Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/11/2000 P&Z Packet• • • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA Wednesday, October 11, 2000 6:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 13, 2000 III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: IV. OPEN MIKE: V. ACTION ITEMS: A. Nancy Anderson, 352 Carl Street, Variance f B. Mueller -Beis Funeral Home, 7050 Lake Drive, Site Plan Review & Minor Subdivision C. North American Composites Co., (Inter - Plastic) 300 Apollo Drive, Site Plan Review & Minor Subdivision VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Town Center Standards B. Temporary Fabric Storage Structures VII. ADJOURNMENT • Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning an . m' oard meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., September 13, 2000. • II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — August • Ms. Lane made a MOTION to appr•e ;uses of the August 9, 2000, meeting of the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning as supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 5 -0 -1 (Johnson abstain is absence at that meeting). III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Smyser stated the applicant for Agenda Item V.B, Oasis Market, is making significant changes to their proposal so staff recommends that item be removed from the agenda. The agenda was approved as revised. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared Open Mike open at 6:33 p.m. No one was present for Open Mike. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:34 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6 -0. Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 2 V. ACTION ITEMS A. Mark Pariseau, 6101 Centerville Road, Variance Staff presented the application by Mark Pariseau requesting a variance to construct a 24 foot by 24 foot detached garage 21.5 feet from the front property line, 2.5 feet behind the existing home. The property is zoned Rural and located on a collector roadway requiring a front setback of 40 feet. The lot is considered to be a pre- existing non - conforming lot of record due to the front setback and the lot size which is approximately 150 feet by 227 feet (10 -acre minimum required). Staff noted the four other properties west of this site that are also less than ten acres in size with varied front setbacks. Staff presented the findings of fact which must be met when considering a request for a variance and noted there are some hardships involved in this case as the applicant has a mound type septic system behind the home with a slight drainage swale in front of the system. Locating the garage according to the setback requirement may hamper this drainage swale and place the building too close to the septic system. Staff has received a letter from the adjoinin operty owner indicating no objection to the variance requested. In review of this request, staff suggested local proposed garage five feet from the storage shed, thus maintaining a setback of 32. ' from the front property line. This would require approval of a variance for the 35 -foot distance established by Section 3, Subd. 3.d.2.a. The garage ted approximately 21 feet behind the front of the home allowing additio • n • ace in front of the garage. Staff explained it is recommending app 1 hree revised conditions to assure the staff has an opportunity to verify t ents and setback distance. Upon inquiry, Mr. Smyser sta wants to assure the garage is not located in front of the house. He explained that wit variance, it is recorded with the title of the property so it is important to know exactly where the line is. If approved, staff will meet the applicant at the site and take the measurement. Chair Schaps asked the applicant if he would like to make comment. Mose Pariseau, father of the applicant, stated he staked out the garage as proposed but found they have a major problem with drainage between the back of the garage and mound system which needs to be addressed. He advised that some of the drainage is from Centerville Road during heavy rains so the farther they can get from that drainage area, the better it will be. Mr. Pariseau stated he believes the best situation is to align the back of the garage with the back of the house, but that would require a 13.5 foot variance for that location. Chair Schaps commented on the large amount of work that has occurred on this property. Mr. Pariseau explained his son bought this property as a disaster house and to fix it up. • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 3 Chair Schaps stated the recommendation is to provide the minimum separation but also the minimum necessary deviation from the 40 -foot setback requirement as well. Mose Pariseau stated if the garage is located too far back, it would not work. Mark Pariseau, owner of the property, stated he also installs septic systems for the State of Minnesota and understands how critical it is for drainage not to run into the absorption area. He explained that with a heavy rain, the amount of water forced into the mound system is a concern and, if the garage is moved it will encroach about 30% into the swale area, even if a berm is constructed. He noted their proposed location is where cars now park and would align with the back wall of the house. In response to Chair Schaps, Mark Pariseau explained the mound system is installed per State requirements and there was really no choice for a different location. He stated he would support a 13.5 foot variance request and advised that should the mound septic system be contaminated, there is no feasible alternate site. Mark Pariseau stated that he is requesting a setback 2.5 feet from the center of the street. Mr. Johnson reviewed the staff report and ask e most recent proposal is for 62.5 feet from the center line of the road to the ont garage, which is an additional six E� feet of variance. Mr. Pariseau stated it w:' �� :additional three feet since the house is at 19.5 feet from the property line. Mr. Smyser stated the right -of -wa subtracting 33 feet, indicates requirement is for 40 feet a property line. The staff report measurement from the septic syste the septic system. wide so a measurement from the center line, rom the property line or 19.5 feet. The setback nal request was to build at 21.5 feet from the es support of 32.5 feet and verifying the to assure the garage is not placed to interfere with Mr. Johnson asked if they want the garage to be 23 feet from the septic system. Mark Pariseau answered in the affirmative noting, however, they will have to verify that measurement. Mr. Zych stated he would support allowing the garage to be aligned with the front of the house. Mark Pariseau stated he wants the garage positioned so the back of the garage and back of the house line up. He agreed the garage would not be any closer to the roadway than the house. Chair Schaps stated as recommended by Mr. Zych, the garage would only be 20 feet from the edge of the roadway so, conceivably, a vehicle and trailer could not park in the driveway without the trailer extending into the road. Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 4 Mark Pariseau corrected that it is 20 feet to the property line but 47 feet of driveway from the garage to the edge of the roadway. Mr. Corson inquired regarding the potential for future County roadway improvements. Mr. Smyser stated the County does anticipate, at some time in the future, that some sort of improvement will occur. At that time, if the roadway is realigned, the County may need to take the house or obtain an easement from Mr. Pariseau. Mose Pariseau stated he had Roger Butler of Anoka County visit the property and talked with him about the culvert and problem with semi trucks making the turn at the front of the house. Mr. Butler had indicated they had to stay within their property and would not round off the curve to make it an easier turning movement. Mr. Butler also indicated they may consider taking land to the south, if needed, so the houses would not be impacted. Mark Pariseau stated if the County ever decides to "square" the corner, it would push the intersection away from this property and provide more setback, not less setback. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to approve a variance ` onstruct a 24 foot by 24 foot detached garage at 6101 Centerville Road with th king conditions: 1. Locate the proposed garage 30 feet from t property line. 2. Proper building permits are obtained p nor to truction. The motion was supported by Mr. Jo e on Lion carried 6 -0. B. PUBLIC HEARING, (Co ctober 11, 2000) Oasis Market, 7509 Lake Drive, Amended Con' ► Permit This agenda item was remove he agenda upon adoption. Chair Schaps noted this item would be on the October 11, 2000 meeting agenda. C. PUBLIC HEARING, Central Suburban Inc., 416 Lilac Street, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review Chair Schaps declared the public hearing opened at 7:04 p.m. Staff presented the application by Central Suburban, Inc. for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to build an addition on the existing building and use the site for its land development and construction business. Staff explained the CUP will cover both the building expansion and an amendment to the grandfathered outdoor storage CUP. Thus, two sets of findings must be made. Staff reviewed its analysis of the application and presented the findings required for consideration of a CUP and findings specific to outdoor storage. Staff finds that the general and specific findings apply and recommends approval of the site plan and CUP to expand the pole building and outdoor storage based on the listed findings and subject to 13 conditions plus added conditions to require the • • • Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 5 • trash dumpster to be located inside the structure and to indicate that a sign permit would be required for any signage. • Chair Schaps asked the applicant if he or his engineer would like to make comment. Bruce Kerber, representing the applicant, stated they were previously North Suburban Development and he has become more active and is Vice President with Mr. Menkveld so they actively looked for a facility. He explained that Shaw Trucking does work for them so they talked with them about this option. He stated a new facade will be created so it will be a nicer looking structure. Chair Schaps inquired about the potential for added dust. Mr. Kerber stated they have a limited staff of three and primarily do land development so the equipment is most often off site. However, the equipment will occasionally return to this site. Mr. Corson noted the City's restriction on noise generation. Mr. Smyser stated the hours of operation restriction applies to construction and not necessarily business locations. However, that may have been included with other pr is and could be considered here as well. Mr. Kerber stated hour restrictions will not w . ause the equipment is usually off site and may be some distance from this site s t co «e 8:00 p.m. before the equipment returns to the site. In response to Mr. Corson, Mr. S residential neighborhood. He stat determine if hours of operatio other nearby industrial use d surrounding uses and the location of the review the Moline Concrete application to d on that application. Staff will also check Mr. Corson stated he would prefe ` a generic reference to allow staff to research that issue. Mr. Kerber stated the only activity would be a returning dump truck and would not create more noise than a dump truck makes on the road. Chair Schaps stated the hours of operation was a huge issue with Moline Concrete but he assumes it has worked out. Mr. Smyser stated the backup indicator was changed to a strobe light rather than a sound backup. However, the strobe could not readily be seen during daylight hours so they went back to the sound backup indicator. Mr. Smyser stated staff will work with the applicant to see what can be worked out. If an agreement is not reached, staff will so report to the City Council. Chair Schaps asked if anyone else would like to make comment. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 7:21 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 6 Ms. Lane made a MOTION to approve the application by Central Suburban, Inc. for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit to expand the pole building and outdoor storage based on the listed findings with the following conditions: 1. An addition to the existing pole barn building shall be allowed that is 20' x 44'. The addition shall be constructed as shown on the submitted certificate of survey, building elevations, and floor plan. 2. The exterior of the north side of the existing building and addition shall be cedar siding and cedar shingle, details as described in the August 28, 2000 letter. 3. Open outdoor storage shall be allowed, including semi - trucks, trailers, construction trucks and equipment, materials such as pipe, concrete manholes and culverts, casting, form lumber, sand, gravel, pumps, fuel and tool trailers, fiberglass pools and spas, and other items and materials used with excavation and trucking operations. 4. Open outdoor storage on the site shall not include construction rubble or debris or demolition debris. The intent is that material that is stored on this site is intended to be installed on other sites. 5. The fence along the north side of the storage yard may be moved to be flush with the front of the building. 6. The fence shall be repaired and ivy shall be pl ong the entire west fence for screening. 7. The site landscaping shall be, at a minimu own on the submitted survey. 8. The applicant must obtain permits fro the ty for any work in the right -of -way. 411 9. The parking lot shall be paved as sho bmitted survey. If parking becomes an issue of concern for the public et � paved parking lot shall be enlarged. 10. The site shall connect to City s er and all assessments paid. 11. The existing septic system mu � pro = ly abandoned. 12. The well may be retained only, at the discretion of the landowner. If the well is not to be maintai � for �i�i gation, it must be properly abandoned. 13. Proper building permits m obtained prior to any construction and 1% of the construction costs must be putn escrow to insure completion of all site improvements. 14. No trash shall be stored outside. 15. Sign permits will be required for any signage. • The motion was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. D. Deer Meadows, Dan Robinson, 407 Main Street, Site Plan Review Staff presented the application by Deer Meadows Golf Range for a site and building plan review for a small, 12 foot by 30 foot, addition on the north side of the existing building. Staff presented its analysis of the application and recommended approval based on findings in the staff report subject to three conditions. Chair Schaps asked the applicant if he would like to make comment. Dan Robinson, representing Deer Meadows Golf Range, stated business is getting better and he wants to be able to sell golf clubs, accessories, and regrip. • • • Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 7 Chair Schaps asked Mr. Robinson to send the Board's best wishes to his father who served the City for years on the Planning & Zoning Board. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to approve the request of Deer Meadows Golf Range for site and building plan review for a small addition to the existing building at the Deer Meadows Golf Range based on the findings in staff's report, with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the site plan and conditional use permit is not an implied approval of signage. Any signs require a sign permit and must comply with the sign ordinance. 2. No additional exterior lighting shall be installed. 3. Proper building permits must be obtained prior to any construction and 1% of the construction costs must be put in escrow to insure completion of all site improvements. The motion was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6 -0. E. City of Lino Lakes, Otter Lake Road, '; ubdivision Staff explained the City has purchased land f Clearwater Creek light industrial area. Th- lan via a minor subdivision. Staff advised th not just an easement. Since this is to Ci claim to a buildable lot on either si g and wetland mitigation in the be divided from the larger parcel ower line strip is a parcel in itself, or ponding, there is no danger of a P land. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Johnson noted a discrep aps regarding the road name. He stated that he remembers it was to be n,_st. Mr. Smyser agreed there is confusion about the correct road name and he is un - answer that question. However, one section of the roadway is being vacated as part this process in cooperation with the City of Hugo to accommodate new development in Hugo. Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to approve the request of the City of Lino Lakes for a minor subdivision in the Clearwater Creek light industrial area to facilitate ponding and wetland mitigation, and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 6 -0. F. PUBLIC HEARING (Continuation), Ordinance 09 -00, Tree Preservation Ordinance Chair Schaps declared the public hearing reopened at 7:29 p.m. Staff explained the public hearing had been continued from the last meeting to allow staff to analyze a sample development project using the draft tree ordinance and to address the requirements for individual home builders. Staff asked the Board to consider and discuss the issues raised in its staff report and provide direction for revising the draft ordinance. Mr. Smyser stated he did not find this scenario to be what staff would consider a "typical" development but maybe one -fifth of the developments submitted may have heavier than Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 8 normal costs due to tree replacement. He suggested writing language into the ordinance to create exceptions to the rule, one being if the developer demonstrates there is not enough land in the development to replace the roads, the City could allow less than what would be required, or a cap per lot or per acre could be created. With regard to an acceptable cost, Mr. Smyser stated there are a number of options related to cost such as stating boulevard trees could be counted toward replacement trees. However, that may raise an issue with a developer required to place boulevard trees without involving the replacement requirement. Another possibility would be to place a cap on the replacement cost by the acre or lot, or to allow the developer to demonstrate there is no room on the property without the loss of the number of lots. Or, the replacement percentages could be adjusted downward. Mr. Smyser noted the added statement to Section IV, A, to indicate: "The City's intent for the tree preservation plans for individual single family lots is to provide guidance to the prospective resident on the best ways to protect the trees the lot owner wants to protect. The City will not mandate which trees to cut or save, but will make suggestions on this and how to preserve the selected trees. The shall not withhold a building permit simply because of the selection of which tr ome builder wants to save or remove." Mr. Smyser asked if the Board would like con these modifications. Mr. Corson stated his general conce specimen trees, however, cottonw he would support removal of those include the size, species, and property but is to not includ of Siberian Elm, certain maple, se s previously, is the goal to preserve nd box elder trees are included. He stated Smyser stated the plan requirements are to 11 significant trees to be removed from the indicated in a specific section. Thus, replacement wood, boxelder is not required. Mr. Johnson noted the trees removed for the building pads or streets could not be replaced in those locations and asked when the trees would be replaced. Mr. Smyser stated the timing for replacement is not indicated specifically in the ordinance but could be addressed in the development agreement with the requirement to complete planting before the escrow funds are released. Mr. Johnson noted the wishes and desires of the lot buyer with regard to tree placement should be considered in this process. He stated he believes this type of ordinance will result in a variety of situations and variables so it may not be possible to write a single ordinance to address all possible scenarios. Mr. Smyser stated staff gave thought to indicating where the trees should be located or when the trees should be planted. However, if left open, it provides more flexibility and allows the developer to make that determination, to negotiate with individual lot buyers, or negotiate with staff. Mr. Johnson stated he believes developers in Lino Lakes want to place trees on the individual lots but if a problem were to occur, the ordinance language could be tightened. • • Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 9 Mr. Smyser stated he will review the ordinance to assure there is no language that would interfere with the developer's ability to negotiate that issue with individual lot buyers. Mr. Johnson stated the developer could also grant a "tree credit" to the individual lot buyer so the buyer can determine what they want and where the trees should be located. Ms. Lane asked if the developer would be obligated to place the trees on another lot if a home buyer does not want trees, or if those trees could be waived. Mr. Smyser stated the City is not mandating where the trees must be located, except they must be somewhere else in the development. Ms. Lane stated her concern with a bureaucratic approach to government regulation of tree replacement and location. She agreed that developers want to save nice trees since it will result in more money for their lots. She stated she remains concerned with this ordinance and does not support its adoption as it will become too cumbersome and require additional staff time for enforcement. Mr. Smyser stated there already is an ordinance but t ' anguage is ambiguous so staff is faced with trying to make a determination on each wig ,. as to what will happen. To provide more clear and understandable guideli � ill gi 4 he developer more "up front" information so the tree preservation plan can ned according to the stated guidelines. He explained the current ordi ce t y a lot of staff time to determine and negotiate and he believes the proposed or ti provide more clear direction and, thus, reduce the amount of staff time , ' i r er stated staff has received complaints from developers that they are not b front what will be required. Chair Schaps stated the inten supports the comments by have trees if they don't want th support to use the ordinance as a ore efficient is well intended however he at it is too personal to tell lot buyers they must ell as the placement and species. He stated his alculator" so developers can be told what they will be assessed for tree replacement, but he believes the City needs to be absolutely submissive to the needs and desires of the individual lot owner. Should there be a surplus of trees and the owners do not want trees, the City should have the option to request cash for placement in the park fund, or find another location in Lino Lakes that needs trees. Mr. Smyser stated he agrees 100% with Chair Schaps and Ms. Lane, noting there is nothing in the ordinance to require the lot owner to accept a tree. If there is a surplus of trees, language could be included to address that situation. With regard to the suggestion of cash in lieu of trees, the City Attorney has indicated that cannot be done because it requires the developer to pay for an improvement off site which is seen as being an impact fee. John Johnson thanked staff for their diligence in trying to find a way to make this work. He stated that while progress is being made, he believes there is still a ways to go. He stated Gary Uhde, his client, remains concerned and believes the ordinance needs to be worded so it works. John Johnson presented a picture of the property his client would like to develop which depicted the trees to be removed to accommodate the roadway and Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 10 building pads. With a standard grading plan, many of the trees would be removed and the trees in the rear lots would be impacted due to the change in elevation. He suggested flexibility in presenting grading plans to allow for custom grading until after the lot buyer and home style is identified. He stated this example, about 275 trees would need to be replaced or a range of 12 to 14 per lot. John Johnson commented on Gary Uhde's estimate of $10,000 per lot to meet the requirements of the tree preservation ordinance. John Johnson stated he supports staff's recommended revisions and supports placing a cap on the number of trees and ratio of trees removed for right -of -way versus for the building pad. He suggested the use of the overlay district be made available to provide for more flexibility. John Johnson stated street width flexibility would also preserve more trees. He reviewed the City of Plymouth requirement to place funds in a tree fund if the caliper inch requirement cannot be replaced. John Johnson agreed there are buyers who do not want trees and he believed it makes more sense to wait to plant the trees until after the house is constructed. He advised of two cases where the lot owner removed trees from their property after closing the sale. He agreed the lot buyer needs to be part of the "equa " John Johnson suggested staff hold a workshop with developers to discuss these nd return with a report on what is agreed with and what is not agreed with He ed th:'r. Uhde understands the need for a tree preservation ordinance but wants to <,a t is drafted in a way that it will work well John Johnson offered to help and asst w e can Mr. Corson stated his support for a stated when you consider the utilif take about 50% of the trees on a w Mr. Rafferty asked if the nu based on the size of lots John be required to replace closer to 2, and result in about 12 trees per lot. tuber of trees per lot at five or six. He s, building pads, and boulevards, it would ather than 25% so he would support a cap. ented in staff's analysis are somewhat correct is involved with. John Johnson stated they would 0 caliper inches so their costs would be much higher Mr. Rafferty stated staff is seeking recommendations on how to continue with their efforts. He stated he would like Marty Asleson to provide input on this issue as he has a background with tree preservation. Mr. Rafferty stated he also supports continuing discussions between developers and staff. Chair Schaps suggested staff schedule a workshop with developers and interested Board members. Mr. Smyser stated Mr. Asleson was involved in the drafting of this ordinance and has presented it to the Environmental Board. He stated he will schedule the requested workshop but noted it may take some time to accomplish that discussion. Mr. Smyser pointed out that a delay will mean it is not placed into effect until the next construction season. • • Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 11 Mr. Johnson noted there is only so much room for trees on a lot and in some developments there are no trees in the first place. He asked if the concern is the proper tree density rather than the number of trees removed. Mr. Smyser stated that depends on your perspective and concern about loss of trees in Lino Lakes. He noted the issue is to try to prevent tree loss in the first place. One of the incentives that is contributed to by a tree replacement requirement is sensitive development of the site. Chair Schaps asked if anyone present would like to provide additional input. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to November 8, 2000 to allow time for staff to schedule and hold a workshop with developers, and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 6 -0 Chair Schaps thanked John Johnson for his taking time to attend the meeting tonight, offer input, and volunteer to work with staff. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Schedule of Meetings, Report Packets Mr. Smyser presented the application deadlin staff lengthened the total review time betw- en recommendation meeting and the City Co outstanding issues. Overall, the revis advisory boards and governmental eeting schedule and advised that nning & Zoning Board ng to assure adequate time to resolve e allows more time for review by Mr. Rafferty stated his apprec the ability of the Board me packets prior to the meeting. Board members the Wednesday days of review time. ing about the timing but stated his concern is ve enough time to adequately review the meeting ested finding a way to get the packets delivered to b='' ore the meeting which would provide two additional Chair Schaps stated he has had the pleasure of serving on the Planning Commission for ten years and while he agrees there are times the meeting packets are large and more time is needed for review, part of the obligation when seeking the appointment or reappointment is to understand how the City has grown and expanded and that staff cannot always keep up with the amount of work. He suggested that to a large extent, if you agree to the appointment, you need to understand there may not always be enough appropriate time to read the packets without sacrificing something else. Chair Schaps stated he has always had enough time, but had the feeling that it would be nice to have a little more times. However, getting the packets out takes a lot of staff time. Chair Schaps stated that while it would be a good goal to get the meeting packets out by the Wednesday before the meeting, it may not be realistic for each meeting. Mr. Rafferty stated the members are appointed by the Council, go through the interview process, and stated they would do the best job they could to assist in the Planning Department to support the City moving forward. He stated it does not say anything about Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 12 doing a job by Wednesday when there is not enough information provided or being able to get out to the site and physically view the site during daylight hours. Mr. Rafferty stated he appreciates the long days worked by City Staff but stated he does not believe the Board receives enough information or enough time for review. He noted the meeting packet for tonight's meeting and suggested it contains nothing that would prevent it from being delivered by the Wednesday before the meeting. Mr. Rafferty stated he wants to be prepared so he can provide support and direction to the Planning Department. Chair Schaps stated the issue is if there are enough staff hours to create the information in the meeting packet, noting there are more work tasks than to prepare this meeting packet. He stated he has no reason to doubt that staff is getting the information to the Board as quickly as possible. Ms. Lane stated when serving on the Park Board, they held Monday meetings and the meeting packets were delivered the previous Thursday. She explained how she was able to accommodate that tight schedule and stated she has no problem with the current Planning & Zoning Board schedule and meeting packet delivery. Chair Schaps excused himself from the meeting a m. Ms. Lane chaired the remainder of the meeting. Mr. Johnson stated having the meeting pa et t ditional days would not help his review of the information as he has been _ w the information and visit the sites over the weekend. Mr. Rafferty stated he is asking sta provide information that will allow them as Board members to utilize, rev helpful to City staff. He stated he is not asking for anything unreasonable i em to try. Vice Chair Lane suggested if the ``''` eeting packets are completed earlier, members be called and given the option to stop by City Hall to pick them up. Mr. Smyser stated if the meeting packets are completed early, the Police Department will deliver them early. Mr. Johnson noted there have been several large detailed projects that require more review but he believes that is the exception. In that case, he would support the information being provided as soon as possible so there is adequate time for review. Vice Chair Lane agreed setting a goal for an earlier meeting packet delivery is a good suggestion. Mr. Rafferty encouraged staff to continue with the hard work they are doing and set a goal for an earlier meeting packet delivery, even if it is only one day. John Johnson stated in Brooklyn Park, staff sent copies of the public hearing notices to the public 10 -14 days in advance of the meeting. They also sent those same notices to the Board members to alert them of what was coming up. It also allowed them several additional days to visit the site. • • • • Planning & Zoning Board September 13, 2000 Page 13 Mr. Rafferty stated his support for that suggestion. Mr. Smyser stated the notices are very straight forward and could be mailed to Board members. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Corson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 5 -0. Respectfully submitted, Carla Wirth, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • • • • AGENDA ITEM V A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland MEETING DATE: October 11, 2000 TOPIC: Nancy Anderson, 325 Carl Street, Variance DESCRIPTION: This case involves a request for a Variance from the City's Zoning Ordinance, Section 3, Subd. 4.D. Accessory Buildings and Structures, 1. General Provision. c. No detached accessory structure shall be closer to the front lot line then the principal building or its attached garage. Ms. Anderson has an existing home w /attached garage at 352 Carl Street. The property is Zoned Rural and located within the Lino Air Park. There are 23 lots within the Air Park. Four (4) have hangers in front of the dwelling (one of these four is not constructed yet but a Variance was granted in May of 2000), one (1) has an attached hanger, eight (8) have hangers on the side or behind the principal building, eight (8) have no hanger, and three (3) lots remain undeveloped. In considering all requests for variance or appeal and in taking subsequent action, the City shall make a finding of fact: 1. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. 2. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to his property not created by the land owner. 3. That the hardship is not due to economic considerations alone and when a reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 4. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that would be denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. 5. That the proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. The proposed hanger will be located approximately 125' from the front property line and 5.5' from the side property line. The existing house & garage is approximately 190' from the front property line. The Ordinance requires a 30' front and 5' side setback requirement. Staff has received a letter form the adjoining property owners indicating no objection to the proposed hanger location. We have also received comments from the Air Park Association indicating this proposed location is optimum for several reasons • • outlined in their letter. The main consideration is the 7/1 transition airspace required from the runway which could not be achieved if the structure were located behind the home as required by the Ordinance. For this reason Staff believes there is a hardship and would recommend approval of the variance request. For P & Z and Council information we are considering an Ordinance Amendment that would allow accessory structures to be construction in front of the principal structure in the Rural Zoning District. However, this proposal will not be initiated until the Zoning Ordinance is updated some time next year. OPTIONS: 1. Approve Variance Request 2. Deny Variance Request 3. Return to staff for further consideration RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 - - PINE -STREET 191 -500N77--NW7-R10,17+0E-WAY-Pt-A7 NO 50 t 1, .00, 1 4" noo 0- 1-4-REET - - a -GOON.F3'-4719N OF IOW PI 1 L 43. 11131171 11111 17 2 10 MUM .14 NMI 2 13 Cti:k PL-AF NUM0ER-5•5 - --1-- - stag, !P 1111111111111111111111 SI 111111Pr / A ta 12' 17 114337,ilt7.:1171rt5 141 jaii11 „ea '.1 cricsa .,Domoki. too* mann Eargw. PatE071 IUI 111310,-.40 IA 3 55 5 6 6 MEM 2 38 4 4 3 2 NO. LINO LAKES L R EHABILITATIOI1 CENTER William J. Noel and Bonnie E. Bigler 346 Carl Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014 September 15, 2000 Planning and Zoning Committee City of Lino Lakes Re: Proposed site of Anderson hangar at 352 Carl Street, Lino Lakes To Whom It May Concern: We the undersigned, neighbors immediately to the west the Andersons, have no objection to the Anderson family building a hangar on the north side of their property. As a matter of fact, we hope to build a hangar on the north side of our property in due course. We consider the north side preferable to the south side, as it will not block our view to the south and the east. Furthermore, grouping of the two buildings will make each less obtrusive. Please grant the Andersons a variance so they can proceed with plans to build their hangar. Thank you. i '2,- ! i4 1i ♦)Gl /LGil ll&I..1 i 5 .j Bonnie E. Bigler --r • Please allow the Anderson's the variance for constructing a hanger on the north side of the property. My address is 360 Carl, the residence east of the Anderson property. Lock Susan E, Freppert • • • Lino Airpark City of Lino Lakes We have reviewed the plans for a hanger at the Nancy Anderson residence. In our view the location and design she has selected is the optimum location for the hanger. This location is optimum for the following reasons: • The location is far enough away from the runway to not interfere with the 7 to 1 transition airspace surface. • This location provides adequate space for a taxiway to the hanger and provides for a logical flow of aircraft. • This location provides for smooth and efficient access of the hanger from the front street. • This location fits in well with the surrounding homes and appears to compliment the neighbors future plans for their hanger. As I'm sure you know, each home and hanger in the airpark association is quite unique and providing harmony is always a challenge. This location and design appears to provide a consistent character to the neighborhood and appears to fit well with the adjacent homes. We support approving this hanger location and design. Lino Airpark Roger Schroeder President ;5- '_ .., , Date: 9_, S -� David Hunter Secretary Date: 9- /-Go Glen Martig Vice President Date: 7 —/_? c Tom Schmelzer Airpark Engineer Date: 12 <ser° c73- 0 2- STOR`i TODD PETERSON LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7001 73rd Avenue North 812 -500 -3093 Fax No. 680 -3622 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 uruPjurz Orrtif irate Property located in Section 7, Township 31, Rnage 22, Anoka Minnesotanty'JS7 CARL STREET (0. a I7�.__ M 4S .4- 900. — 15Lo.2I — X�r slam .4+ I Aar INVOICE NO 47482 F.B.NO 758 -65, 780 -05 SCALE: 1" = 40' O Denotes Iron Monument ❑ Denotes Wood Hub Set for excavation only x000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation r r Denotes Proposed Elevation Denotes Surface Drainage NOTE: Proposed grades are subject to results of soil tests. Proposed building information must be checked with approved budding plan and development or grading plan before excavation and construction. 4)01.5 Proposed Top of Block 'N9I,O Proposed Garage Floor 898.3 Proposed Lowest Floor Type of Building 2. S-r-pg.)' 5 Goer -. (A4SFmfNT Note: Builder must verify setback requirements for hanger with City Planning Dept. 096 0 8.n, 69'.0 rye ad 10.0 "b ?,34'3 11'9„ w a PR0po5ED RFSIPENCE o r7S i+ .3 _ _ S 34.0" • b'0 1t.94\ 9r9 )OPa 614.4} .F .919.1 Ix-N 14'0" 00.5) u WM% e91 %. 157. 33 Lot 7, Block 1, LINO AIR PARK NORTH The only easements shown ore, from plats of record or information provided by client. We hereby certify that This is n Irue and correct representation of n survey of the hnnnrinrle0 ..r +tie ..ti....., a..__.:+._a i_.,a -_., ++._ AA *kw. 1r 4 w, ' . , •.$ ., .1 .....,*M,T,A.,. ,... , .54.4&A. .. 6' ,,,1:,..:. .;. . : ...., , ,, , i'-..4 i,i'......i: .7.,.';',....7:4.; g : i - A " ',f4'.7.:',--,-','*.,-• 5 . ,. — - . — — ' ".,` -- -----.'—` ,,-A.1t-le. - •:.: ,'" -.'.•-• .-:- • :-•'f....2:,..' • t 4,4, • - 7;••••• S 1 /2 SFCTI 0\ 7 T 31 V • • • AGENDA ITEM V B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland P & Z MEETING DATE: October 11, 2000 TOPIC: Site & Building Plan Review & Minor Subdivision Mueller -Bies Funeral Home, 7050 Lake Drive BACKGROUND This review is based on the following plan submittals: Site Plan, Survey, grading, landscaping September 11, 2000 Revised site plan ANALYSIS September 26, 2000 The submittal complies with the General Business (GB) zoning standards as follows: • Building The footprint is approximately 13,700 sf. The building will be 35' high. The exterior will be a country theme consisting of face brick, cultured stone, some steel siding and asphalt shingles. A colored rendering is attached for P & Z information. The trash handling area is located within the attached garage area. Required 20,000 sq.ft. Proposed 4.5 acres Lot size minimum Lot width minimum 100 ft. 241.44 ft. Setbacks: buildings From street Rear lot line Side lot line OHW per Shoreland Ord. Parking from street rear lot line side lot line 40' 30' 10' 150' 15' 10' 10' 75' approx. 190' " 130' " + +190' 15' 165' + 10' + on north & 45' + on south Bldg. height 45' 35' Green space 25% 64% • Building The footprint is approximately 13,700 sf. The building will be 35' high. The exterior will be a country theme consisting of face brick, cultured stone, some steel siding and asphalt shingles. A colored rendering is attached for P & Z information. The trash handling area is located within the attached garage area. • Mueller -Bies Funeral Home October 11, 2000 page 2 • Lighting The submitted lighting plans meets with the requirements of the Ordinance. Light fixtures must be directed downward as provided in the Ordinance and recommended by the Environmental Board. • Signage Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and permits are required for all signs. All signs will be reviewed with the sign permit applications. An illuminated ground sign is proposed for the site but no detail has been provided to date. The Environment Board has requested that no glare be produced from the illuminated sign. • Landscaping The landscaping plan has been reviewed by our Environmental Specialist and the Environmental Board. The Board recommended additional screening of the front parking lot and use of native species were possible • Utilities City utilities are available to serve the site and are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. A copy of his report is attached for P & Z information with conditions of approval listed in this report. • Parking City Code requires 20 spaces per chapel, 1 space per vehicle and 2 spaces per residential unit for a funeral home w /an accessory apartment. The total requirement is 44 parking spaces. The plan shows parking for 109 stalls. The applicant believes this amount of parking is necessary for the use even though our Ordinance requires considerably less. No overflow parking is available in the vicinity and a large funeral may require this amount of parking. Staff would agree that 44 spaces seems inadequate for this use and concur the request for additional spaces. The applicant has agreed to provide additional landscaping along Lake Drive which will help to screen this parking area from the roadway. Roads, Access, Circulation Access and circulation patterns appear adequate to serve the site. Anoka County is still reviewing the access location and has indicated that a shared access would be preferred. As a condition of approval, access permits must be obtained from Anoka County to serve this development. According to the County, the access shown on the plan may need to be altered when Lake Drive is ultimately upgraded. The County has also indicated that an Mueller -Bies Funeral Home October 11, 2000 page 3 additional 20 feet of right -of -way will be required for the future reconstruction of Lake Drive. The County will prepare the deeds for signature and recording. • Park Dedication Park dedication will be subject to City policy. For commercial use the requirement is $ 200 per 1000 sf of commercial building. Therefore, the park dedication will be approximately $ 2,300. (Based on 11,554 square feet of building) ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD ACTION The Environmental Board reviewed the project on September 27, 2000 and recommended approval of the project. A copy of their comments are attached. One of the Boards concerned related to the OHW level on Rice Lake. For P & Z and Council information, the proposed construction meets the setback requirement from the OHW according to our Shoreland Ordinance. The DNR has reviewed the plans and expressed no additional concerns with the proposed development. The RCWD tabled the site plan review at their 9 -27 -00 meeting with authorization for administrative action (this is an approval with conditions). MINOR SUBDIVISION The property in question is a 7.6 acre unplatted parcel of land that is proposed to be split into two parcels. Parcel A, the Mueller -Bies site, will be 4.5 acres in size and Parcel B will be 3.1 acres in size — less right -of -way dedication required by Anoka County. The Zoning Ordinance provides a minimum lot area of 20,000 sq. ft. for the General Business Zoning District with a minimum frontage of 100'. Both proposed parcels exceed the Ordinance requirements. Parcel A is 500' in length and Parcel B is 446.5. Staff would recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision with the dedication of 20 additional feet of right -of -way to Anoka County for the reconstruction of Lake Drive. A revised survey will be required prior to Council reviewing indicating this land dedication, not easement dedication as indicated on the current site plan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Minor Subdivision and Site Plan In review of this plan, staff would recommend approval of the minor subdivision and site plan review with the following conditions: 1. Proper building permits are obtained and include a 1% escrow deposit to insure completion of site improvements. 2. The revised landscaping plan shall include additional screening along Lake Drive and is subject to review and approval by City Staff. This plan shall be submitted and obtain the approval of the City Environmental Specialist prior to City Council review. 3. Park Dedication shall be required per the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Mueller -Bies Funeral Home October 11, 2000 page 4 4. An additional 20 feet of right of way shall be dedicated to Anoka County by Deed, prior to issuance of any Building Permits. 6. A revised survey document, indicating the right -of -way dedication, shall be provided prior to Council review. 7. Engineering: plans shall be revised as indicated in the Engineer's report dated October 5, 2000. 8. All lighting shall be directed downward and produce no glare on the roadway. 9. Approval of the site plan is not an implied approval of signage. Any signs required a sign permit and must comply with the City's Sign Ordinance. 10. A shared driveway agreement shall be provided for the entrance drive. 11. Access permits shall be obtained from Anoka County Highway Department prior to construction on the site. OPTIONS 1. Approve minor subdivision and site plan review with conditions outlined above. 2. Return to staff for further consideration. RECOMMENDATION • Option 1 • • Memorandum DATE: October 5, 2000 TO: Jeff Smyser, City Planner Mary Kay Wyland, Planning Coordinator FROM: John Powell, City Engineer RE: Site Plan Review Comments Our comments regarding the site plan submittals for the October 11, 2000, Planning and Zoning meeting are as follows: Mueller -Bies Funeral Home 1. The ordinary high water elevation and the ground water elevation must be provided. 2. A detail for the pond outlet must be included in the plans. 3. The size of the watermain that runs parallel to Lake Drive must be increased to 12 -inch and extended to the southwest edge of the site. The funeral home will be served with a 6 -inch branch off of this main. 4. Currently, the basement floor is below the high water elevation of the pond. Either the • basement floor elevation needs to be raised or the high water elevation of the pond needs to be lowered. 5. Storm water runoff calculations need to be provided for the 10 -year storm for both the existing and proposed conditions. 6. The proposed pond needs to provide 1 foot of free board above the high water elevation. 7. A gate valve is needed at the connection to the existing watermain. 8. The cover for watermain that is 10 inches or Tess is 8 feet. 9. The minimum storm sewer size is 15 inches. 10. RCWD and ACHD review and /or permits are required. • Intertech Plastic 1. A detail for the construction entrance must be shown as well as the location of the entrance on the grading plan. 2. The 903, 904, and 905 proposed contours near the southwest corner of the proposed building do not tie into the proper existing contours and must be corrected. 3. The utility plans shows two sanitary services connecting into the existing manhole. This is not acceptable. A new manhole must be constructed to facilitate the service for the proposed building as well as a future service for the property to the west. A single 8 -inch main would then be constructed from the proposed manhole to the existing manhole. 4. The invert elevation of the sanitary sewer service at the proposed building must be shown. 5. The need for a fire hydrant on site must be reviewed by the fire department. 6. RCWD and ACHD review and/or permits are required. If you have any questions, please let me know. 16 3 4 2 13 111 to — OA 1s . Q 22F RM FARM ', 9:• 9a la ® 3 oQ m© v0= ,a D. [ p �b. dal 6IP© oM © ®v =MC o T>DO - / In 62 o •L L 3 1117 4 4 �5 5 6 6 '4 2 30 63 � 4 h� litme5'ATE IK 4TX— STREE 0049 AIAWY 1 TREET I 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 153-- S 2 3 8 4 4I5.. 3s 0 AUD, 9— LINO LAKES L 4 / 9 -PAR% REHABILITAT1011 CENTER APOLLO MC CI 29 X.m® © orb, 30 -mm' El vp‘rkb a �f� ET 1aa MARSHAN LAKE 20 2 19 3 10 ,i2 UCI ad e sue. ®° leo o d _v -9-1� 21q'1Ia 3 wag sL 9 2 1 • liotP NIP3 I �Ntf NORTH 00 (09.10) RICE LAKE 2. RESHAN 5 3335 West St. Germain P.O. Box 1228 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302 -1228 (320) 251 -4109 Fax: (320) 251 -4693 Mueller -Bies Funeral Home Lino Lakes, Minnesota The approximate 13,700 square foot funeral home to be constructed in Lino Lakes, Minnesota on Lake Drive (between 7040 and 7080) is to be completed so that Laurie Bies, Jim Nielsen, and the staff of Mueller -Bies Funeral Home of Roseville, Minnesota can provide the families of Lino Lakes and the surrounding areas with quality services and a facility they deserve during their special time of need. The Mueller -Bies Funeral Home was established in 1906 and is a fourth generation family -owned funeral home with both Laurie Bies and Jim Nielsen residing in the area. The exterior of the facility will have a country theme, with a combination of stone, brick, and metal siding with asphalt layered shingles. It will also contain approximately 130 -140 asphaltic parking stalls with curb and gutter per City • requirements. The landscape design will be "Prairie Style" with input from Central Landscape Supply and from The Prairie Is My Garden company of Clearwater, Minnesota. • The interior will contain a spacious Lobby and two separate Chapels. Each Chapel will have a private Family Room adjoining it. There will be a private Arrangement Room and Casket Selection Room containing approximately 24 caskets. The Preparation Room will be built to meet/exceed all OSHA regulations and specifications. There will be an attached three stall Garage with Living Quarters on the second level and a small Mechanical Room in the basement. The building will be completely sprinklered per City codes. We anticipate construction to begin at your earliest favorable approval of this application (November 1, 2000). Construction is expected to take approximately six to seven months, with completion before June, 2001. Your favorable approval of this project will greatly be appreciated. The Mueller -Bies Funeral Home is excited to become a part of the Lino Lakes community and to provide the families a quality service during their special time of need. RECEIVED SEP 1 1 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES Miller FUNERAL HOME DFSIGN 8c CONS'T'RUCTION A Division of Miller Architects & Builders • 1 41.7A °A .7 • r --.72.71R7 Orr fic "op • - vrp.re ."11NG.SET84 / APPROXIMATE EXTENTS OF EXISTING WET I ANDS • • / / / / / / • / / / / / / r / / / / . , / / / / / / r / / / / / / / / / 401 . / f4- • / --/////1.` 88 PARKING STALLS 7 A/ • / ,;,"e r / / 1 / / • / / 1' / / / / / /1 / / / / I / / / / / / /I i / / /1 / / , / / / / I ' 20 PARKING STALLS / / 1 / / / , / 1 / 1 / / 1/ ir , A11•244. L•i• ft& $1.1•-. .......,,, 4,....tz4. gati 41,41. 14+0 • / LANDSCAPING PLAN TH 1111-11" PARKING iTHAcK I / / / / ' // 1 - - --/- APPROXIMATE EXTEN T5 / OF FASTING WET LANDS AREAS. TOTAL SITE AREA 1.14.14, SQ MT BUILDING AREA 11,334 913 PT PARKING & SIDEWALK ARRA 14,11/II DO YI I I 6 COMMON BOTANICAL NAME PLANTING SCHEDULE L A ULAC. OIAMON PUMP (apio•WpRib room) rit-- I 5EDGEORASS . !2, • C COMMCD REED i . • D IIAGO IONDIVIED (For.www psOinwo) 1 ; L .....E DROAD-1.E.AF ARROWEAD (SailtsWIDWO Z i 1 1 I 1 111 I I 1 ; ! ; ' 6 I I . tr . :70111/061t tr. . CISRAINFIt !WIDMER A5itGEEN (P.Ww Mwolotal ' 6.0' • PM/WNW PURIAITED WINE /WAR (Aar DauJorunD I . I IMO 11.611014E0 DECK PAPER (11Wia pappIldnO r tip°. ; • .1-$06/1"4.10 MALAPK.0 eto. i DAM AMP KAMM J MEMO MION NOTED L rem, 1,1/.11.6 wA6.6•11. M.A.. PRIM TO Ift.STALLANAr S71132 Num5EX ARE ILI OE nANIF.01,111.1.1,....01-4, 1.141" 1.661.4 Of 1/1.6.5.01A NAME SPECE-9 :NAN GRA66, 011.1(51-al LAMA Otal:fiikll vaDfU7NEILS RANT/ Fl AG0i `10 TAff 1.11.1.01- MEM? 0/FX KW ----L.... regmaamq meow \ 0 DETAIL PLANTING RECEW SU:n/6'100 CITY OF LINO LA ES 012L_U_ [1[01[11.4/ARY fil©q t1 Caratbruicllon MILSer 11111111110111111117011111111110 AKIN! 13CISIR BUILDERS JOS VONT ST. GOMM P.O. BOX OM MI GUILD. MINNERMA SOM MINTZ 1320; /SLOW r1.71, •30 u•rm REVISIONS SKEEYTTILI .-kliPSCAPiNG RAM, DRAWN DV: 1JP DAM 9 26.2(Kr SK11117.Y0. AO 111 C.S.A.H. NO, 23 (LAKE HIVE) k PROPERW LAC 25744011-1/ 54.• 3o) 0==arliP\ =ono .012.7PIRF. \ 0 1 t.1 ) ) essolost Man Wro sifted 1A241 O A. 0ty COlog ?Mentor Oseription 3 LO0E-CASTCORF MO 25011 13 WIMAAIE LADO ▪ lonans LLF 250 W*77147,4. MUD 112042401.125 20500 0.12 (0033)0.00 2540 2 RS 04-0.400 037000 1.1.1421.410 250 WATT M2111. 10IXO 52042001.ES 10500 672 • c • 04D10010114 (RECAST 7172 RA WORT. arrcss MOWN 250 WATT NTIL HAL( NOPIIONTAL DAN 511021105.05 20500 072 Oesolse33 Awl oll4.0010410S l.233 0.133 04 AvAelAn 0.333 •1.0:1 let ash *333 0.233 1L4:1 10031 Lad • 25.0 • 25.0 C 25.0 OA 4 0. 25.0 0.0 0.0 A :SO 0.0 A OA A 250 • ISA 10 0. ZLO ZLO 00 (ID 11 12 C 25.0 C 250 OD 0.0 so C 25.0 J Southwest New MILLER FUNERAL HOMES 1 of 1 WEST ELEVATION w•axr<r 3 -.sue '= •• s :14ti "g1 i- .1T Kli - '".`i ° '3 -,s. teau. tgEk r v +i L i ilfe- xk s L _ • A'- .41-`4:. '5}s;, y, '?' .- .ir • (��y:; `i �TSF•alir. -� •wry _uSSv..atu m• aE- �a� iu ? -aau — 11(11eNT SIENNA`e1RNfiLE — ROM PRF.FlICRPD MFTN. ROOF FOGF TOESSIN TAM PREFIN%5IED SOFRT E FASCIA SYSTEM 'DOESRIN TAM STEEL SWING - 'U0E9J1 TAM PRE}TMSMED AE TA: FRIEM OOARD .— SEALED MAIM CEDAR TAPERED COLUMNS 910E&'r COUNiR(MCA-STONE CULTURE? STONE COLUMN SA5E VI” PN.OMINO.FAM DIU= NORTH ELEVATION VD'd0 0' JAo ST ELEVATION vE,•.Aa - _ E 2 iR s :,, —... ice- - 6,..-E:ti.} a,+.SC;Sp-g- - a3.�- tea.•:;: ^,.; :4.'' u2E ^ I _ - u r. _ y r rTFi - a a .-.A� r SOUTH ELEVATION vs .10(P ra- n Miller M13111E(75 &IP-S UMS • 3335 WEST R. GERMAN P.0.102 I= ST. CLOUD, MINNESOTA S[l0T OFPICS.: (320)251 .4105 FAX: (130)140-FT11 RECEIVED pRELOOvVi1OLV,\ ° Y Hoq [Fog' Con Stan tenon REVISIONS SHEET TTTI2 EXTP.RIOR ELEYA71014S DRAWN EY: TJP DATE: 9.12000 WET A2 • • • L. 0 1- RECYCLING AREA r :5 F),MILY LOUNGE OULILIE1 UMW LEXICLI uoupd 01:11DOCJ DODGE/ Ed-ULM 01:1000 amo.ci Imam Of1.12:1 EILIDLIQ * ULIDULI U17LIGE1 LgrILI FAMILY LOUNGE. CI 10 CI 1-2 EL1 LJotJootJ MAIN LEVEL PLAN NORTH tmo-ot 11.554 m ft. LOODY wsrlouts CM110 tJrjrjnLJLJrJ .EihrdEHHL-i'd HP;P0 REERh _ 3, 10 H IQ 10 - - L1111247.1115 0 L_ MECHANICAL LOWER LEVEL PLAN NORTH two-ot 1260 m. UPPER LEVEL PLAN NORTH 1/8c f 1160 Miller 1111LCIS & BUILDERS • ME WEST St GERMAIN P.O. IKE IZE ST.CLOU�MINN!SOtA5M2 ORRICE 021) 7.51.410, FAX, PIE 2414711 CaiTY OF LINO LAK PREL[imukumf F}© Far C©nenyAcru REVISIONS SHEET 7717.8 FLOOR PLANE DRAWN 117; DAM VI I 0.172000 SEU327 NO Al • • NORTH 14' PINE 14' MAPLE ., =1e' ELY 12' PINE �M1 - 16' ELY 16' ELM 14' 43.9 12' ELM 14"1444- 41141 , / , , E% SAN MH MILLER FUNERAL HO TOP 902.93 INV 688.51 EX SAN MH TOP 894.56 INV 887.84 51'MH/ ORFILE.'890.0 INV. /892.00 TOP 894.1 12- RCP420.5X 14U' +APRON) 2". / rr y GRADING PLAN 898 896 hn m RETAINING WALL a, P 0 9, CURB CUT DETAL 2' w NOTES PRIOR TO ROUGH GRADING, INSTALL SILT FENCE IN LOCATIIONS SHOWN OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE WILL BE REOUIRED WHERE LOCAL CONDITIONS REQUIRE. ROUGH GRADING SHALL PROCEED ON AN AREA BY AREA BASIS TO MINIMIZE UNCOMPLETED AREAS. AS EACH AREA OUTSIDE THE STREET IS GRADED, PROVIDE NATIVE TOPSOIL, SEED, AND MULCH ANCHORED WITH A STRAIGHT SET DISC WITHIN 48 HOURS OF FINE GRADING. MAINTAIN AND REPAIR SILT FENCES (INCLUDING REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATED SILT) UNTIL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. SEED TO BE MnDOT TYPE 500, MULCH TYPE T (2 TONS /ACRE). SEED FOR PONDING AREAS 10 BE MnDOT TYPE 15A (WET MEADOW MIX). TOPSOIL TO BE RESPREAD TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES ON THE FRONT AND REAR PORTIONS OF THE LOTS. kc -830 — X 886.2 X 886.2 EXISTING CONTOURS NEW CONTOURS EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS SILT FENCE CERTIFICATION I hereby certify thot this plop, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Professional Engineer under the laws of the Stote of Minnesota. Susan E. Fussell Dote: Lic. No. 25527 9.1. A BALE CHECK DETAIL PJ. DITCH Ban 'hates TwN• > pnt•d that 1 0, / SEE DETAL--' BFI-0M RECOMMENDED SPACING BETWEEN DITCH CHECKS DITCH GRADE (X) SPACING (FT.) 2 100 • 75 6 50 8 40 10 25 A NOTE: Point A newel ea higher that Paint NOTE: 1e. 2 N. s 2 h wood stoke. or r•Nfor0np pre F each pee and wM•dd•d N that pram 10 h min. DESIGN CRITERIA (BALES): Storm 44.eu•ncl0 2 24 hr Mao. 6o. velocity. 5 rL /•oc' Mo. ditch prods: 55 Moe. droN09• ores 2 aces 2%2%4' WOOD STAKES 04' O.C. SILT FENCE PROPEX 'SILT STOP- FABRIC OR EQUAL- FASTEN TO STAKES EXISTING GRADE 10' YIN. BACKF1LL —BURY BOTTOM 6' OF FABRIC PROPOSED EMBANKMENT ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NO SCALE GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FETE ) I inch . 30 91 DRAMC 60 SO" JOB 840: 560 -001 DATE: 9/19/00 CHECK 80. DAC Nor56p001GR 94E65 1 el 1 N0 DATE OCSCRIPTICO4 84 S P 1 1 70 30 CITY OF UNU LAKES S METRO fIF ifIFY3ii1 i Sii i pl IV 2,5 ka.-%StafriReetait: LAND SURVEYING k ENGINEERING •A P w4/412 County (86 Road X0174 Little Canada, (511 7(88 -083Y Email: rune•metrolr.com r.sm- r°` t 1 � NV WAN / t / / / / /, / / / / / / / / / / / / / / n / / n/ / J CONNECT TO EX 12• DIP WATERMAN / 12X6- TEE / 1 ) „ ./. 1 / O IT S.. O .v 8458.71 / y °i CONNECT TO EX 14H V 8AO nn e / yo / A 1 1n r O N / MILLER FUNERAL HOME FINAL UTIIJTY PLAN FOR MILLER FUNERAL HOME DESIGN + DEVELOPER 3335 WEST ST GERMAIN STREET ST. CLOUD, MN 56302 Telephone: (320) 251 -4109 SYMBOLS --- cAs - - -- DENOTES — —UT— — DENOTES - — — DENOTES ....—.M1 DENOTES • Ma. DENOTES DENOTES DENOTES ID DENOTES Sx DENOTES ® DENOTES WELL 69 DENOTES CATCH BASIN ® DENOTES STORM MANHOLE • DENOTES SANITARY MANHOLE GAS LINE UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINE SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN GAS MARKER TELEPHONE BOX POWER POLE FIRE HYDRANT 7 TON PARKING LOT PAVEMENT SECTION 1 -7/2- 2341 WEAR /NC COURSE 11=' 2- 2331 BASE COURSE a ST CL 5 1008 CRUSHED STONE tSa SOIL Rgt'0RT WILL VERIFY CITY'S 7TON REOUIREMENT B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER 3• RAD 3- RAD. " SLOPE 3/4- 7. • SLOPES /4'OPEg.FT 12- 20- 1 9 TON PARKING LOT PAVEMENT SECTION 1-1/7 2341 WEAR /NC COURSE II L_7 2331 BASE COURSE 17 • CL 5 1008 CRUSHED STONE INDICATES AREAS FOR 9 TON PARKING LOT SECTION CERI TICATION hereby certify that this pion, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am o duly Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Susan E. Fussell Dote: Lic. No. 25527 DRAWN BY SEE JOB NO :569 -001 DATE: 9/11/00 CHECK BY:. DWG NO:569001UT SHEET: 1 of 1. NO. DATE DESCRIPTION BY NORTH UTILITY CONTACTS F FCTRI0 NSP L15: NSP TELEPHONF: OWEST CART F: MEDIA ONE PUBI IC U11117IFS CITY OF UNO LAKES TOM DEWOLFE Phone: (651) 982 -2400 Fax: (651) 982 -2499 DEVEI OPER MILLER FUNERAL HOME DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION RUSSELL KARASCH Phone: (320) 267 -8423 Far (320) 251 -4693 ENGINEER Metro Lond Surveying h Engineering Susan Fussell, P.E Phone: (651) 766 -0112 For (651) 766 -0612 SURVEYOR Metro Lond Surveying & Engineering JIM BRAULT Phone: (651) 766 -0112 Fop (651) 766 -0612 •Utiities mopped from data gathered from the preceeding sources. These are approximate locotions only. CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL BEFORE DIGGING. Telephone boxes, gas marker, storm pipe in v., hydrants and power poles were field located by METRO LAND SURVEY. ME NOTES: BENCHMARKS PRIMARY BENCHMARK: IP SW CORNER 896.37 ROW REBAR 896.46 STE BENCHMARK (ESTABLISHED BY METRO LAND SURVEYING 6 ENGINEERING, LLC) RECEIVED S E P 1 1 2000 C OF LINO LAKES (IN FELT) 1 Inch - 50 ft. METRO IATID SURVEEYU4O t ENCHNEEtRING 412 County Road D, Little Canada. MN 55117 Telephone: (851) 788 -0112 FAX: (651) 788 -0812 Eme11 eurve•metrols nom CERTWJLCATE OF SURVEY /..:-/ / 2 / 4p / - NW CDR. OF GOVT 45 i ' LOT 3, SEC. 20 i/ I / I.; 3 /.,, /'/ - - - - -. 14.00 /N89b w / .:. r i / \ /- /// f7 - G > nww�u WN 0 /,..' f / 4( 1. �I Y o "U' -, o S O ,. �I §8 ' 2 1 I / ��I a F m0 1 r.: '�V a d rte. '1 •'7 v / ____L.21.57.17.1.,. EXCEP00N 2) 1 ,'•• 286.87, --- / CEPTIOII -2 .S 7 �/S�n / ;O �a, /r\, m ur 6- - 07 0 67 1 1 S89e �/ A, ,� 1 /, ''.14'"''' b g- 4' / r 150.00 _ !1 - B'19'W • EXCEPTION 1 4. -- 1305.34 -- -- 1130 -- (EAST DEED) 589°20'25 "E BRUCE & 3-%ANSOX N. LINE OF GOV'T LOT 3, SEC. 20,,•- T. 31, R. 22. 1,._60 FEET ROAD EASEMENT- -, r/ 841.34 it T IT. 216734174.12 7- PARCEL A AREA 194075 SgFt± 4.5 Acres± 238.68 424.55 <_ • EpG� / - •tPNp / 05 41 / \ < (0'''/ to �g6/ ./ ri e /4 461 VPN/ c�w3 1 / EDGE i/ i• .i. 1 • s -/ / ii. E/ r' , , -.p5 ',l. / / , -Syn / • i, / / E'/ / OF / PARCEL B 6 AREA .0" ati 135527 SgFt± G� <� 3.1 Acres 279.91 .- S89 °46'02 "W t "- - -• NORTH LINE OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 19, 7.31, R.22 \ ALSO SOUTH LINE OF NORTH 1/2, SECTION 19. X95$ e )' 6, / rye �b / / Ct, / .. / 210•00 137.85 S89 °46'02 "W LAND SURVEYING & ENGINEERING 412 East County Road D, Little Canada, MN 55117 Telephone: (651)766 -0112 Fax: (851)766 -0812 E -mail surveyme trots. com NT l I I / / FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SURVEY THE NORTH LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 19, T. 31, R140. 22 15 ASSUMED TO BEAR N89 °46'02 "E. DENOTES 1/2" MONUMENT FOUND UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY MONUMENT 1 a a NF, G0 S°a1nF , I A p,(.Pc • G a e "§- : • � I k G � G S� S <'2' 1 C. SOUTH LINE OF NORTH 1/2, SECTION 20. T.31, R.22 ALSO NORTH LINE OF SOUTH 1/2, SECTION 20. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am 0 duly licensed fond surveyor under the lows of the state of Minnesota. Doted this day of 2000 8 y. Surveyor, Minnesota License No. 17765 LAND 124.68 175.32 NE Cor. of Gov't Lot 3, Sec. 20 115 a NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE 50 100 20a eD ( IN FEET ) I Inch o 100 ft. DESCRIPTION FOR PARCEL A All that port of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Ouorter of Section 19 and 011 that port of Government Lot 3, Section 20. all in Township 31 North, Range 22 West, City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County Minnesota• bounded on the west by the eostedy right of way line of Loke Drive, formerly known as State Truck Highway No. 49, and bounded on the north by the north line of sold Government Lot 3, and bounded on the south by the south line of said Southeost Quarter of the Northeast Ouorter, and bounded on the southeast by the following described line: Beginning at o point on the south line of the Southeost Ouorter of the Northeast Ouorter of Section 19, Township 31 North. Rouge 22 West. distant 210.00 feet west of the southeast corner of sold Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Ouorter; thence northeasterly to a point on the north line of Government Lot 3, Section 20, Township 31 North, Range 22 West. distant 300.00 feel west of the northeost comer of said Government Lot 3, and sold described line there terminating. • Excepting from the obove - described parcel, the following described four porcels: Exception Parcel 1) That port of the Southeast Ouorter of the Northeast Ouorter of Section 19, and that part of Government Lot 3, Section 20. all in Township 31 North, Ronge 22 West, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: .. Beginning of o point on the north line of said Government Lot 3, distant 14.00 feet east from the Northwest corner of sold Government Lot 3: thence on on assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 18 minutes 40 seconds West and parallel •with the west line of sold Government Lot 3. o distance of 384.00: thence South 18 degrees 18 minutes 40 seconds West 129.00 feet: thence South 89 degrees 08 minutes 19 seconds Eost 189.87 feet; thence North 0 degrees 18 m1 es nut 40 seconds Eost 507.07 feet to the north line of said Government Lot 3; thence North 89 degrees 08 minutes 19 seconds West along said north line of Government Lot 3, distonce of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning. Exception Parcel 2) That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, and that part of Government Lot 3, Section 20, all In Township 31 North, Range 22 West, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Government Lot 3; then easterly along the northerly line of said Government Lot 3, o distonce of 14.0 feel; then southerly on o line which is 14.0 feet easterly of and parallel with the westerly line of sold Government Lot 3 (sold westerly line hoeing on assumed beoring of South 0 degrees. 00 minutes), is distance of 384.00 feet to the actual point of beginning of tract to be described; then North 84 degrees. 57 minutes, 37 seconds West. o distance of 286.87 feet to the centerline of State Trunk Highway No. 8; then South 17 degrees, 40 minutes, 10 seconds West, along said centerline, o distance of 95.28 feet; then South 78 degrees, 40 minutes, 15 seconds Eost, distonce of 280.66 feet; then North 18 degrees. 00 minutes, 00 seconds East, o distance of 129.0 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to said State Truck Highwoy No. 8. Exception Porch 3) Thot port lying north and west of Exception Parcel 1 and Exception Parcel 2 as described above. Exception Parcel 4) Surfside Addition, according to the plot thereof on fde and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Anoka County, Minnesota Which lies south of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of Outlot 8, sold Surfside Addition, thence North 43 degrees 15 minutes 53 seconds Eost olong the west line of sold Outlot 8 510.39 feet to the point of beginning of the fine to be described; thence North 86 degrees 53 minutes 39 seconds West 424.55 feet to the easterly right of way line of sold Lake Drive and said line there terminating. DESCRIPTION FOR PARCEL B All (hot part of the Southeost Ouorter of the Northeast Ouorter of Section 19 and all thot part of Government Lot 3, Section 20, all in Township 31 North, Range 22 West, City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, bounded on the west by the easterly right of way line of Lake Drive• formerly known as Stole Truck Highway No. 49. and bounded on the north by the north line- of said Government Lot 3, and bounded on the south by the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Ouorter, and bounded on the southeast by the following described line: Beginning at 0 point on the south line of the Southeast Ouorter of the Northeast Ouarler of Section 19, Township 31 North. Range 22 West, distant 210.00 feet west of the southeast corner of sold Southeost Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence northeasterly to o paint on the north line of Government Lot 3, Section 20, Township 31 North, Range 22 West, distant 300.00 feet west of the northeast corner of said Government Lot 3, and said described line there terminating. Excepting from the obove - describetl porch, the following described four parcels: Exception Parcel 1) Thot port of the Southeost Ouorter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19. and that port of Government Lot 3, Section 20. all In Township 31 North, Range 22 West. Anoka County. Minnesoto, described as follows: Beginning at 0 point on the north line of said Government Lot 3, distant 14.00 feet east from the Northwest corner of sold Government Lot 3; thence on an assumed beoring of South 0 degrees 18 minutes 40 seconds West and porollel with the west line of sold Government Lot 3, o distonce of 384.00; thence South 18 degrees 18 minutes 40 seconds West 129.00 feet: thence South 89 degrees 08 minutes 19 seconds East 189.87 feet; thence North 0 degrees 18 minutes 40 seconds East 507.07 feet to the north line of sold Government Lot 3; thence North 89 degrees 08 minutes 19 seconds West along soid north line of Government Lot 3, distance of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning. Exception Parcel 2) That port of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19. end thot part of Government Lot 3, Section 20, oil in Township 31 North, Range 22 West, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing of the Northwest corner of said Government Lot 3; then easterly olong the northerly line of sold Government Lot 3, o distonce of 14.0 feet; then southerly on 0 line which is 14.0 feet easterly of and porollN with the westerly line of said Government Lot 3 (sold westerly Inc I having an 0ssumed bearing of South 0 degrees. 00 minutes), a distonce of 384.00 feet to the actual point of beginning of tract to be described; then North 84 degrees. 57 minutes, 37 seconds West, a distance of 286.87 feet to the centerline of Stole Trunk Highway No. 8: then South 17 degrees, 40 minutes. 10 seconds West, along said centerline, 0 distance of 95.28 feet; lhm South 78 degrees, 40 minutes, 15 seconds Eost. o distonce of 280.66 feet; then North 18 degrees, 00 minutes, 00 East. o distance of 129.0 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to said State Truck Highway No. 8. Exception Porch 3) Thot part lying north and west of Exception Parcel 1 and Exception Parcel 2 as described obove. Exception Porcel 4) Surfside Addition, according to the plat thereof on Ide and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Anoka County, Minnesota Which lies south of the following described line: (��1 Commencing of the southwest corner of Outlot B, sold Surfside Addition. thence North 43 degrees 15 minutes 53 seconds East along the west line of said Outlo B 51 .3 l5 the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 86 degrees 53 minutes 39 seconds West 424.55 feet to the easterly right of way Tine of said ke Drive and said line there terminating. EtVED SEP 1 1 am CITY OF LINO LAKE AGENDA ITEM V. C STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: October 11, 2000 TOPIC: Minor Subdivision Site & Building Plan Review North American Composites Company BACKGROUND The application includes a minor subdivision and a site and building plan review. North American Composites Company proposes to construct a new distribution facility on the site. The company will also conduct repackaging of the product into different size containers on site as well as distribution. The product is polyester resins, fiberglass, and related products. This review is based on the following plan submittals: Certificate of Survey 9/12/00 rec'd Preliminary Site Paving Plan 9/11/00 rec'd Landscaping Plan 9/11/00 rec'd Drainage Calculations and info 9/11/00 rec'd Exterior Elevations 9/11/00 rec'd Building Floor Plan/North Building Elevation ANALYSIS Preliminary Site Plan Preliminary Site Grading Plan Preliminary Site Utility Plan TIF application letter Preliminary Site Lighting Plan 9/11/00 rec'd 9/11/00 rec'd 9/11/00 rec'd 9/11/00 rec'd 9/11/00 rec'd 9/19/00 rec'd The site is in the LI Light Industrial zoning district. The submittal complies with the LI zoning standards as follows: Required Proposed Lot size minimum 1 acre 2.39 acres Lot width minimum 100 ft 340 ft Setbacks: buildings from street rear lot line side lot line parking from street rear lot line side lot line 50 ft 30 ft 10 ft 15 ft 5 ft 5 ft 50 39 30 15+ 40+ 30 Bldg. height 45 ft 26 Green space 10% 45% • • • North American Composties October 11, 2000 page 2 • Building The building footprint is approximately 24,980 sf. The warehouse portion will cover about 20,120 sf and office portion will cover about 4860 sf. The warehouse portion will be 26' 4" high. The office portion will be 16' 4" high. The exterior walls of the warehouse portion of the building will be precast concrete panels. The office portion exterior will be decorative concrete block. The roof will be standing seam metal on both portions of the building. The office entry and loading docks are on the east side of the building. An automatic gate will separate the front parking area from the loading area. A six -foot chain link fence will surround the rear parking and loading area. The trash area will be screened with masonry to match the office exterior. • Lighting Cut -sheet pictures of proposed light fixtures show hooded fixtures for all but the F -4 fixture (Lumark Nite Watch). The others are shoebox or hooded fixtures, but F -4 directs light horizontally from the wall. This is not acceptable under our policy of requiring that lighting be directed down rather than horizontally or up. Another fixture must be substituted for the Lumark Nite Watch. The lighting photometric plan indicates that lighting will meet City maximum of 1 foot candle at the center line of a public street. We will check to ensure the requirement will be me with the replacement of the fixture noted above. • Signage Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and permits are required for all signs. All signs will be reviewed with the sign permit applications. • Landscaping The submitted landscaping plan is extensive and includes numerous native seeds. The applicant used the draft new landscaping ordinance as a guide. However, the City Environmental Specialist wants revisions to the plan regarding species and soil treatment. Another landscaping plan must be submitted and obtain the Environmental Specialist's approval. • Utilities The City Engineer has reviewed the preliminary utility plan and grading plan. Some revisions are necessary, as listed in his October 5 memo. The revisions to the plans must be submitted and obtain the City Engineer's approval before City Council approval. The • • North American Composties October 11, 2000 page 3 City Engineer has communicated these issues to the applicant and revisions should not be a problem. • Parking The project includes warehousing and office space. Parking requirements must be calculated separately then totaled. For the office space, our code requires three spaces plus one space per 200 sf. For warehouse, the requirement is one space per 2000 sf plus one space fore each company -owned truck. For the purposes of calculating parking spaces, the ordinance requirement is to use 90% of the gross building area. However, when the applicant's architect supplies the actual floor area, we have used that area as a more accurate indication of actual usage. This can reduce the number of required parking stalls and reduce impervious surface area. The total requirement is 29 parking spaces plus one space for each company -owned truck. The plan shows 27 spaces and three truck parking spaces. There is enough area in the southeast corner of the parking lot for several more parking spaces. The additional spaces just need to be striped. • Roads, Access, Circulation The site will gain access to Apollo Drive via a shared driveway on the east edge of the site. The driveway will be shared with Contract Hardware. The driveway was reviewed as part of the Contract Hardware review. It complies with the joint powers agreement with Anoka County that covers the number and type of accesses on Apollo Drive. Parking will be available for 18 vehicles in the front of the site. The remaining parking stalls are in the rear of the site, through a set of automatic gates. Trucks will enter the site from Apollo Drive, and drive through the gates to the loading docks. There are three loading docks and a drive -in door. • Park Dedication Park dedication will be subject to the City policy. The requirement is $133 per 1000 sf of commercial building. The footprint is 24,980 sf. Therefore, the park dedication would • be $3322. actual floor area code requirement required spaces office 3,000 3 spaces plus 1/200 sf 15 + 3 =18 warehouse 22,000 1/2000 sf 11 TOTAL 29 The total requirement is 29 parking spaces plus one space for each company -owned truck. The plan shows 27 spaces and three truck parking spaces. There is enough area in the southeast corner of the parking lot for several more parking spaces. The additional spaces just need to be striped. • Roads, Access, Circulation The site will gain access to Apollo Drive via a shared driveway on the east edge of the site. The driveway will be shared with Contract Hardware. The driveway was reviewed as part of the Contract Hardware review. It complies with the joint powers agreement with Anoka County that covers the number and type of accesses on Apollo Drive. Parking will be available for 18 vehicles in the front of the site. The remaining parking stalls are in the rear of the site, through a set of automatic gates. Trucks will enter the site from Apollo Drive, and drive through the gates to the loading docks. There are three loading docks and a drive -in door. • Park Dedication Park dedication will be subject to the City policy. The requirement is $133 per 1000 sf of commercial building. The footprint is 24,980 sf. Therefore, the park dedication would • be $3322. • North American Composties October 11, 2000 page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD ACTION The Environmental Board reviewed the project on September 27. Recommendations included attention to infiltration in stormwater design, use of native species in the landscaping plan, assurance that lighting will be directed downward, and attention to soil compaction when possible. Infiltration will be designed in to the extent possible. Native seeds are included. Lighting will be directed downward. The issues will be addressed with a revised landscaping plan to be reviewed by the Environmental Specialist. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Approval should include the following conditions: 1. Lighting fixtures shall be shielded and not direct light up or horizontally. The Lumark Nite -Watch fixture (F -4 on lighting plan) is not acceptable. A substitute shall be submitted for approval before City Council approval of the project. 2. Twenty -nine parking spaces shall be striped. • 3. The decorative concrete block on the office portion of the building shall be identified for the building permit application to the satisfaction of the building official. 4. Another landscaping plan must be submitted and obtain the Environmental Specialist's approval before City Council approval. 5. The City Engineer's issues listed in the October 5, 2000 memo must be addressed to his satisfaction. The revisions to the utility and grading plans must be submitted and obtain the City Engineer's approval before City Council approval. 6. Final utility, grading, and drainage plans must obtain approval from the City Engineer and Rice Creek Watershed District. 7. All permits required by the Rice Creek Watershed District shall be obtained prior to any site grading. 8. Proper building permits must be obtained prior to any construction and 1% of the construction costs must be put in escrow to insure completion of all site improvements. 9. Site plan approval does not imply approval of signage. Any signage shall conform to the sign ordinance and proper permits obtained. OPTIONS 1. Approve the site plan with the conditions listed above. • 2. Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option 1 • • North American Composties October 11, 2000 page 5 • Memorandum DATE: October 5, 2000 TO: Jeff Smyser, City Planner Mary Kay Wyland, Planning Coordinator FROM: John Powell, City Engineer RE: Site Plan Review Comments Our comments regarding the site plan submittals for the October 11, 2000, Planning and Zoning meeting are as follows: Mueller -Bies Funeral Home 1. The ordinary high water elevation and the ground water elevation must be provided. 2. A detail for the pond outlet must be included in the plans. 3. The size of the watermain that runs parallel to Lake Drive must be increased to 12 -inch and extended to the southwest edge of the site. The funeral home will be served with a 6 -inch branch off of this main. 4. Currently, the basement floor is below the high water elevation of the pond. Either the • basement floor elevation needs to be raised or the high water elevation of the pond needs to be lowered. 5. Storm water runoff calculations need to be provided for the 10 -year storm for both the existing and proposed conditions. 6. The proposed pond needs to provide 1 foot of free board above the high water elevation. 7. A gate valve is needed at the connection to the existing watermain. 8. The cover for watermain that is 10 inches or less is 8 feet. 9. The minimum storm sewer size is 15 inches. 10. RCWD and ACHD review and /or permits are required. Intertech Plastic 1. A detail for the construction entrance must be shown as well as the location of the entrance on the grading plan. 2. The 903, 904, and 905 proposed contours near the southwest corner of the proposed building do not tie into the proper existing contours and must be corrected. 3. The utility plans shows two sanitary services connecting into the existing manhole. This is not acceptable. A new manhole must be constructed to facilitate the service for the proposed building as well as a future service for the property to the west. A single 8 -inch main would then be constructed from the proposed manhole to the existing manhole. 4. The invert elevation of the sanitary sewer service at the proposed building must be shown. 5. The need for a fire hydrant on site must be reviewed by the fire department. 6. RCWD and ACHD review and /or permits are required. If you have any questions, please let me know. • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 PROJECT REVIEW A. North American Composites / Apollo Drive — Asleson introduced City Planner Smyser and indicated he would present the details of this project. Smyser presented a map depicting the subject site and reviewed the uses surrounding this site. The application is for a minor subdivision and site plan review. North American Composites wants to construct a distribution facility for their products of polyester resins, fiberglass, and related products to the composites industry as well as some repackaging into different sized containers. However, it is not a manufacturing facility. Smyser presented the site plan identifying the building footprint, points of access, and exterior elevations. The structure will be constructed of precast concrete and brick with those details discussed when the project is presented to the P &Z Board. O'Connell arrived at 6:43 p.m. Smyser noted the requirement for shoebox fixtures to ass presented the proposed landscape plan and stated staff areas in more detail. Smyser stated he received a lis natural plantings around the pond area. downcast lighting. He 1 review it and the ponding ng for the site for some Davidson asked if outdoor storage is bein: request Smyser stated it is not. Donlin inquired regarding the percentage o "`"': •us surface. Smyser stated it is 60% impervious and the City allowanc dus + al areas is 90 %. Donlin stated she is glad to hear of the lighting proposed • a-• th -` ighting was not on the higher "giraffe" type poles. Donlin stated she does o ; e any ative plant species being proposed for use. Asleson stated the landscaping in thi ercial area has evolved into using native plantings in ponding and drainage areas. r- explained the business people prefer more formal landscape in the front areas with native elements incorporated into flower gardens or infiltration pond areas. Asleson suggested working with the commercial community to do as much as possible with native plantings. He stated the important issues to address are to control peak flow rates and increase to volume runoff. Donlin stated she finds this landscape plan to be standard for the industry and she does not see where native species are being incorporated. Asleson stated staff will review the landscape plan with those comments in mind. Donlin stated that use of some native plant species around the perimeter is encouraging and asked if there is a commitment to follow it. Asleson stated it would be included in the development agreement. Chair Lanyon stated the City will need to work with the industry to determine the types of plantings that work well in front commercial areas. He stated there is clearly concern there is too much impervious surface not to address runoff and how it will be managed. 2 • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 Chair Lanyon stated that a formal lighting plan has not been submitted but the Board can pass on their concern for downcast, shoebox light fixtures. Smyser clarified the impervious surface is actually 54 %, not 60% as previously stated. Trehus stated in looking at the site plan, it appears that there is impervious surface of 75% or more. Smyser explained the site plan being reviewed is not to scale and reviewed the setback distances. Donlin stated the trees being proposed for use are heavy water users which suggests they will need to irrigate frequently. However, the Board is trying to encourage lower water usage. Chair Lanyon suggested the use of more native species to reduce the irrigation requirement. In response to questions related to drainage and on site treatment, Asleson reviewed the location of the drainage easement and suggested it could designed for better infiltration than impacted soils would provide. Smyser stated staf the applicant. ill address these concerns with Trehus suggested the incorporation of vegetate Ito ad + ess infiltration and on -site treatment. Chair Lanyon agreed the water treatment p ater quality issue needs to be addressed as well as the landscape Davidson moved to recomm application subject to the as possible, include no c revisited after water retentio that require minimal irrigation motion. Motion carried unanimously. o the Northern American Composites retention of as much storm water runoff on site oils in the drainage easement, landscaping plan is in place, increased use of native grasses and trees d the City's standard for lighting. Donlin seconded the B. Mueller -Bies Funeral Home — Smyser presented a map depicting the location of the subject site and a site plan identifying the building footprint, parking, and storm water ponding. The request is for a minor subdivision. Smyser stated staff needs more information on the utilities and alignment of the utilities as well as the drainage areas. He explained the setback is problematic since part of the area has been filled so it is difficult to determine the Ordinary High Water (OHW) mark. Chair Lanyon asked about trees on the site. Asleson stated there are some grade C3 trees, meaning a degraded, invasive tree species. Chair Lanyoir asked about the lighting plan. Smyser stated there are a few lighting contours that seem to go over the property line that will need to be addressed. He stated 3 �s- D -COUNTY r/W7:—M6117,05N'AY-PCAT NO 50 9iftEEi — - 111■411 - COUNTY NWK -6/614 Oi WM' PL-AF NYNB£A -P•5 . 4 3 ! 1 2 3 4/ 5 8 7 LJ 9 CA 14 1 13 •fj 12 6 � „ !;'� 10 2 M' 5 OUTIDT A My "GENT RI' .. .14 S/ 2 13 0 ®22 F RM iIiiiIIIji I d118 z 3 3 4 55 4 OUTLOT B PARK NORTH 1 82E41155 I� 102.4',511 �11�� ©11 �1 NTUF'3 CON sm„ 0 'dma N;o D _Q. 0 • AUD 5 6 6 6 7 LINO LAKES 1_ REHABILITAT1011 CENTER $ 2 3 °' 3 8 I I 0I�I j 4 4 _III 5 � 11111 1111 2 A70LL0 DRIVE .�-. •.�. \a 0D m mm oo5 mam Na vpiD 0 21 T P OLLOe Ap s 1 THE CNURCN O 117. 405E714 CINNAMON TEAL COURT 42�aaa0000m n�Q 2 19 2 19 3 19 3 19 4 17 4 17 5 9 5 1S pq mu L It I SKETCH AND DESCRIPIT0N FOR: INTERPLASTIC OF PART OF APOLLO BUSINESS PARK r 1 POND 74TH 2277.92 N 88'22'57" E STREET \ \ \ \ \ \ /'t s. 47 7 '^------ t MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 14 7-90.72 PACE» /11CPg; H 1 l► v s tto e, ei 1 9 to �`%o/ te Oq'7. \e h•59Cf3 ve 2162.20 '9 227 - - - 588'227'W 11') x•16 \O•ti01 • R.11w5 I) ye /b // n -L-w< / e\ �s109 v / y 0 •• • / X1104.1`y „MCP w 3614 114 /L` 9999' / Ae9 �� 10 W le es eai- oo .* xn0 U1 in Z -s-ltNtt� V.% b( / .1"C \ ! \ r- / / //lbi / / / '-'1 ?5 D# 14 oR8 SS 86 8 8 1 \b� 29 • laeeciasaliJUfEli METRO LAND SURVEYING 412 £8 1 Ceunly Road D, little Cans .. ENGINEERING 55117 Telephone: (851)766 -0112 rex(651)768 -0812 E -mall surveyemelrcls.eom • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND (UNLESS OTHERWISE MARKED) 1 hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 peel ly Licensed Land Surveyor under ours of t tote Id w •. Ronald P. Al Date :Cer( 1 1 W License No. 17765 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING PARCEL •C" RECEIVED SEP 1 2 ZOO CITY OF LINO LAKES That part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 31. Range 22. Anoka County. Minnesota. lying southeasterly of the City of Lino Lakes Right -of -Way Plat No. 1, Apollo Drive. According to the recorded plat thereof and lying northwesterly of Interstate No. 35W and lying southwesterly of the following described Ina: Commencing of the most easterly comer of Ported 14, City of Lino Lakes Right -of -Way Plat No. 1, Apollo Drive, Anoka County. Minnesota according to the recorded plot thereof; thence an an assumed beoring of South 68 degrees 12 mt.!. 20 seconds West along the southeasterly line of said plat 60.07 leet:, thence southwesterly 243.99 feet along said southeestely line being o tangential curve concae 10 the southeast, hosing a recites of 610 feet 0nd a centre! angle of 22 degrees 55 minutes 02 seconds; thence South 45 degrees 17 minutes 15 West tongenl to said curve 316.66 feet; thence southwesterly 2.39.02 feet olong o tangential Curve cone* 10 the northwest having 0 radius of 899.00 feet and 0 central angle Of 15 degrees 14 minutes to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds Soot 281.84 feet to the northwesterly right of woy tine of Interstate No. 35W and there terminating. NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE se re veto DESCRIPTIONS OF PROPOSED PARCEL$ (IN FELT) 1 Inch w 100 11. PARCEL D that port of the Southeast Wailer a/ Section 18, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County. Minnesota, described as commencing et 100 most saslerly coma of Pored 14. City of Lino Lakes Right- of -W.y Plat No. 1. Ap000 Drive, Anoka County. Minnesota cording to the recorded plat thereof; thence an en assumed bearing of South 68 degrees 12 minutes 20 seconds West Mang the south.stely line of said plat 60.07 fast thence so010..ot rly 243.99 I.0 Wong said southeasterly Ihe ben9 a tangential curve ve to the southeast having o radius of 610 feet and a tented angle of 22 degrees 55 minutes 02 seconds: !hence South 45 degrees 17 minutes 18 West tangent to .W curve 316.66 feet thence sauthw.lMy 239.02 feel Wong a langentid curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 899.00 feel and a central angle of 15 degrees 14 minutes to tin 1 e lest o beginning of the lama v eg nnq to W asserted; slid point deserted cue-. t0 be brown o Point e ; thence continuing 13 e southwesterly 157.95 feel along the .tension of the Iasi Deserted curve: thence South 70 degrees 35 minutes id seconds West tangent to lost descrbed curve, 177.32 feet said pant hereinafter to be known as Pahl "B•; thence Smith 19 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East 298.31 feel to the norlhwesloy 040,0 of way line of Interstate Na. 35W; thence northeasterly don9 sad northwesterly right of way line le its intersection with a line 6sarin9 South 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds Eosin from the pant of beginning; thence North 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds West 281.84 feet 10 the point of beginning. Together with on easement for drainage end ot0ity pwpes. ever. under and across the south 30 feet the north 30 feet the west 5 feet vend the east 5 feel of the Woo. described pored. PARCEL D -1 POINT ACCESS EASEMENT) An easement for ingress ond egress purposes ow and across port of the following described pore.: Thal p001 of the Southeast Ouaele. of Section 18, Township 31. Renee 22. Metro County. Minnesota, described os commencing of the most easteely corner of Pored 14. City of Lino Lakes Right -of -Way Plat No. 1, Apollo Delve. Anoka County. Minnesota according to the recorded plat thereof; thence on on assumed bearing of South 68 degrees 12 minutes 20 seconds West Wang the southwostmly One of sold plot 60.07 feet thence southwesterly 243.99 feel done aid s0ulheesterey line being a tangential curve concave to the southeast. having a remits on ns of 610 INet and a tented angle of 22 degrees 55 minutes 02 secds thenceSouth 45 degrees 07 minutes 18 West tangent to said cur. 316.66 feet thence southwesterly 239.02 feet dung a lan9enl:al ow. concave la the northwest hating a radius of 899.00 lest end a anted angle of 15 degrees 14 minutes 10 the point of beginning of the land 10 be described; said point hereinafter to be known a Point 'A'; thence continuing southwesterly 157.95 feet alone the extension of the last described eurvec !hence South 70 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West tangent to last deserted curve, 177.32 feet said point hreinoflr to be know. as Point "8'; !hence South 19 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East 290.31 feel to -the north.esterly right of way line of Interstate N0. 35W; thence northeasterly Wong sold northwesterly right of way tin. to Its intersection with • Tine storing South 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds East hem the point of beginning; thence North 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds West 281.84 leet to the point of beginning. Said tosemenl is further described as beginning at IM previously deserted Point 'A': thence South 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds East along the East line of the above deserted pa004 60.00 feet: thence westeny at right angle to the lost described lint 20.00 feet' thence northerly parole with sold East line to the North line Of the above described pat0: thence easterly Wang sold North f to the point of beginning. PARCEL 0 -2 (SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT) _ A 30.00 feel easement lee sanitary sewer purposes ow, under. end across pat f the following described pared: That pat of the Southeast Pewter of Section 18. Township 31. Renee 22. Anoka County, Minnesota. d.crted as commencing of the most easterly corner of Parcel 14. City of Lino Lakes Right- of -WOy Plot No. 1. Apollo Drive. Anoka County. Minnesota according to the recorded plot thereof; thence on on assumed bearing e1 South 68 degrees 12 minx,. 20 seconds West along the soulheeslrly line of said plot 60.07 bet: thence southwesterly 243.99 /.t along said southeasterly line being p lon9enlid curve conceive to the southeast. having a rodbs of 610 !.t and a central angle of 22 deq.eea 55 minutes 02 seconds !hence South 45 degrees 17 minutes 18 West tangent to said curve 316.66 Net thence southwesterly 239.02 feet along a tangential cur. concave to the northwest having a radius of 899.00 I.1 end a cent.' angle of 15 degrees 14 minutes to the point of beginning of the land to be descried; soil point 0.0400tr to be known es Pahl 'A !hence 000(00 nq southwesterly 157.95 f.! Wong the ..tension of the lest deserted torero; thence South 70 ding... 35 minutes 18 seconds West tangent to last deserted cur. 177.32 feet; said paint hereinafter to be known as Point '8•: thence South 19 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East 298.31 0.t to 1he northwesterly right of way 11.. of Interstate N0. 35W: thence northeasterly •lo0g sold northwesterly right of way line to Its intersection with o line b.orng South 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds East from the point of seginnn9; thence North 29 degrees 28 minutes 42 seconds West 281.84 lest to the point of beginning. The centerline of said easement it further at Commencing at previously described Point '6': thence South 19 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East. Wong the west line of the above deserted parcel, 30.00 feel l0 the point of beginning of the easement le be described: thence North 60 degrees 48 minutes 59 second. East 73.40 I.L Said easement is prolonged or shortened to terminate at said West line. PARCEL E that pat of the Southeast Ouorla of Section 18, Township 31. Range 22. Anoka County. Minnesota, lying soulheasterly of the City of Llno Lakes Right- of -Way Plat No. 1. Apollo Drive. occoodng to the recorded plat thereof and lying northwesterly 01 interstate No. 35W end lying southwestMy of the following deserted line; Commencing of the mast eesterly corner of Parcel 14, City of Lino Lakes Rohl -o/ -Way Plat Na. 1, Apollo Delve. Anoka County Minnesota <wedding to the recorded plat thereof, thence on an °.awned bearing of South 68 degrees 12 minutes 20 seconds West along the southeoslrly line of said plat 60.07 feet thence southwesterly 243.99 feel along said sautheostmly Me being a lan9entiel curve concave to the southeast hoeing a radius of 610 fast and o central angle of 22 degrees 55 mtutes 02 seconds. thence South 45 d.gre. 17 minutes 18 Weft tongml 1e said dune 316.66 feet thence southwesterly 396.97 feet don9 a tangential curve coneove to the northwest havne a radius of 899.00 feel and a central angle of 25 degre. 18 mnulet thence South 70 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West 177.32 Iva to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 19 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East 298.31 feet to the northwesterly right of way line of Interstate Nor 350 end said tine there terminating. A P O L L O D R I V E Proposed Site for North American Composites Hazardous Materials Storage Facility 78' 10i" P/1 51' -10 TYPICAL CONC. PAD 5-4" x 4' -0 21.33 SF 15' -0" PARKING FRONT YARD SETBACK 50' -0" BUILDING FRONT YARD SETBACK 10 • 2• ••� RANCE , , ALK. ' 67 Sr . PAVED' YARD ' 13 . • 31;068 o. 1 5' -0" PARKING SIDE YARD SETBACK > 30' -0" SIDE YARD SE1BACK (es requked by UBC 503.4.5.2) PROPOSED 1.5 STORY STORAGE /OFFICE BUILDING 24,982 SF (Fin. Flr. EL: 907.15') —STALL CO. -0 EN11- TR• 1 ... t' _ • IflI 141111111111101111 104111110M1141111.111 • .16' wide I, for . _PARTING •' CU )/AUTOMAMI ILERS • GATES , TRAS� ENCLO U 'Nee 2/�1 - - -f x R30' -0" LOCATION of 40' -0• wide x 60' -0" long SHARED —USE SITE ACCESS ROAD CENTERED on P /L. 5' -0" PARKING SIDE YARD SETBACK 30•-0" BUILDING SETBACK 27. 10'x•12', " ;DRIVE—IN , OH DOOR' L high IN —LI FENCE Preliminary Site Plan P11 goo FILTRATION REA. SEE ADING PLAN I RECEIVED SEP 1. 1 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES Scale : 1" = 20' -0" Project North Apollo Business Park Scale : 1" = 400' -0" SCHEDULE of DRAWINGS o1.1 Preliminary Site Plan a1.2 Preliminary Site Paving Pion 02.1 Building Floor Plan; Primary Elevation 03.1 Exterior Elevations c1,1 Preliminary Site Grading Plan c1.2 Preliminary Site Utilities Plan L1,1 Landscaping Plan - -- Certificate of Site Survey Drawing R E Q U IRE D PARKING OFFICE AREA 3,000 SF — 10% = 2,700 SF 3 STALLS + (2,700 SF x 1 STALL /200 SF) = 13.5 STALLS 17 STALLS WAREHOUSING AREA 22,000 SF — 107. = 19,800 SF 19,800 SF x 1 STALL /2,000 SF = 10 STALLS TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 27 STALLS (25) 9'08' PARKING STALLS (2) 9'x16' ACCESSIBLE STALLS (27) PARKING STALLS S I T E C O V E R A G E Property Area = 104,253 SF (2.393 Acres) 104,253 SF x .60 (609: Impervious) = 62,518 SF Impervious Surfaces Allowed Building Parking /Service Yard Patio /Walks TOTAL HARD SURFACES 24,982 SF 31,068 SF 1 100 SF 57,150 SF (54.48 %) RECYCLING AREA Recycling Space Required Office 3,000 SF x .0025 = 7.5 SF Warehouse 22,000 SF x .001 = 22.0 SF Recycling Area = 30 SF Site Data North David J. Kelly Architect, Inc. SWe 205 ,w, Veal 50th St "n",eoss, "nwsota 552* 1952, 922 -2220 Consultants Certification I two, error), vat tra pun ✓ o.elhroelon, re,. ou wooer., H or or woe - Weet supertagol d ¶ tu,l,r"'tnr IMO rr ve Slate or iu..s.. Os,id Joseph Kelly Reg No. • 15254 Comm. No. :00.031 Drown By : Kelly Date Issued :09,11.2000 Revisions • Project A New Distribution Office /Warehouse for North American Composites, Co. Apollo Business Center Apollo Drive Una Lakes, Mn Drowing Title Preliminory Site Pion Scale As Noted Sheet Number fir Site Plan Renew Only doted 09.11.2000 Not tar Construction ale1 • • A P O L L O D R I V E PARKING STALL STRIPING. 4" wide per City Standards (Typical for all striping) 51'- 011' 15 " -0' Wde FRONT YARD PARKING SETBACK L_ L._ Preliminary Site Paving Plan 78' 10g' P/L FND. RLS PT. 9808 175'43' 9' 0" R30' -0" 18' -0` R3' -0" 11' -4 72' -0" • $— STALLS hi 9' -0" eo. y4' -0`• • — 5— ' STALLS' at 9' -0" eo. 1 '16' -4 6" CONC. PAVING on 3.5` BIT. PAYING 1 • '8" MNDOT •Close 5 ar 1 • 4` CONC. FI4VING ) • • 24'•x`• • gr, MNDOT Glass 5 1 38' 1 0 • 1 `i / { ■ 1 29' -6" TRASH ENCLOSURE See 2/1.1.1 ' R30' -0" , 26'- 0" • 6` CONC.. PAVING• , ••• re! On • 14NDOT Chins 5 . i LAWN AREA 40' -0' Wide REAR YARD PARKING SETBACK /BUFFER P/L 79' 24 168' 8' ees 99. LAWN AREA 6' -0" 119' 24' -5" J CONCRETE CURB /CUTTER MnDOT 812 (Typical at perimeter of all paving) 6' -0' High CHAIN LINK FENCE at PERIMETER of SERVICE YARD. EXISTING Bit Paved 40' -0" Wide x 60' -0" Long SHARED ACCESS DRIVE I RECEIVED SEP 1 1 2000 CIT' OF MO LAKES Scale : 1" = 20' -0" Project North David J. Kelly Architect, Inc. Suite 505 3925 Vest 550th St er.w.p.... w..wnt. 55029 (9520 922 -2220 Consultants Certification 111.1414.tes op nee. ,epend or a.m.ie. . In lt.... +.7 .0 w. I. w.. or n. st.t. Of NMI.. 099 91 Joseph K.ar Reg. No.: 15254 Comm. No. :00.031 Drown By : Kelly Dote Issued :09,11,2000 Revisions • Project A New Distribution Office /Warehouse for North American Composites, Co. Apollo Business Pork Apollo Drive Lino Lakes, Mn Drawing Title Preliminory Site Paving Plan Scale As Noted Sheet Number for Sky Plan ReMae Only dated 09.11.2000 Nat, kr Canytructlon a1.2 • • PRE- FINISHED STANDING -SEAM METAL ROOFING INSULATED ALUM /GLASS WINDOW UNITS MASONRY WALLS at OFFICE • Office Building Preliminary North (Apollo Drive) Elevation Worehouse beyond PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANELS FIN. FLR. ELEV. 907.15 FIN. GRADE Scale : 3/32' = Y -0' 68' 4' 0 lV '0 A , Office 3,000 SF Warehouse No. 3 2,100 SF r 76'-4" Conference '.Office 16x16 Break Room 16x16 1002 Office 10x12 • Office 10x12 Office 10,02 Office 16x12 Worn -Room 38x9 Fire Riser Room r 1 8x10 1 OH Door Store Room Store Rooms 19x12 Warehouse No. 4 2,800 SF r � 8x10 I I OH Door Worehouse No. 1 7,000 SF Reception I. 1 r II 1 r Elect. � y Loom . Wrhse. � Restrooml G i Wareh use No. 2 7,000 SF 10X12 Drive -In DH Door r • Wrhse. Offices Pr i L_ 8x10 0H Do L_ 8x10 0H Do I L_ 8x10 OH Do Preliminary Floor plan Scale : 3/32' 1' -0' 127' -4 17' 4" North (1) David J. Kelly Architect, Inc iu11e 205 3925 Vest 30th 11 arneapolis. wwsot. 55124 19320 922 -2220 Consultants • RECEIVED SEP 1 1 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES Certification Mreby certery Inn Ins w.+ _5 r+w... wMorus.e.y..n ■ Of the st.,e a n..».e,: :_ On.Id Joseph Kelly Reg. No. • 15254 Comm. No. : 00.031 Drawn By : Kelly Date Issued :09.11.2000 Revisions Project A New Distribution Office /Warehouse for North American Composites, Co. Apollo Business Pork Apollo Drive Lino Lakes, MN Drawing Title Preliminary Floor Plan; Apollo Drive Elevation Scale As Noted Sheet Number a2.1 • • • • • ELEV. + 26' -4" ELEV. + 16' -4" FIN. FLR. ELEV. 907,15' ELEV. — (3' —B') I1 EL O Preliminor 10' x 12' Drive —In OH Door 8' x 10' OH Door 8' x 10' 8' x 10' OH Door OH Door East Elevation Warehouse beyond Loading Main Entrance Office David J. Kelly Architect, Inc. Lair 205 5925 Vest 50th St Mneopotts, Mmesoto 55124 49522 922 -2229 Consultants • RECEIVED SEP 1 1 2000 GiTY OF LINO LAKES Scale : 3/32 - 1' -0" Preliminary South Elevation Warehouse r JI A Loading >J beyond Scole : 3/32 - 1' -0" PRE - FINISHED STANDING —SEAM METAL ROOFING INSULATED ALUM /GLASS WINDOW UNITS PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANELS IT J Office beyond >� Preliminary West Elevation - R623' -0" Warehouse ELEV. + 26' -4" FIN. FLR. ELEV. 907,15' FIN. GRADE Scale : 3/32 1• -0" Certification I My., e.etMy awl INS pwo weeks., .e nmM .. + e reopened wp. se unme ann supeeroson Otr. awl 1 r w.o or lM Stale M Mm.., &yid Joseph Kelly Reg No • 15254 Comm. No. :00.031 Drown By : Kelly Dote Issued :09.11.2000 Revisions • Project A New Distribution Office /Warehouse for North American Composites, Co. Apollo Business Park Apollo Drive Uno Lakes, MN Drawing Title Preliminary Exterior Elevations Scale As Noted Sheet Number a3.1 • • • • • Sod w/ 1 II II II II FND. RLS PT. 9808 PLANTNG KEY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME QUANTITY SIZE FLOWERING CRAB APPLE Maws 'ThunderMBd' 3 2 JAPANESE TREE LILAC Syringe reticulate 'Ivory Silk' 4 3 RED- TVACCED DOGWOOD Corpus afolonlfere 'Cardinal' 5 4 PURPLE LEAF SAND CHERRY Prunus x oisteno 2 5 POTENTLLA PotentIlla 'Gold Drop' 25 ARBOR' VITAE Thep occidentolis 'Brondan' 7 10 11 12 13 CLIMBING TRUMPET HONEYSUCKLE SWAMP WHITE OAK Lanicera x brown; 'Dropmore Ouercus bicolor 7 RIVER BIRCH BLACK HILLS SPRUCE JACK PINE SCOTCH PINE YEW i''lanting Schedule Betulo nigro 'Heritage' Piceo glauca 'Densalc Pines banksiono Pious syivestris Taxus media 'Dark green' 2 9 5 3 3 David J. Kelly Architect, Inc. Solt. 205 59e5 vest 50t0 Si INnn oils. Nr.rww[x 55424 (9522 9222222 Consultants Landscape Architect Nestingen Design 3749 47th Ave. So. MhneopoDS, Mt 55406 -2914 (6121724 -1300 1X/ Irrigation 11 Trash Enclosure See Detail 2 /LI.I 1t1 1 � 1 i 11 Infiltration Area See Sheet C.I Sod w/ Irrigation 11 i Preliminary Landscape Plan Scale : 1" = 20' -0" Project North 6' -0" 4' -6. L Trash Enclosure REDWOOD DATE RECEIVED SEP 1 1 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES 4" MASONRY to MATCH OFFICE EXTERIOR MASONRY 6" REINFORCED Cue INNER WYTHE. PA197 EXPOSED SURFACES. 4" MASONRY to MATOl OFFICE EXTERIOR MASONRY B" REINFORCED CND INNER WYTHE 6' -0" wide x 5' -0" deep EPDXY- COATED CONCRETE SLAB -on- CRADE. Scale : 1/4" = V-0" Certification I (01y rw1l, in. was wws ry,ce;b.n. fir -Pwt ..s pr.....; ar r» .r www rr Wert aprevirin me v. 1 NI aft M Ur 9Y4. of Noon. OMAN Joseph Kelly Reg No. : 1SESi Comm. No. :00.031 Drawn By : Kelly Date Issued :09.11.2000 Revisions • Project A New Distribution Office /Warehouse for North American Composites, Co. Apollo Business Park Apollo Drive Lino Lakes, Mn Drawing Title Preliminary Landscape Plan Scale As Noted Sheet Number far Ste Plan Red*W Only dated 09.11.2000 Na fm Cmatractlan L1.1 4 • • 41k NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE • to 26 (nlrssr) 1 90810 - 60 ft. /'.:.19 / /..62 /-� / •909 // % /,/ 900'/ '/ 10 / 18 I 9139/34 94 � \w 906.60 \ g5.61 601 906.35 _ //�/ IIY219 gl /1/4/ j �1 / I / / / / / //! r/ // / /r / )(toles 69326* \ - % 1! r l l' 997. 6033711( \ \ ♦ / ! 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \`\ / / i ' / / / 60224x\ j /X�9.W/`\ \ \ \ °�\ �'/ii/ / Dm.60 / P1 13\ ,/ / // 907.50 100661 2 1 \\ / / 905.84 \ - a.6053 89046.1 \ y \ - \ \ \s 820107 \ \ / 103 X901 902.0534 \ 1 •\ + / „// 66 / 900. / 504.12 90435) - 1E.E X901.30 903.23X/ / / / / / / / / // / / / 1' / es / // ' // G / / .40 //I A / 4%ej \ 901.27 // • / / % (' / // / - I / X902.41 X901 .96 /- 9�/ 41.921 /'. /. / / Ri5 000n/ / at X902.30 X90267 1 r ti L to3aJ4 / x902.35 14' CEO afr S a Et .02.�88 / 5 6 re /i/ �// �/ / // .699.66 / , - -9 699.34 899.62 0 /- /� i� /i 699.60Y/ / Bove/ //- ...:n ▪ -ii/i / _, / / 1� nog 7 ''� Q� -i - / / / - - • f / / % / - -." i / - - 90367 903.43),•' =/ / 4 4 - - -' 699.5.% ;i .-r - " ' / - - r „ / *9.16x/ ' -' -" 903.90 e 59662 - - - - -- - - / 990.27>< %� I- ' -' 900 - - 902-....:-::: - 904' 01.64 79 60 ' - 904.47 -;- 903.71 GO 404 4TA - 03.25 Q N c, / .49%, ice / ...os MOANS bOixo• 601 / 69235 12I0y1i, 1 �� Go /X900.90 0.44 / 30 / I / 999.16 j 999.7.$ 09 32 67 • RECEIVED SEP 112000 CITY OF LINO LAKES METRO LAND SURVEYING 4 & ENO G • 9 e' 12 East County Rood 0, Little Canada, MN 55117 Telphone:(651)766 -0112 Fo*:(651)768 -0612 E- OiOil: 9UVVeyc,00tf610.861i1 s • NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE al a 129 ( ]77 FELT ) loran - 30 ft 241 / ,� / / - / ' ,- /' / , / / ,, Og -/- /,'10 / ,/ 5s 16 / 31 05.36 16 F 65 / /, --- / / / / K) pP 0 / 20627 I \ / 105.64 \ C.O. / 4 \ \ am,,, \\ Z \ \ / / / / / / ' / / / / /' / / / / / / / / / / / // / / / / / / / , ' / - // / / t / 90`' / , \ 9i, 9p2 /' ■ / \ \ 'tpAt dl PNPJ� X01 / \ /' .oLSS'— / •- ; -i / / /, - as„." -- /// / -_ /- / i; / / 90328 -% ,a;/ -- \- - -- - - .•�,. / _ - -- l 49'. j / j ,- �/ / / , ./.........../...--- / , - - ,/ / „/„........./' - , / �) / i -'/ / — ,' /i i -// /'---/ - - -/ - -/ - / , 9a3 8 -;'-- / ��.� i �- i -- ——-- / —'— 90.27 20371 3.04 0e 201.31 RECEIVED SEP 1 1 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES METRO RO LAND SURVEYING • • 'd ENGINEERING 412 East County D Little Canada, MN 55117 Televhone:(651)766 -0112 Fox:(651)766 -0612 E -ma: 6urveydm etrole.eom z n o 1— En ^ 1— 6. r- J z (n N Z O Sj 6 n Z -3 a ° .. U m m a` • UTILITY PLAN STORAGE FACILITY 8 CV • AGENDA ITEM VI. A • STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser, Mary Divine P & Z MEETING DATE: October 11, 2000 TOPIC: Discussion Item: Town Center Development Standards BACKGROUND The Town Center Committee of Lino Lakes citizens recommended special design standards for the Town Center back in 1998. The draft standards prepared by Calthorpe and Associates builds on the Committee's framework. The standards will put into effect the vision for a Town Center that was formulated several years ago. The City Council endorsed the draft standards on August 28. Final approval will include rezoning the land as well as amending the zoning ordinance to create a new zoning district and adopt the development standards for it. As the discussion continues, it is clear that confusion still exists over the need for the development standards. The draft standards include more detail setbacks and accustomed to seeing. We are accustomed to seeing standards for minimum heights: but maximum setbacks and minimum building heights is a switch. Though many cities have architectural standards regarding building materials,v Though many cities have architwe are not accustomed to this in Lino Lakes. Additional architectural standards are even more disconcerting for some people here. We will schedule a public hearing in November for the zoning amendment action. Before we do that, it is a good idea to revisit the Town Center vision. Mary Divine, the City's Economic Development Assistant, has prepared a presentation to demonstrate the need for the design standards. • • • AGENDA ITEM VI. B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: October 11, 2000 TOPIC: Discussion Item: Temporary Fabric Structures BACKGROUND Some of you may have seen a few temporary fabric structures around Lino Lakes. They are made of a metal pole frame with fabric stretched over it. People are using these structures for inexpensive storage of vehicles or other items. City staff have received some calls about these structures regarding placement and size. Most people just put them up without contacting us. In discussions with the Building Official, we decided it would be a good idea to inform the P & Z about how we are addressing these structures. These structures are not addressed in the building code. No building permit is required. We have some concern about snow loading, but snow likely will slide off the fabric. Citizens who put up such a structure do so at their own risk, however. The placement of the structure and its size are two other issues. We will consider these fabric structures as accessory structures. As such, they must: 1) meet setback requirements for the zoning district, and; 2) the maximum accessory building square footage for the lot size will apply. The aesthetics of these structures may be questioned, but the City has no ordinance to address that.