CR 91-83 CUP - TownhomesAarch 27, 19 91
„MO )bY1
Nancy (. Anderson
Planner
Supporting Documents.
o Detailed Background
o Analysis of Issues
o Alternatives
o Site Plans
o Resolution No: R91 -07
Petition for E.A.W.
� 1
\ S Y
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - TOWNHOMES
Council Report:CR91 -83
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 91 -7
approving the conditional use permit to construct 12 townhomes on the
corner of Hiawatha and Cambridge.
Approval of this motion will allow the applicant to construct 12 townhomes.
The Zoning & Planning Commission on a 3 -1 vote approved Resolution RZ91 -1
approving construction of 12 townhomes on the corner of Hiawatha and
Cambridge.
Overview.
The applicant is proposing to construct 12 rental townhomes on the east
side of Ramsgate along Hiawatha Avenue. These townhomes will be two story,
three bedrooms with a 2 car tuck -under garage. Access will be from
Cambridge. There is no car access from Hiawatha to the townhomes.
A ponding area will be located on the north end of the site. The south end
of the site will be a parking area for Ramsgate Apartments and the
townhomes.
This conditional use permit was referred back to the Planning Commission
because of a change in the site plan. The site plan was changed to
accommodate a larger holding pond which resulted in removing one unit. The
Council referred this back to the Commission and asked the Commission only
to review the site plan for land use and design issues. Other issues
involving the past actions by the City will be reviewed the City Council.
The Hiawatha residents have submitted a petition to the Environmental
Quality Board to request an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be
prepared for this project. Further information on this item is provided in
the report under "Notes from the Zoning & Planning Meeting."
Primary Issues to Consider.
o Does the proposal meet the zoning requirements?
o What is the impact of this project on the surrounding area?
o Should Hiawatha be widened?
o What are the changes detailed on the revised plan?
CR: 91 -83
Page 2
Detailed Background.
Zoning and Comprehensive Plan.
The zoning of the subject parcel is R -2, Low Density Multiple Family.
The Comprehensive Plan has designated this parcel as high density
residential. The applicant has requested an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan from high density residential to medium density
residential.
Exterior materials.
The exterior of the townhomes is masonite siding. The color will be
earth tones.
Parking.
The proposed plan has a two -stall garage for every unit, plus a
driveway long enough for two more spaces. The Ordinance requires 2
parking spaces per unit. The proposed plan complies with this
requirement.
The parking area on the south side of the site can be used by both the
townhomes and Ramsgate. If the Commission is concerned about enough
parking for the townhomes, parking spaces can be designated for
additional spaces for the townhomes. The applicant would be willing
to designate spaces for the townhomes.
Engineering Considerations.
At the March 5, 1991 City Council meeting the City Council ordered a
feasibility study for the Hiawatha sanitary sewer. This study was
ordered as a result the City's consulting engineer reviewing the sewer
system in Hiawatha with the new information regarding sewer problems.
The City is prepared to correct the sewer problems in Hiawatha.
The site plan has been revised to accommodate a larger ponding area on
the north side of the property. The City's consulting engineer has
been sent the revised plans. His report will be available at the
meeting. The applicant will have to get permission from the Minnehaha
Watershed District for this development. Any approval should be
contingent on their approval and the City's consulting engineer.
Landscaping.
The Ordinance requires one tree per 2000 square feet of open space.
The Ordinance requires 16 trees for this site. The landscape plan
details 23 new plantings which meet or exceed the Ordinance
requirements. There are also 106 other plantings of trees and shrubs
that will be added to the site. 18 existing trees will also be
retained on the townhome site if possible.
Trash Handling.
There will not be community trash area. Each unit will have their own
trash container.
CR: 91 -83
Page 3
Access.
Access to the site will be from Cambridge. The townhomes and the
apartments will share a 24 foot driveway easement. This easement will
have a bituminous surface. 12 feet is an existing bituminous surface.
Lighting.
The site will have individual lights on the front and rear of the
buildings. The road to the garages and parking area will also be lit.
The lights for the access road are pole lights, with a height of 12
feet.
Fire Marshal Consideration.
The Fire Marshal has reviewed the preliminary plans and found no
problems at this time. He also noted that this area has been a
problem with grass fires.
Screening.
The parking area on the south end of site will be recessed. A
retaining wall with a guard rail will be constructed on the east part
of this site. The east part of the parking area abutting the
residential area will remain as a buffer to the parking area.
Primary Issues to Consider.
o What are the changes detailed on the revised plan?
The major change to the site plan was changing number of buildings to
two from three and removing one unit on the north side the site.
There is 10 feet separating the buildings to allow for drainage.
The plat has changes slightly. The north lot line of Lot 2 has been
moved approximately 27 feet to the south.
o Does the proposal meet the zoning requirements?
The following are the zoning requirements for the R -2 district and the
proposed development:
front yard: 35 feet
rear yard: 35 feet
side yard east: 12 feet
side yard west: 12 feet
height 35 feet
open space 1:1.5
R -2 proposed townhomes
110 feet
35 feet
25 feet (with new
ROW)
29.5 feet
31 feet
1:1.88
This is a corner lot. The front yard is Cambridge. (attached is a
letter from regarding the front yard for this project)
•
o What is the impact of this project on the surrounding area?
Any development will have an impact on the surrounding area since the
lot is vacant at this time. However, because of the way the access
has been designed the impact should be quite minimized for the single
family homes to the east and south. Much of the activity will be from
the west side of the townhomes. The townhomes, with the proposed
density, will provide a good transition from single family to the
higher density of the Ramsgate apartments.
The apartments to the east should not have any impact. The townhomes
will abut parking and garages on the apartment site. The new parking
area for the apartments should be an improvement to the apartments and
the current parking situation.
o Should Hiawatha be widened?
Hiawatha has a 40 foot right -of -way with a 22 foot bituminous surface.
If the road were to be reconstructed the current roadway policy
requires a minimum right -of -way of 50 -60 feet with a 26 foot roadway.
The staff is recommending that 10 feet be taken from the applicant's
0 - property for right -of -way. The additional 10 feet will give Hiawatha
a 50 foot right -of -way. Also, the applicant should be required to
widen Hiawatha by 4 feet to the west. The extra right -of -way and the
widening of the road will meet the minimum roadway requirements
established in the roadway policy. The applicant has agreed to give
the additional right -of -way and to widen Hiawatha by 4 feet.
Alternatives
CR: 91 -83
Page 4
1. Approve the conditional use permit. By approving the
conditional use permit the applicant will be able to construct
12 townhomes.
2. Deny the conditional use permit. By denying the conditional
use permit, the applicant will not be able to construct 12
townhomes. The Commission will have to state findings of fact
which support the denial of the conditional use permit.
3. Continue for further information. If the Commission indicates
that further information is needed, the item should be
continued.
Notes from Zoning & Planning Meeting
CR: 91 -83
Page 5
Staffing explained the change from 13 units to 12 units. Arlene Dixson
representing the applicant appeared before the Commission and also
explained the changes.
Joey Carlson appeared before the Commission. Mr. Carlson expressed a
concern about the preserving of the trees on the site.
The Commission discussed corner lots and if the setback on Hiawatha should
be greater. The City Attorney advised the Commission that if they added a
condition requiring a greater setback on Hiawatha, they would be imposing a
requirement that was not enforceable.
Several other residents appeared before the Commission and spoke about the
trees on the site.
The Commission discussed adding the following conditions to the resolution.
13. Require that the front yard setback be from Hiawatha.
14. That no grading or removal of trees occur until approval by the
Environmental Quality Board.
Mr. Pavelia moved to approve resolution RZ91 -1 with the two added
conditions. The motion failed on a 1 -3 vote.
After a considerable discussion on what to do, another motion was made.
Mr. Maxwell moved to approve resolution RZ91 -1 with the two added
conditions. The motion passed on a 3 -1 vote, Mrs. Reuter voting nay.
The Hiawatha residents submitted a petition to the Environmental Quality
Board requesting an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The current
proposal does not meet the mandatory threshold for a EAW. The proposal may
meet the minimum requirements for a discretionary EAW. Staff is studying
this issue further and will provide additional information to the City
Council during the meeting. If the proposal meets the minimum requirements
for a discretionary EAW, the City Council will need to undertake a process
of determining whether it wishes to require a discretionary EAW.
Also attached is the memo from Jerre Miller regarding the condition from
the CUP when Ramsgate was approved regarding access to the Ramsgate Site.
Date: March 8, 1991
To: Nancy Anderson
From: Jerre Miller
Re: Hiawatha Avenue Project
C I T Y O F H O P K I N S
MEMO
An Equal Opportunity Employer
f
I have been asked to furnish an opinion and otherwise
interpret the definition in our zoning ordinance concerning
the manner in which a front lot line is determined.
The definition is contained in Ordinance 515.07, Subd. 72 as
follows:
The boundary of a lot which abuts an existing or
proposed public street and in the case of a corner
lot, it is the shortest dimension on a public street.
If the dimensions of a corner lot are within 10% of
being equal, the front lot line is that street line
designated by the owner and filed in the office of the
building official."
The purpose of the definition is to ascertain the location
for a front yard setback regardless of architectural design,
address or structural location each of which is subjective in
nature and have no relevance to the purpose of the
definition.
The identical definition is one of common usage and
specifically referred to in A Survey of Zoning Definition
complied by the American Planning Associations.
In applying the definition to the proposed project, the Mark
Jones property consists of one lot, the shorter lot line of
which abuts Cambridge and the longer lot line of which abuts
Hiawatha. Pursuant to the definition contained in the
Hopkins Zoning Ordinance, the front yard setback is measured
from Cambridge Avenue to the proposed structure. This is
true whether the buildings face a direction other than
Cambridge.
It would be possible to modify the definition by negotiation
or for the safety and welfare of the public although no such
concern appepgig FiVOStitlaatttiWigigkins, Minnesota 55343 612/935 -8474
There is no other way to apply the definition contained in
the ordinance to the lot on which the townhomes are to be
constructed.
E
SIGN w R011131 Om
K
•
EXIST. TREES (RETAIN IF POSSIBLE)
EXIST. TREE REMOVED
PROPOSED PLANTING
PA0 1100. 10' MIT
COL F0 Rb1I
DETENTION
STORM RUNOFF
PONDING AREA
UOR Pas
0 20 40 60 80 100
� fL6E X PG sc-°4 p Gt 40
- . �� SN'
HIA/ /ATHA AVE.
8 - A
S - 8
2 -
s -0
1 —
2 -
TREES (DEC)
CREDI ASH
CANAOA RED CHERRY
UTTLE LEAF UNDER
SUNBURST LOCUST
SUGAR MAPLE
AMUR MAPLE
pa
ENT
EASEMENT
P L A N T I N G S C H E D U L E
2 1/2' 8 & 8
2 1/2' 8 &
r B & B
r B & e
2 1/2 B & B
B & 8
TREES, EVERGREEN
8 - C COLORADO SPRUCE 3',t' POT
6 - H COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE 5' B B
4 - J BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 6• 8 & 8
EXIST. GARAGES
SHRUBS /EV- ...., -tEN & DEC
11 - U PFRZER JUMPER 2 CAL POT
11 - R 60L0 TIP PFTT2ER J,}AIPER 2 GAL POT
5 - P PURPLE LEAF SANG : -E4R1' 2 GAL POT
8 - 0 IS NTI DOGWOOD 2 CAL POT
3 - R LABURNUM. AMERICA.. 2 GAL. POT
s0 -s
HEDGE
001.0 FLN1E SP EA
02'-0• 0 C.
100 IS RE0•D
2 GAL
POT
•
tttttttt "SR",
RAMSCATE TOWNHOUSES
NOPK'NS, MINNESOTA
J
SCE PLAN
PLANTING PLAN
1 -20'
APT.
BLDG.
RAMSGATE
1•4101 13. 11191
gal
6)
__ Ry
� I•D] �, �.
G
2
[•)O r
IF
\Q NCH P_1 a
AJ
F - I'
�r /�.. x M
H
. ......x.,it
X.
E
SIGN w R011131 Om
K
•
EXIST. TREES (RETAIN IF POSSIBLE)
EXIST. TREE REMOVED
PROPOSED PLANTING
PA0 1100. 10' MIT
COL F0 Rb1I
DETENTION
STORM RUNOFF
PONDING AREA
UOR Pas
0 20 40 60 80 100
� fL6E X PG sc-°4 p Gt 40
- . �� SN'
HIA/ /ATHA AVE.
8 - A
S - 8
2 -
s -0
1 —
2 -
TREES (DEC)
CREDI ASH
CANAOA RED CHERRY
UTTLE LEAF UNDER
SUNBURST LOCUST
SUGAR MAPLE
AMUR MAPLE
pa
ENT
EASEMENT
P L A N T I N G S C H E D U L E
2 1/2' 8 & 8
2 1/2' 8 &
r B & B
r B & e
2 1/2 B & B
B & 8
TREES, EVERGREEN
8 - C COLORADO SPRUCE 3',t' POT
6 - H COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE 5' B B
4 - J BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 6• 8 & 8
EXIST. GARAGES
SHRUBS /EV- ...., -tEN & DEC
11 - U PFRZER JUMPER 2 CAL POT
11 - R 60L0 TIP PFTT2ER J,}AIPER 2 GAL POT
5 - P PURPLE LEAF SANG : -E4R1' 2 GAL POT
8 - 0 IS NTI DOGWOOD 2 CAL POT
3 - R LABURNUM. AMERICA.. 2 GAL. POT
s0 -s
HEDGE
001.0 FLN1E SP EA
02'-0• 0 C.
100 IS RE0•D
2 GAL
POT
•
tttttttt "SR",
RAMSCATE TOWNHOUSES
NOPK'NS, MINNESOTA
J
SCE PLAN
PLANTING PLAN
1 -20'
APT.
BLDG.
RAMSGATE
1•4101 13. 11191
w a t
1 •
6 L b v
T I e AJ
14i ••
S w • f •
•• I.
J
rwa i3 In,
RAMSGATE
RAMSGATE TOWNHOUSES
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA
J
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
CROSS SECTION
•
••••
••• .• Etat 1;
•
•
•
e
. ; / ...
":•--a-r-;-
:. - • t : • .•
I .I
_ _ • 1.
5.--, - .=--• - '":,"" " IP' ' -. - — - i - - - . , i_ v ."' --- ••• ••••••• ...b.... 4......one.
••• ••,•I■ • so. :m.o....pi. i t "...
_ ,.. . $ N IA,. ATMA AV E 'WC • ••• •I , -- r - ”---- ---=,---='- -- - -- ' "':-"---
,
. - • ..1 I.. .0.•
—1" — - ."...."' • --st " ----- - ' •••••• ,
7 ;:;- 3 — '"..."---
:'
--2. -
•
[ ME. •111■. ■■■■• au.
t
:!': 5•0 '
12' =
„ . ..-....._,
., 1
' "-- , i ..
1 1, i..........--•• 2. .---?•',
, J
.-• — .....
..
........ • •
-':::::: r - ------- •:
• 1 ••• '
..1‘■ ece N .
\ •
;:t .7..• •■•••-• r•••••■ mr.....z........,-,--- -
. , . - - • -
0- '':'t= — ....
----a.,-
...:....
1 ''' ':,--..A... .•••••• oalz Zi ..... ..i ...... /
■:::,r
11,Mg= I/
I
J
Ramsgate Townhouses
II 1.41
El..1,u14AAY GRAOING
AND 0
•rC WATEIt
c1
•
• • • • •
I . • • .
DETENTION
STORM RUNOFF
PONDING AREA
I KEY I
0 20 40
EXIST. TREES (RETAIN IF POSSIBLE)
900 FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION
900 BASEMENT ELEVATION
900 GARAGE ELEVATION
60 80 100 r+w
DATA
OPIG'NA. SITE AREA
LOT -1 NORTH SITE
LOT 2 SOUTH SITE
PROPOSED USE
NORTH LOT 1
SOUTH LOT 2
EXIST. GARAGES
67,130 SF
54.065 SF
13.065 SF
SURFACE PARKING 24 CARS
LESS 10' R.O.W.
3/91 (4850 SF)
62.280 SF NET
49.215 SF
13.065 SF
12 TOWNHOUSES (2 . boo sr - , assro 9 .oan)
12 TWO CAR TUCK UNDER GARAGES
24 SURFACE SPACES
•
1
RAMSGATE
RAMSGATE TOWNHOUSES
HOPKINS. MINNESOTA
J
SITE PLAN
J r -m
J WAa iz 1991
,• g- pre- pl.,'
/.1-4/ 4.:A/2441eAAA.C
BITAMMAJE ELIREACE
•1'
\ HIAWATHA • . . - AVENUE
fe.
- . 17J8.•
•
TT _
MAL OLICAIATION
.01 that peat of the 0.01000.1 0... of t....e. P.a.. of Svc,.
VV. Toloelvt. 117, km. 71. 0.00 of M Ilfth F81.1.1 ...a.. I..
South of *(.101l101, MAY. T. YAM the Gee feet
of the Aro. Mort.. 8.11.7 Co.......141
•••••• thiet •ovt 00.0.00 •••••■■•■ 00 0.0 Cemoveleg et 17*
faun... eon.. ool• th.re 10,11. An. the U•11 1104
twero. t• the 1.01.01y rtalvt.f.ovillo of the prooe. 11•74.1-.. 01
the feaet lArther• 0011.7, thee. ttttt .8.1
rtat-of... Or Serthorly *I 7* My.. 87 0. 0.111 oa■
••••.•••••••• •et• tttt ••••••••••to., olang .st• 11.71.0118
11.../.7) en.. le. te • Wm WA., lot.. the 1.1010001ia.••
.14 hara..? Iloe ...he Boot 11. of vete Peort•• chorta.0 a. the
11.0817 taro of tle. CAW 1a110.y. the... In •
t• • plat Is the fay• 1 ay al .14 Mety met.
810 fe. 81.0. 00•0•■1•4 Wor ..te Sha• 110 free th• ••••.e.
OA11 ale0, sole llsath 11..1 peta. el ■••■.....
Ow port dn... within Ow Oat •my., ask8 .10*••
/111 1 11900000•
PRELIMINARY PLAT
RAMSGATE 2 ND ADDITION
sn
FRAME
a..• et.;• ,•2
• aimme•• swww.e■
trmy Myty yam. 113•
me.. Mem MAIM
Ave. ••■ vet. •eta
1147a aro fr. the 1107 of ttttt
Ty IA My.. 1* test moth 0.4 0 foot out of
Meth.. preheat, .... 81...lee •10..
8.• ••
GARAGE
••••14.7.p.,•.• ft
--1:1301BLILEIS-
• •
•
#Po 0.031
•••• *Imo ••■••
Mi-ORAMONS
.1=11.••• TWA NIB, a.
1111.4• MI
PAM, MAIMINI• MIS
PTIMAt 1111-M1
EMEEK.A.-EMMEN-EME
1-2 MR PERM 11N0IALIMMIT
MIM
1ML &AL.". SA. IR. Pt. 1.
HIGHLAND VILLA BUILDERS
ory.reAt::•;Zif
dews,
• -*if-
•
Date: March 22, 1991
To:
Environmental Quality Board
300 Centennial Office Building
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
From: Minnehaha Oaks Subdivision
c/o Joey Carlson
928 Twelve Oaks Center
15500 Wayzata Blvd.
Wayzata, MN 55391
Project Location
A small tract in the city of Hopkins, Minnesota in the southwest corner of the
intersection of Cambridge Street and Hiawatha Avenue (see accompanying map)
Project Description
Phone: Office 473 -8890
Home 935 -1663
The proposed project consists of building twelve (12) townhouses on a site described by
Alan E. Olson, District Forester of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as
follows.
"The city of Hopkins has a valuable resource in this woodlot although it is
not large it is unique as one of the only old oak woods of its type in the
city. When you think that the trees that make up this little forest were
seedlings not long after the American Civil War, I think there is a heritage
and a history that would be worth saving for the benefit of the people of
your city. There are programs at the Federal and State governmental levels
to plant trees to re- establish our forests, I think we need to save the trees
we already have especially in our urban environment."
More details are given in the attached March 16, 1991 letter from Mr. Olson outlining
additional information as to the environmental importance of the trees.
Whereas, the 1.54 acres forested plot (I.D. #19- 117 - 21210001) bordering Hiawatha Ave.
contains 75 mature beautiful oak trees;
Whereas, these 75 oak trees average 70-80 years old;
Where, the State of Minnesota is embarking on a 13.5 million dollar per year tree
planting program;
Whereas, the forested area adds life giving oxygen to the atmosphere;
Whereas, the trees utilize carbon dioxide by the photosynthetic process;
Whereas, carbon dioxide contributes to the greenhouse effect and its tendency to
increase the temperature of the global atmosphere;
Whereas, the global warming is undesirable;
Whereas, the forested area to be preserved is virgin timber,
Whereas, there are no oak trees in Central Park at 17th Avenue South in Hopkins;
Whereas, there are no oak trees in Oak Park at 900 Lake Street in Hopkins;
Whereas, there are no oak trees in Burns Park at 201 Park Lane in Hopkins;
Whereas, City Forester, Ray Vogtmann, considers the forested area an asset to the City
of Hopkins;
An important sound barrier would be destroyed by the removal of these trees for the
building of the proposed townhouses. In a memorandum -- May 14, 1974 Mr. John
Bergly, as a consulting planner for the city of Hopkins described forested area as follows:
"This strip of land is a very attractive amenity in the neighborhood and
serves as a buffer between the single family homes and the apartment
complex. The slope of the land and the mature trees as well as the
underbrush provide a visual as well as a physical separation between two
dissimilar densities."
Whereas, destruction of the trees would eliminate a major and important sound barrier
between Trunk Highway No. 7 and the beautiful homes of Hiawatha Oaks Subdivision;
Whereas the destruction of the trees would destroy wildlife habitat and cause the
movement of resident or migratory animal species;
Whereas, the City of Hopkins is not planting young oak trees along the boulevards of the
Hopkins streets because trees of this variety do not flourish at such locations;
Whereas, construction of the several proposed townhouses will result in the loss of these
beautiful oak trees; and
Whereas, the construction of the townhouses would result in the destruction of virtually
all the oak trees, resulting in greatly increased runoff to Minnehaha Creek, which already
reaches flood stages seriously damaging to several private homes along Hiawatha
Avenue;
We, the undersigned hereby petition under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.. of
1973 to review the major environmental impact of the proposed construction project.
DATE
NAME
ADDRESS (City and Zip Code)
2141/ 4t �}`.` r yx� ' 4' , � �..,�. ,' 1. s -- � ^ 474
/ Y7( .(4 22-5 5
"1/4t Malta, 0. Km% q 1 3 )4.4o-a.a.2) ape . ge ) , )1•n S's 13
(r-
'9
• er,:itj ctfaso4 Cu ( • i; j ;4 ;s 0- co 4-;!, cf;s-,,
• U r�
r _ 3ad �c
S�or t �nM� ;4- � s y�o
:s
tajL fi c, Q.
`
pr 4ss
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: R91 -7
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVED
AN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP:91 -1
WHEREAS, an application for a Conditional Use Permit entitled CUP91 -1
submitted by Mark Z. Jones to construct 13 townhomes at
Cambridge & Hiawatha Avenues is hereby approved.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
1. That an application for Conditional Use Permit CUP 91-
1 was filed with the City of Hopkins on December 31,
1990.
2. That the Hopkins Planning Commission reviewed such
application on January 29, 1991.
3. That the Hopkins Planning Commission, pursuant to
published and mailed notices, held a hearing on January
29, 1991 and February 26, 1991: all persons present at
the hearing were given an opportunity to be heard.
4. That the written comments and analysis of the City
Staff and the Planning Commission were considered.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that application for Conditional Use
Permit CUP:91 -1 is hereby approved subject to the following
Findings of Fact:
1. The townhomes are a permitted use within the R -2 district.
2. That the proposed development complies with the zoning
requirements for the district.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that application for CUP:91 -1 is hereby
approved subject to the following Conditions:
1. That the Watershed District approves the drainage for the
site.
2. That the final plat reflects an additional 10 feet of right -
of -way.
3. That the applicant widens Hiawatha by four (4) feet to the
west pursuant to City specifications.
4. That the Metropolitan Council approves the Comprehensive
Plan change.
5. That the final plat is approved.
6. That Lot 2 is an outlot.
7. That the parking area be allowed to be used by the townhomes
for overflow parking.
8. That the developer is responsible for the maintenance of
ponding area.
9. That approval is conditioned on final approval of the
grading, drainage, and utility plans for the project.
10. That an engineer review the capacity of the existing
sanitary sewer system in the area to insure that it is
capable of serving the proposed project. The cost for this
review shall be born by the applicant.
11. That the applicant provide copies of private easements for
storm water, driveway, water mains and sanitary sewer.
12. That the applicant provide copies of private easements for
storm water, driveway, water mains and sanitary sewer.
13. Require front yard setback on Hiawatha Avenue.
14. No grading or removal of trees shall occur until approval
from Environmental Quality Board is obtained.
Adopted this 2 day of April, 1991.
Attest:
James A. Genellie, City Clerk
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor