which this may not prove true would be if all twenty trucks arrived
at the same time. We do not foresee this as a likely occurrence.
3. If adequate and reasonable safety and sanitation is observed the
maintenance and operation of this Conditional Use should not be
detrimental to or endanger the public health safety morals or comfort.
If, on the other hand, the garbage compactors that will daily visit the
site are operated unsafely or in an unsanitary manner the public health
and safety may impacted.
4. The proposed use does not involve permanent structures, and as such, can
be both established and eliminated "overnight". This feature of the
proposed use when coupled with the Zoning Ordinance provisions for the
revocation of Conditional Use Permits works to provide a level of comfort
in the issuance of this permit in the face of potential questions
regarding the impact of the operations.
5. The applicant has indicated that the proposed use is "temporary" in
nature. The implication would appear to be that this truck routing
station would remain until such time as a Plymouth Waste Transfer Station
would be in operation. This logic presumes a Conditional Use Permit for a
Waste Transfer Station will be approved. We find that logic to be
Page Three
File 89074
incorrect and we recommend that any approval of this Conditional Use
Permit be on a six month renewal basis, to both monitor the impacts that
the use may present, and to disassociate this use from any proposals for a
Waste Transfer Station in Plymouth.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the application for a Conditional Use Permit to
locate an interim truck routing station at the Minnesota Department of
Transportation Truck Station at 2455 Fernbrook Lane North. I recommend that
the Conditional Use Permit be renewable at 6 month intervals to monitor the
impact of the use Md the compliancewith the cpR4itions.
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud,—Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Conditional Use Permit approval.
2. Engineer's Memo
3. Petitioner's Submissions
4. Sketch Plan
pc/cd/89074:dl)
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HENNEPIN COUNTY (89074)
1. Use of the site for truck routing purposes shall be limited to no more
than 20 trucks per day.
2. The site shall be open for garbage trucks from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday only.
3. All trucks using the site shall be single or double axle waste collection
trucks. No tractor/trailer rigs shall use the site.
4. There shall be no dumping or transferring of waste from one truck to
another at this site.
5. No truck shall be stored at this site or allowed to stop for repairs,
phone calls, or for any other reason other than routing.
6. Trucks visiting the site shall have normal mixed municipal solid waste.
There shall be no trucks with hazardous waste loads of any type.
7. The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed six months from the date of
issuance for compliance with the Conditional Use Permit standards of the
Zoning Ordinance, and the conditions of approval.
8. The Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to compliance with all
applicable rules and regulations governing this activity administered by
other governmental agencies.
9. No permanent signage of any type is approved related to this Conditional
Use Permit.
t i
j3
MEMO SFP S 1989
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: September 7, 1989
TO: _ Cuck Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
FROM: V,"/Daniel L. Faulkner, City Engineer
SUBJECT: INTERIM TRUCK ROUTING STATION
At the MnDot Truck Station located at 2455 Fernbrook Lane, Hennepin County's
estimate of approximately 20 garbage trucks per day will not adversely affect
the traffic patterns along Fernbrook Lane as the street was designed as a nine
ton street and for the surrounding commercial area.
DLF:sm
cc: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
07
Description of Interim Truck Routing Stations
Hennepin County proposes to establish an interim truck routing station at the
MNDot truck station located at 2455 Fernbrook Lane North in the city of Plymouth.
Hennepin County is establishing a network of interim truck routing stations as
part of its system of waste burning plants. There will be about 10 truck routing
stations including the routing station proposed for the MNDoT truck station in
Plymouth. They will be located around the County in order to be convenient to
all waste haulers in the County.
At these interim truck routing stations garbage trucks in the County will check
in with their loads. There they will be quickly recorded and dispatched to where
the waste can best be disposed of on that particular day - most likely to a waste
burning plant. If the burn plants have received all the waste they can handle
for a particular day, the garbage trucks will be routed to a remote landfill.
without these interim truck routing stations, too many garbage collection trucks
will show up at the burn plants and will then have to be turned away. This will
cause unacceptable additional driving time by waste collection trucks and
unacceptable traffic problems, particularly at the burn plant in downtown
Minneapolis.
Eight of the interim truck routing stations started operating in mid -1989, the
time one of the waste burning plants started operating. Hennepin County's solid
waste designation ordinance went into effect at that time and requires that all
solid waste generated in the County be delivered by garbage collectors to
locations specified by the County so it can be routed to the waste burning plants
built for that purpose. Since then, two additional routing stations are being
sited to serve haulers in the western suburbs. one site is in Plymouth and one
site is in Mound.
When the County's four permanent transfer stations are built in the next two
years, the interim truck routing stations will be phased out. At the permanent
transfer stations the garbage collection trucks will be able to tip their loads
rather than be rerouted to another location. At these transfer stations the
waste will then be transferred to semi trucks for hauling to one of the burn
plants or possibly to a landfill. (By the time the permanent transfer stations
are operating the burn plants should be operating at full capacity. Solid waste
will then be landfilled only during periods of high waste generation - spring and
fall, and during times when the burn plants are down for plant maintenance and
repair.)
Most of the interim truck routing stations in Hennepin could be phased out in
mid-1990 when the Bloomington and Brooklyn Park transfer stations are completed
and operating. The remaining interim truck routing stations should be phased out
when the Plymouth and the South Minneapolis permanent transfer stations are
built.
It should be emphasized that at the interim truck routing stations waste
collection trucks will not dump their loads of waste. They will only report to
these stations where their loads will be recorded and then dispatched to a
disposal site.
Because of certain legal and other requirements a network of truck routing
stations is a necessary short term need. The main purpose of the truck routing
stations is to have places where waste collection trucks can enter the County
system; where the County can take possession of the waste; and then route it to
the final disposal point - burn plant or landfill - best able to handle the load
of waste on any particular day.
The Key elements of an interim truck routing station at the MNDoT Truck Station
in the City of Plymouth are as follows:
A County employee will be located in a small portable trailer on the site
see site plan). When a garbage collection truck enters the site the
employee will issue the truck driver a routing slip directing the garbage
truck to specific destination.
The site will be open for garbage trucks from approximately 7:30 AM to
3:30 PM, Monday through Friday.
Ongoing operations of the MNDoT truck station would continue as normal.
Hennepin estimates approximately twenty garbage trucks per day will visit
the site and will probably be well spaced throughout the eight hour period.
With this low traffic volume and the fact that each truck routing
transaction only takes one minute, there will seldom, if ever, be more than
one truck at the site at any time. Most of the trucks visiting the site
will come from T.H 55 and proceed south on Fernbrook Lane to the site.
After receiving a routing slip, trucks will go north on Fernbrook Lane to
T.H. 55.
All trucks will be single or double -axle waste collection trucks. No
tractor/trailer rigs will visit the site.
There will not be any dumping or transferring of waste from one truck to
another at this site, only truck recording and routing.
Trucks visiting the site will have normal mixed municipal solid waste.
There will be no trucks with hazardous waste loads of any type.
No trucks will be stored at the site or allowed to stop for minor repairs,
phone calls, or for any reason.
Conformance with Standards
Set Forth in Section 9 of the Plymouth zoning Ordinance
Conditional Use Permit
1. Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed site is zoned industrial and the routing of approximately 20
garbage trucks per day would not be incompatible with existing truck
operations at the MNDoT truck station.
2. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will
promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental
to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort.
The routing station is temporary, and will facilitate disposal of solid
waste in the area and will involve only approximately 20 trucks per day.
Operations will occur during normal working hours - Approximately 7:30 AM to
3:30 PM. Other routing stations in operation in the County caused no
concerns whatsoever with noise, odor or spillage.
3. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
The truck routing will take place in a well screened area. The City Public
Works area is to the west, the drivers examination station is north, 23rd
Avenue is south and the property to the east is on the east side of
Fernbrook Lane.
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.
The truck routing will take place in a well screened area. The City Public
Works area is to the west, the drivers examination station is north, 23rd
Avenue is south and the property to the east is on the east side of
Fernbrook Lane.
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.
The use is temporary and the estimated waste collection trucks per day
entering and leaving the site will not cause traffic congestion in the
surrounding public streets.
6. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable
cable regulations of the district in which it is located.
The temporary use should be able to conform to the applicable regulations of
the district in which it is located.
3N01 XOOd6NM3A
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
REPORT DATE
FILE NO.:
PETITIONER:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
GUIDE PLAN CLASS:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
August 14, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 23, 1989
89054
Susan Tippets
Lot Division and Variance From the Zoning Ordinance
Pertaining to the Lot Width of the Northerly Parcel, 85
Feet Versus the Ordinance Minimum 110 Feet.
2320 Larch Lane
LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
The City Council under Resolution 80-596 approved the Lot Consolidation of
this property for the mother of this petitioner. The consolidation was to
combine three separate parcels into a single new parcel.
Property owners within 100 feet have been notified of this public meeting.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance as to specific properties when, in its judgment, an
unusual hardship on the land exists. We have attached a letter dated
August 11, 1989, from the petitioner which addresses the six Zoning
Ordinance standards that must be met for the Planning Commission to
recommend approval of a variance. We have also attached a copy of those
Zoning Ordinance standards.
2. The Lot Division complies with the minimum lot size requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance with 25,000 square feet in one parcel and 18,700 square
feet in the other parcel. The R -1A Zoning Ordinance standard for minimum
lot size is 18,500 squre feet.
3. The property is located with the Basset Creek Drainage District. The site
is not located within a Shoreland Management Area nor does it contain any
wetlands. The site contains some major woodlands and slopes in excess of
12 percent. The soils appear suitable for urban capability with public
sewers.
see next page)
Page Two
File 89054
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The division of platted property responsive to Section 500.37 of the City
Code meets all submission requirements and, standing alone, the division
would appear to be responsive to the City Code.
2. Based on the level of development found in this and most other areas of
the developed portion of Plymouth, it could be considered a hardship for a
property owner to be denied the right to divide property into parcels of
less than the 43,700 square feet this overall parcel contains. It could
be held that this is an economic issue, but it also can be held that there
will be economic benefit that will accrue to the City as a result of
division as well.
3. With respect to the impact on surrounding neighborhoods and the
Comprehensive Plan, the variance requested will not have a negative impact
as long as the recommendations of the City Engineer with respect to street
access to the southerly parcel complied with.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the application to divide platted property
together with the variance to the Zoning Ordinance or lot width that would be
required.
Submitted by:'
Charles E. Di erud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Conditions to the Approval of the Lot Division and Zoning
Variance.
2. Engineer's Memo
3. Location Map
4. Division Graphics
pc/cd/89054:jw)
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING AND REGARDING LOT DIVISION FOR
SUSAN TIPPETS (89054)
1. A variance is hereby approved to permit the creation of the northerly
parcel (Parcel A) with a lot width at the front setback line of 85 feet
instead of the R -1A Zoning Ordinance standard of 110 feet. The basis for
the variance is the unusual shape and prior platting activity involving
the lots in this vicinity resulting in a hardship to the property owner if
the variance were not granted.
2. No variances to the Zoning Ordinance or Subdivision Code are approved
except as noted.
3. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79-80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures on sites adjacent to or containing open water storm
drainage facilities.
4. Payment of Park Dedication Fees consistent with the Park Dedication Policy
prior to filing lot division/consolidation with Hennepin County.
5. No Building Permit shall be issued for the south parcel (Parcel B) until
such time as the resolutions approving this lot division are recorded with
Hennepin County.
6. All necessary drainage and utility easements shall be submitted prior to
recording of the resolution approving the division with Hennepin County.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 6, 1989
FILE NO.: 89054
PETITIONER: Ms. Susan Tippets, 2320 Larch Lane, Plymouth, Mn. 55441
LOT DIVISION/CONSOLIDATION: PART OF LOT 10, ALL OF LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 6, ELMHURST
PARCEL 26-118-22-21-0107
LOCATION: North of 23rd Avenue, west of Kirkwood Lane, in the northwest one
quarter of Section 26.
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (101) 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.)
7. _ _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan. The 100 Year Elevation for the Bassett Creek
Flood Plain south of this _prgperty is 894.0.
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division/Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: The
responsible for extending the watermain to serve this
owner will be
site.
LEGAL/EASEMENTS/PERMIT
6. X Complies with standard utility/drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (101) 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.)
7. _ _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan. The 100 Year Elevation for the Bassett Creek
Flood Plain south of this _prgperty is 894.0.
N/A Yes No
8. X Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots: The minimum basement elevation shall be 896.0.
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way to
facilitate the development. This vacation is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely
dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from
the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
12. X All existing street rights-of-way are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on Additional right-of-way
will be required to provide a cul-de-sac for public access to the
south parcel along 23rd Avenue,
13. A. The owner is responsible for the installation and cost of the watermain to the
east property line along 23rd Avenue or the developer may petition the City to
do the work.
B. Kirkwood Lane, ,from the end of the existing bituminous, shall be paved south to
23rd Avenue and west on 23rd Avenue with a cul-de-sac to the east property line
of the proposed division. The bituminous shall be constructed to the same
width and section of existing Kirkwood Lane, this shall be the responsibility
of the developer or the developer may petition the City to do the work.
C. The additional right-of-way will be required from the adjoining property owner,
which is park property.
D. A 100 Year Flood Plain Elevation of 894 shall be determined by the applicant,
if the 100 Year Elevation encroaches on their property, a drainage easement for
ponding purposes will be required.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
7 u
8 e c)
25
s' . • ,. (
ru' ,
S, .Qr " s%
le 1.(2s(,'
S)
8
20 a 165' Z
3
OOC.3210332
IN.
S•) e, (31) n (77) Cis) , - 1 o (lf -
1 :`52.72• '-• - X211.6 ,
W 112• (
74• O Q' ;.33.75' 11
soso, 160' Z (N)
N. R J o M / (y) 'Q'- 98) = 2 cls) ' a pa cio) (i )
oi-
3 Op
q, rn .._
19.x`' Y+ .o• : -_
8 7 s (
n) .
t Via)
R (u) 'ta) t«) Q ... "'
1'-
S 16-6 a( +P ' .. • ca.) ~ fi .: .c. ..
of <
4TI31
2e•.. %H '.,~' as)' e• 33 tis) i 7 _
e _
10
e, ..' («) ,µ.
es 8 j/
cis 26 17 Q • csi)1 — ° • }
zy ) ' lel .1 VE ', °e $ e•222.e7•
lA. • so'
7 q^P (4 1) 2 ems, z Y i=+
t .
A p.
oS
9
s . ; 0.".
N kt — N.•b lap ', ;1•• a3' rs.•' ,; •,
i..• , > . 230• .3' :1 . •
7 ' ( 210 199. a (. • 1i (•20> = g ' (•q • '' 2 - , . (
ss)
Ike
L 3 ' %
R c (tai) , .. tr {
J ,•.
Tj 139 J . 1•
j `
r (••M)
iU IM' ) -
13 (•q Z to , 3 •` ,
u 230' 137 C (•t) / (70) :. e S! (
65?
2) _—Nf *
Ai c•>
y
QQa:?jz.• s $, ex 3,
7 p`is':',- >
rs 4t ••• • . • • 1 1.110 g 75' : .0 '
00—
F 75)
i 1 (
2)
y
AAR^
ar.
J•
1
e 0
70sY
0 11 slo o
se 21) 0(
A)
0530, M) N) N) (
ail
ar.
J•
1
e 0
70sY
OP
N
J
Y
r
W
y
PZ
m .-J
bo'g51
rZl lc"1 c 15 nMW-13' 9
33 N7pi 157M M1nOS
N
cc
U U CL
W F- C U C
W W W '
SCO,' z - c
bo'g51
rZl lc"1 c 15 nMW-13' 9 33 N7pi 157M M1nOS
6 am
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE August 21, 1989 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 13, 1989
FILE NO.: 89073
PETITIONER: Trammell Crow Company
REQUEST: Lot Consolidation, Lot Division, and Site Plan
LOCATION: Northwest of Sycamore Lane and Sixth Avenue North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: IP (Planned Industrial)
ZONING: I-1 (Planned Industrial)
BACKGROUND:
The City Council on July 10, 1989, approved the Preliminary Plat and Final
Plat for Carlson Companies 4th Addition for Trammell Crow Company. This lot
is one of the lots involved in that platting action.
In October 1979 the City Council, under Resolution 79-636, approved the site
plan for American Hospital Supply located on Lot 4, Block 1, Carlson Companies
2nd Addition, which is the westerly lot involved in this consolidation
division.
Written notification of the consideration of this site plan and lot
division/consolidation action by the Planning Commission has been sent to five
property owners residing east of this site consistent with the direction of
the Planning Commission from June 14, 1989. At that time the Commission
stated their desire to have those residents who spoke at a meeting involving
an earlier lot consolidation/division action at this location be notified of
any future site plan for a structure on this parcel.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The lot consolidation and division is to relocate the existing property
line between this site and the existing site of Baxter Hospital Supply
immediately to the west. The site plan is for the construction of a
124,700 square foot office/warehouse facility (33 percent office/67
percent warehouse).
2. The 1977 platting action that included this site provided for a transition
area ranging in width (west to east) of 50 to 300 feet along the east
property line of the plat. The purpose of the transition area is to
buffer the Glenloch residential neighborhood to the east from the
see next page)
a
Page Two
File 89073
industrial development of this Carlson 2nd Addition industrial plat. The
design of the site plan conforms to the specifications of that covenant
precluding structures within the covenanted non -development area.
3. The physical constraints analysis identifies this property to be within
the Basset Creek Drainage District. The site is not located within a
Shoreland Management area, but does contain some wetlands. There are no
major woodlands or severe slopes on this property. The soils appear
suitable for urban capability with public sewers. The proposed site plan
responds to the on-site physical constraints appropriately.
4. The lot division/consolidation action proposed would move the property
line between the existing Baxter site to the west and this lot from 50 to
130 feet westerly, subtracting approximately two acres from the Baxter
site and adding approximately two acres to the site upon which this
structure is proposed. The Subdivision Code allows for consolidations and
divisions of platted property without replatting.
The specifications of the Baxter site have been reviewed within the
context of a reduction in site size of two acres and we have determined
that the site still meets Zoning Ordinance specifications with respect to
related site design features, after the two acre parcel is subtracted.
5. The site plan complies with the Ordinance minimum requirements for parking
241 versus 237); building and parking setbacks; trash enclosures (to be
located within a structure); and site lighting. The landscape plan is
consistent with the City policy setting the standards for the site design,
and rooftop equipment is proposed to be screened as required by the Zoning
Ordinance.
6. The architectural elevations of the structure reveal that exterior finish
will be generally poured concrete panels broken by a painted metal feature
strip and entrance structure detail. The service areas of the structure
are designed to be along the north elevation (facing a building of similar
appearance and design) and the entrances will concentrate on the south and
west elevations. The east elevation will be continuous concrete panel
with no breaks other than the accent strip noted above. The nearest point
at which the east elevation can be observed is in excess of 300 feet
distance with substantial intervening natural forestation. The structure
would appear to be architecturally consistent with other structures of a
similar type in this immediate vicinity, and therefore consistent with the
provisions of the Plymouth policy with respect to building architecture
and aesthetics.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The site plan as proposed meets all City codes and ordinances of a
planning and zoning nature. A fire lane variance on the east side of the
structure has been requested, and will be considered by the City Council
with the recommendation of the Fire Chief.
see next page)
Page Three
File 89073
2. The requested division and consolidation of platted property is consistent
with the terms and conditions of the Subdivision Ordinance with respect to
such actions. In addition, the division/consolidation will not result in
the inconsistency of either resulting site with provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance.
3. The proposed structure and site plan are consistent with the terms of the
covenant that is recorded against this site with respect to structures in
relationship to the east property line.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the site plan and lot division/consolidation
consistent with th a tached list of recommende nditions.
Submitted by: ,
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Conditions of Approval
2. Engineer's Memo
3. Location Map
4. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, 1989
5. Large Plans
pc/cd/89073:dl)
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING AND REGARDING LOT
DIVISION/CONSOLIDATION FOR TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY (89073)
1. Payment of Park Dedication Fees in lieu of dedication in accordance with
the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance.
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.
4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
6. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the structure, and
no outside storage is permitted.
7. An 8 1/2 x 11 inch "As -Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted
prior to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City
Policy.
8. No Building Permit to be issued until the lot division/consolidation is
filed and recorded with Hennepin County.
9. Prior to recording of the lot division/consolidation, the City Attorney
shall verify the applicable covenants as to development prohibitions are
carried forward not withstanding this action.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 7, 1989
FILE NO.: 89073
PETITIONER: Mr. John D. Griffith, Trammel Crow Company, 601 Lakeshore Parkway,
Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN. 55343
LOT DIVISION/ CONSOLIDATION: LOT 4, BLOCK 1, CARLSON COMPANY SECOND ADDITION AND LOT 2,
BLOCK 1, CARLSON COMPANY FOURTH ADDITION
LOCATION: North of Sixth Avenue, east of Xenium Lane, south of Tenth Avenue,
west of Sycamore Lane in the northeast one quarter of Section 34.
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. x Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division/Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: Non.
6. _ _ X Complies with standard utility/drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required,
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building
permits.)
N/A Yes No
7. XX Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan.
g, _ — X Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots: The minimum basement elevation shall be 943.0_
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities For the storm sewer from the pond adjacent to Sixth Avenue
north along the east side of the proposed building to the drainaee
ditch in the northeast corner of the site.
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way to
facilitate the development. This vacation is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely
dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from
the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated. The temporary surface drainage easement per Document
pipR2i•l i=.11 oi•-rnn•a-,.. - -- --
R5 I 1 - 1 • 11 ' ! • i • • ! • 1 i 1 1,14447"1
11. _ X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
12. X All existing street rights-of-way are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on
13.A. The Final Plat of Carlson Companies 4th Addition shall be filed prior to Lot
Consolidation/Division Approval.
N n
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
2
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: September 7, 1989
FILE NO.: 89073
PETITIONER: Mr. John D. Griffith, Trammel Crow Company, 601 Lakeshore Parkway,
Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN. 55343
SITE PLAN: BULK WAREHOUSE F
LOCATION: North of Sixth Avenue, west of Sycamore Lane, east of Xenium Lane,
south of Tenth Avenue in the northeast one quarter of Section 34.
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. _ X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Site Plan approval:
4. Area assessments estimated - None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
LEGAL/EASEMENTS/PERMITS:
6. X Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval. A lot division consolidation is beim processed
concurrently with this application.
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.)
B. _ 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. A drainage and utility easement 20 feet wide will be
required for the storm sewer from the Rond adjacent to Sixth Avenue
North alone the east side of the building to the drainage ditch at
the northeast corner of the site.
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated. The tem ograry
Sur ace drainage easement per Document 1168992 The existing 20
foot drainage and utility easement dedicated_ with the plat of
Carlson Company Second Addition A portion of the 6 foot drainage
and utilitx easement that is covered under Document 1987049._ A
petition along with the necessary legal description shall he
provided to the City by the developer,
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
12. X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Other
13. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The site plan will be submitted to the City's consulting engineer
for review to see if it is in conformance with the City's
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations
shall be incorporated in a revised plan. The grading and drainage
plan shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary: Seg
special conditions
14. _ X Necessary fire hydrants provided -
The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such as
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance.
15. X Size and type of material proposed in utility systems has been
provided
The utility plan shall be revised to indicate the size and type of
material required in the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain services
and storm sewer. The size and type of material to be used for the
sanitary sewer service shall be shown on the site utility plan
16. _ X _ Post indicator valve - fire department connection
It will be necessary to locate the post indicator valve in such a
manner that it will not render any of the existing fire hydrants
inoperable.
3-
N/A Yes No
17. _ X _ Hydrant valves provided -
All new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6" gate valves per City
Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W-2. This plate should be
referenced on the site plan.
18. X _ Sanitary sewer clean -outs provided -
It will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the proposed internal
sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot intervals.
19. X Acceleration/deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration/deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
20. X All existing street right-of-ways are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on
21. _ X Complies with site drainage requirements -
The City will not permit drainage onto a City street from a private
parking lot; therefore, the site plan shall be revised accordingly.
4-
N/A Yes No
22. _ X Curb and gutter provided -
The City requires B-612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances
and where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where
it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either
B-612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced
parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance
with this requirement.
23. _ _ X Complies with parking lot standards -
The City will require that all traveled areas within the parking
lot, as well as the proposed entrances, shall be constructed to a
7 -ton standard City design with six inches of Class 5 100% crushed
limestone and three inches of 2341 wear or five and one-half inches
of 2331 base and two inches of 2341 wear. All parking areas may be
constructed to a standard 5 -ton design consisting of four inches of
Class 5 100% crushed base and two inch bituminous mat. The site
plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with these
requirements.
STANDARDS:
N/A Yes No
24. X It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility
foreman,
24 hours in advance of making any proposed utility connections to
the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The developer shall
also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the Public Works
Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging within the
City's right-of-way. All connections to the water system shall be
via wet tap.
25. _ 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. X The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual. See Items 6 7 9 10, 11, 12, 13,
15 22 23 and Special Conditions.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
27. A. The proposed 15 inch R.C.P. from catch basin 7 to the pond shall be increased
from 15 inch R.C.P. to 18 inch R.C.P.
B. A surface overflow shall be provided to adequately handle the 100 Year Storm.
Currently a natural surface overflow would occur to the northeast, the
overflow would occur at elevation 945.0. Since the building floor elevation
is 945.0 a surface overflow should be established by the critical elevation of
943.0.
C. A Building Permit shall not be issued prior to the filing of the Final Plat of
Carlson Companies 4th Addition and the filing of the Proposed Lot
Division/Consolidation.
D. The financial guarantee for the public storm sewer shall be included with the
Planning Department Site Plan Agreement.
E. Cross easements will be required for the drive, storm sewer, watermain and
parking.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
Ll
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 1989
Page 163
North.
Mr. Waters reported that he lived in Amber Woods. He sai he
did not want to see 34th Street as a major access point t the
development.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mary Weinzierl of 18820 Co ty Road
24.
Ms. Weinzierl said she was concerned about the sa ty of the
exit proposed onto County Road 24.
Rick Sather, in responding the statements fr the public
stated that 34th Street is shown as a minor c llector on the
Plymouth City Thoroughfare Plan. He reported hat County Road
24 has a very flat grade in the area a developer is
requesting as an access and would be safe.
Chairman Plufka closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Zylla stated that the pro osed lots were small
compared with R -1A standards.
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seco ed by Chairman Plufka to MOTION TO APPROVE
recommend approval of the Sketch P1 for "The Leuer Property"
subject to the conditions listed in, he Staff Report of June 8,
1989 omitting Condition #4, and_ adding to Condition #5 the
words "including density".
MOTION to Amend by Commissio r Stulberg to add Condition #4 MOTION TO AMEND
back into the conditions lis d.
Motion failed for lack of,Af second. MOTION FAILED DUE 10
LACK OF A SECOND
MOTION by Chairman P1 eka, seconded by Commissioner Marofsky to MOTION TO AMEND
add a new conditionating that 32nd Avenue be extended to the
City of Medina bord9r.,
Roll Call Vote.
carried.
MOTION by 0
the lot size
5 Ayes, Commissioner Stulberg Nay. MOTION VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
ssioner Zylla to add a condition stating that
within 90 percent of the RI -A requirements.
Motion failoC for lack of a second.
Roll Cafl Vote on Main Motion once amended. 5 Ayes,
Chairman Plufka introduced the request of Trammel Crow Company
for a Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, Zoning Variance and Amended
MOTION TO AMEND
MOTION FAILED FOR LACK
OF A SECOND
VOTE - MAIN MOTION
TRAMMEL CROW COMPANY
89023)
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 1989
Page 164
Site Plan for the Carlson Center 4th Addition located north of
6th Avenue and east of Xenium Lane.
Commissioner Stulberg excused himself from the discussion and
stepped down.
Coordinator Dillerud gave an overview of the June 6, 1989 Staff
Report.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. John Griffith representing
Trammel Crow Company who stated he agreed with the Staff
Report.
Chairman Plufka opened the Public Hearing.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Mike Anderson of 720 Sycamore
Lane.
Mr. Anderson stated his concern over the wildlife area which is
a buffer to the residential area he lives in. He stated that a
new building would have an impact on the area, and he was
concerned about the type of structure to be built.
Chairman Plufka introduced Ms. Nancy Anderson of 710 Sycamore
Lane.
Ms. Anderson stated that a new industrial building in this area
would decrease the value of her property. This building would
be visible from her home. She stated she thought the area was
a buffer zone. She said she had heard Gleanloch Park was to be
restored.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Chris Eilers of 615 Sycamore
Lane.
Mr. Eilers reported that he thought the area was a buffer zone.
He stated that approval of the request would allow the
petitioner to build a larger building, and he was not in favor
of this. He also stated that he had heard some of the land
would be added to the Gleanloch Park.
Chairman Plufka read a letter received by the Planning
Commission from Dr. Robert Ostrow. Dr. Ostrow stated that he
was against any further development in this area. He stated
that he thought the wildlife area was a buffer between the
residential and industrial area.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Pat Zilverberg of 755 Windemere
Drive.
Mr. Zilverberg stated he felt the natural woodlands was needed
as a buffer zone and that more park land in the area was
needed.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 1989
Page 165
John Griffith stated that there were no exact plans for the
type of building to be put on the site.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Randy Harju of 13105 6th Avenue
North.
Mr. Harju stated that prospective home buyers for his property
were concerned about what was being done with the plat. He
asked where the access to the plat would be, and the height
restrictions for a new building.
Coordinator Dillerud stated that a building on this site could
be no taller than 45 feet. He reported that the access will be
from 6th Avenue, and this has been predetermined.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Roger Anderson of 710 Sycamore
Lane.
Mr. Anderson stated that the existing building on the north
site is ugly, and he does not want to see another building
similar to it constructed.
Chairman Plufka closed the Public Hearing.
Chairman Plufka asked Mr. Griffith what type of building would
be constructed, and what is the reason for the 10 foot
variance.
Mr. Griffith stated that no plans had been made for the type of
building to be placed on the site, and therefore the variance
is not tied to a specific plan.
Commissioner Zylla inquired as to how much more new building
was possible on the south site with the movement of the
property line.
Mr. Griffith said he did not know.
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Tierney to recommend approval of the Final Plat and Preliminary
Plat adding a condition stating that property owners present
at the meeting be notified when a Site Plan is requested for
the southerly portion of the plat.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Tierney to recommend approval the Resolutions for an Amended
Site Plan and Setting Condition Prior to Filing of the Final
Plat as listed in the June 6, 1989 Staff Report.
MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Chairman Plufka to MOTION TO AMEND
delete Condition #10 from the Amended Site Plan approving the
request for a variance.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 1989
Page 166
Roll Call Vote on Main Motion. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MAIN MOTI
CARRIED
4U F. M.
The meeting reconvened at 9:50 P.M. w Commissioner Stulberg
returning to the table.
Chairman Plufka introduced the req st of Harstad Companies for HARSTAD COMPANIES
a Land Use Guide Plan Amendme70uthfor Lake Camelot Estates, (89030)
located west of I-494, north and of County Road 47.
Coordinator Dillerud gave an
Report.
Chairman Plufka introduced
petitioner.
iew of the June 9, 1989 Staff
Ken Briggs who represented the
Mr. Briggs reported that a took exception to the assessment
charges proposed in the ngineer's Memo because the developer
wants to develop at a ower density. He stated he felt the
lower density would be better transition for the townhomes.
Commissioner Zylla lestioned whether the developer really
wanted to go to LA -1 rather than LA -2.
Mr. Briggs resZed that LA -2 was really what the developer
wanted.
Chairman Plufk roduced Mr. Doug Achtelik of 6065 Annapolis
Lane.
Mr. AchteliV stated that he was happy with the petitioners
request to,down guide the development to LA -2.
Chairman/(lufka introduced Mr. Crutchfield of 6070 Annapolis
Lane.
Mr. Cr tchfield stated that when he bought him home he was told
that he remaining area would be single family homes. He just
foun out that the current guiding is LA -3. He supported the
dow guiding.
irman Plufka introduced Ms. Linda Knapp of 6035 Yucca Lane.
s. Knapp stated that she supported the down guiding of the
roperty.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Tom Skiba of 13905 60th Avenue
North.
Mr. Skiba stated that he supported the down guiding and would
like to see it go to single family homes.
Chair e u is Baring.