Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/13/2001 P&Z Packet• • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA Tuesday, February 13, 2001 6:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 10, 2001 III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: IV. OPEN MIKE: V. ACTION ITEMS: A. PUBLIC HEARING, Molin Concrete, 415 Lilac, Amended Conditional Use Permit, Mary Kay Wyland B. PUBLIC HEARING, Ryan Companies US, Inc. (Target) Lake Drive, PDO Rezone, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use & Site Plan Review, Cindy Sherman (NAC) /Jeff Smyser C. PUBLIC HEARING, Land Holding Group, 12th & Holly, Preliminary Plat, Cindy Sherman(NAC /Jeff Smyser D. PUBLIC HEARING, Heritage Development, Saddle Club, Old Birch Street, Preliminary Plat, CONTINUE TO 3/14/01 E. Circle Lex VFW, Apollo Drive, Minor Subdivision, Mary Kay Wyland F. Rockey Goertz, 325 Birch Street (Apitz), Minor Subdivision, Mary Kay Wyland G Ryan Companies, Summit Fire Protection, 2XX Apollo Drive, Minor Subdivision and Site Plan Review, Cindy Sherman(NAC) /Mary Kay Wyland H. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION, Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to allow Accessory Buildings in Industrial and Commercial Districts, Jeff Smyser/Mary Kay Wyland I. Central Suburban, 416 Lilac, CUP Tabled from January meeting J. PUBLIC HEARING, Tree Preservation Ordinance, continue to 3/14/01 VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Mini - Storage, Al Robinson B. Appointment of P & Z Liaison to EDAC C. Discussion — EIFS — Chris Lyden VIII. ADJOURNMENT • • • AGENDA ITEM V A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland MEETING DATE: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 TOPIC: PUBLIC HEARING, Molin Concrete, 415 Lilac, Amended Conditional Use Permit DESCRIPTION: Molin Concrete is located at 416 Lilac Street. The site is a concrete processing facility that is permitted in the General Industrial Zoning District with a Conditional Use Permit. They have been located in this area since 1971. Molin Concrete received an Amended Conditional Use Permit and an Interim Use Permit in October of 1997 covering their entire site and allowing the expansion of their facility including an interim use permit for outside storage on the light industrial portion of the property. The conditions of approval are attached for information purposes. Since that approval in 1997, OSHA (Federal Occupational Safety & Health Administration) rules have changed and Molin is prohibited from operating their equipment without back -up beepers. They have therefore requested removal of condition number 11.c. Strobe lights replace truck back -up beepers during nighttime hours (6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.). The Council is aware of several complaints received from neighboring residences concerning the back -up beepers (copies attached). We have also received a letter from an adjoining property owner, Ms. Kathleen Schwartz, expressing concerns regarding the industrial use (attached). These beepers frequently begin at 4:00 a.m. Staff would suggest amending the previously approved Amended Conditional Use Permit and Interim Use Permit by adding the following language: 1. Equipment requiring back -up beepers shall be prohibited from Light Industrial portion of site, north of vacated 77th Street, between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. This condition would allow Molin to work in the general industrial portion of the site, but not in the light industrial portion. The light industrial area adjacent to the residential neighborhood is intended to buffer that neighborhood from the heavier industrial use to the south. Again, Molin would still be allowed to work in the general industrial area of the site with the amended condition although it may not eliminate the noise complaints. • As an alternative, the City could prohibit any operation of equipment with back -up beepers on the entire site between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. NOTE: On February 7th several residents of the neighborhood spoke at the Council Work Session, expressing concerns regarding Molin. Staff will provide additional information regarding their concerns at the P & Z Meeting. OPTIONS: 1. Approve Amendment of Conditional Use Permit/Interim Use Permit by adding the requirement that back -up beepers shall be prohibited from Light Industrial portion of site, north of vacated 77th Street between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 2. Approve Amendment of Conditional Use Permit/Interim Use Permit by adding the requirement that the use of back -up beepers shall be prohibited between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 3. Return to staff for further consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 • 011.12. ,0 4 r7 NW ' lam: c :+•--S mr. als ill r amine `I ®_ ro �� Jam': PAP:Enarilm.4-1" v 'IL'df NO d0 'MM.- 9if1EET - - -r . e inamm � lig I ® i�o a 111111111111r �,1 _ ,I 1 ,--t.P..r.11itrauV.,r 4111111111MUMIni- urumiiivalVaimarrumdm 1111 Mil op��oo ©od _ oo ® _ p� o �egYf OOga00 0 0 000 Qy�A��A d01L0T • go_ glaoc.` o E IlliPt� -�a!4a 1 ASR PARK "' ��V fURY� PANT-01111111111111W4111.eflArtaiel Cam Cm:O ' S U 8. Aliiiill idl,�os rsfiCkt al " ibil Pi VAS II 1u . rRp,•FF •dII�' .1! gat AN. niP ins ll111e meememmmmma a6,�LB��llll�����Olo °e 117C0111C10ATI' GEORGE WATCH .6 mmooyo WitLIUS OtYfinl� G6 mns „ mmCr ;.v ZE' Mkt vows 4411111 • • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DECEMBER 13, 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES DATE : December 13, 2000 TIME STARTED : 5:35 p.m. TIME ENDED : 6:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Carlson, Dahl, O'Donnell (6:20), Reinert (5:40), and Mayor Bergeson MEMBERS ABSENT : None Staff members present: City Administrator, Linda Waite Smith; City Engineer, John Powell; Economic Development Director, Brian Wessel (part); Economic Development Assistant, Mary Divine (part);Public Services Director, Rick DeGardner; Planning Coordinator, Mary Kay Wyland (part); and City Planner, Jeff Smyser MOLIN CUP DISCUSSION, JEFF SMYSER AND MARY KAY WYLAND Staff distributed a memo regarding Molin Concrete that provided background information. Staff has received a letter from Molin Concrete requesting the removal of one of the conditions of approval relating to strobe lights replacing truck back up beepers during nighttime hours (6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.). Mr. Randy Molin, Molin Concrete, came forward and stated he received complaints from neighbors late September to early October, 2000. When approval for the CUP was granted, rules regarding this issue were much more lenient. The company is now required to use the audible warning devices on trucks. The company has changed the direction of the beepers so they go down eliminating as much noise as possible. Neighbors have heard the beepers and know they aren't supposed to be used at night. An outside firm has conducted two (2) noise tests. The firm has indicated that most of the noise is from the freeway during those hours. He requested the conditions be changed so the company can comply with OSHA standards. Mayor Bergeson stated that the City may have a problem if a conditions was imposed that is not legal. Mr. Molin stated that at the time the CUP was granted, the condition was permitted. New laws were written in 1997 regarding this issue. If the beepers are disconnected, the company can receive a $10,000 fine. The company is locked in to the way it does business and can not abide by the condition for approval. He explained the reason why the property has two (2) zoning designations noting that all conditions of the permit relate to the light industrial parcel. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DECEMBER 13, 2000 Mayor Bergeson inquired if there is the prohibition of beeper use on either of the parcels. Staff advised the conditions of approval relate to both properties. Mayor Bergeson asked if the company would need a CUP for the general industrial permit. Staff advised the company does need a CUP for both properties. Staff explained the necessary permits. Mr. Molin stated he believes there are no restrictions on the general industrial property. The property zoned light industrial has the CUP. Staff advised the concrete use on the property is permitted with a CUP. The general industrial property already had a CUP. Staff noted they are unsure whether the permit was grandfathered in or issued. The City Administrator asked if neighbors will be notified if anything is changed in the CUP. Staff advised all neighbors in the area will be notified. Council Member Carlson requested copies of the complaints and minutes of the approval from the Planning and Zoning Board and Council meeting. Staff advised that CUP's are granted for the use to the property. CUP's are not typically renewed every year. If there are any changes in the use, amended CUP's are issue. The City Administrator asked if the neighbors contacted the company directly about their complaints. Mr. Molin stated he was out of town at the time. There was a new foreman who did not know about the restrictions. The City Administrator inquired about a process in place for the neighbors to contact the company directly instead of the City. Mr. Molin stated that neighbors were given his direct office phone number three (3) years ago. He stated that at times the neighbors were difficult and he was uncomfortable talking to them. He stated he would prefer they call the Police Department. He noted he has not received any complaints since the isolated incident in early October 2000. Staff explained the City process used to change the CUP noting that a public hearing would be held at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Mr. Molin stated that he has to run the beepers even if the condition is not changed so he is not in violation of OSHA. He stated no complaints have been received from anyone other than the two (2) neighbors. • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DECEMBER 13, 2000 Mayor Bergeson suggested Mr. Molin submits an application noting the City process • must be followed to amend the CUP. • • Mr. Molin stated that on several occasions, the company has received complaints about noise that has nothing to do with Molin. He stated he wants the Council to understand that Molin has aggressively tried to reduce as much noise as possible. The City did send the police out to do a sound check. The sound level tested too high but the test was not done correctly. He stated he does not want that test held against Molin. He added that he has given staff testing reports from a sound test that was done correctly. TOWN CENTER UPDATE, MARY ALICE DIVINE Staff advised a discussion regarding the Town Center was held Monday night. The City Council and staff have been invited to a reception at the Metropolitan Council on Wednesday, December 20, 2000, 2:00 p.m. The reception is being held for the grant recipients. The Economic Development Director stated the schedule for Target has been put back one month. A revised schedule will be distributed to Council when it is received. The grading is scheduled for July 2001 with an opening date of July 2002. A neighborhood meeting has been set up for Wednesday, December 20, 2000. A meeting with the Environmental Board will take place in January 2001. A formal review with the Planning and Zoning Board will take place in February 2001. A target representative will be present on January 3, 2001, to discuss the project. CSAH 49 RECONSTRUCTION, JOHN POWELL Staff advised the County Engineer has received the letter and resolution from the City and has indicated he is willing to attend a joint meeting. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, LINDA WAITE SMITH Staff advised the Council needs to schedule additional meetings to discuss the Comprehensive Plan. It was suggested that the Council meet on the off Wednesdays in January 2001. Council directed staff to tentatively schedule Comprehensive Plan work sessions on January 10 and January 24, 2001, 6:00 p.m. Staff advised Chair John Sullivan from the Charter Commission is expecting to have a joint meeting with the Council on January 11, 2001. Staff added they are attending a meeting tomorrow regarding the Community Block Grant. • • • Since 1897 CONCRETE PRODUCTS COMPANY October 13, 2000 Mary Kay Wyland Planning Coordinator City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN. 55014 Re: Amending Our Conditional Use Permit. Dear Mary Kay; Since we received our conditional use permit in 1997, we have made a conscious effort to minimize the exposure of our neighbors to unnecessary noise. One of the conditions of our permit is to use strobe lights instead of beepers as movement warning devices on our equipment before 8:OOam. The new material handling equipment we have purchased is equipped from the factory with strobe lights that operate whenever the equipment is running. It is also an OSHA requirement that all equipment where the operator has obstructed view to the rear be equipped with an audible warnindevice. Since 1997, we have installed the quietest warning devises available and positioned them in a way to minimize the distance they can be heard from. We have hired an outside company to do noise level tests along our north property line. The results of these tests show that we comply with the Minnesota Pollution Control Standards, which is the standard that the city of Lino Lakes follows. At this time we would like to have the portion of the conditional use permit pertaining to the use of strobe lights instead of beepers removed from the permit. We feel that the safety of our employees comes first and that it is impossible to operate without the use of audible warning devises to make them aware of the moving equipment. Sincerely, Randall G. Molin Facilities Manager OUR MISSION IS "BUILDING" CUSTOMER SATISFACTION THROUGH GENERATIONS OF TEAMWORK Flexicore Hollowcore Plank • Wallpanels • Beams and Columns • Misc. Precast 415 Lilac Street • Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 •Office 651 - 786 -7722 • FAX 651 - 786 -0229. 1- 800 - 336 -6546 • EOE /AA COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 27,1997 Council Member Bergeson moved to approve the James Speiser minor subdivision. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. - Consideration of Molin Concrete, 415 Lilac Street Requests: Mr. Brixius explained that Molin Concrete wishes to expand their production and outdoor storage facilities located at the corner of Lilac and 4th Street. Specifically, they want to add production area with a taller batch plant which requires a variance from the City's height requirement, to vacate an easement which now splits off the northern portion of their property, and to use that portion of their property zoned Light Industrial for outdoor storage of bulk product. In order to accomplish these goals, an amendment to the current zoning ordinance text would have to be considered together with an amended conditional use permit, interim use permit, variance, and street vacation. Mr. Brixius stated that Staff determined that it would be better to amend the existing Ordinance and identify outdoor storage as a principal use by interim use permit. Within the City's districts the interim use permit mechanism exists, but to date most have not been used. He added that a sunset clause can be included in an interim use permit, allowing for outdoor storage to expire as use changes. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of this permit, pursuant to the following conditions: 1. The City approve the requested zoning ordinance text amendment establishing open and outdoor storage as an interim use in the LI Zoning District. 2. The City approve the requested vacation of 77th Street. 3. The City Council specifically approve an outdoor storage area surfacing material other than blacktop or concrete. 4. Outdoor lighting is prohibited in the site's outdoor storage area (north of 77th Street). Permissible exterior lighting shall be hooded and directed to reflect light away from neighboring residential properties and rights -of -way. 5. Consideration is given to aligning the site's western access point (from 4th Avenue) with 77th Street. This issue should be subject to further comment by the City Engineer. 6. A minimum 150 -foot setback is maintained along the subject site's northern boundary. The buffer yard shall extend 40 feet north into this 150 -foot setback line. 7. The City shall prohibit on -street truck parking along Lilac Street. 8. All additional site signage shall comply with applicable City sign requirements. 9. All applicable MPCA requirements are satisfactorily met. 10. All proposed structures comply with applicable City building material requirements. 11. The following noise mitigation efforts are utilized: a. Concrete product (precast wall panels) are stored parallel to the northerly buffer yard to act as a sound buffer. b. The outdoor storage yard is arranged such that truck backing maneuvers toward residential properties are minimized. COUNCIL MINUTES - ' OCTOBER 27, 1997 c. Strobe lights replace truck back -up beepers during nighttime hours (6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.) 12. Comments by other City Staff. 13. The landscape plan shall be amended to show the following: a. The berm location. b. Berm height of not less than 7 feet. c. A solid row of coniferous trees on the north side of the buffer yard with a row of deciduous trees on the south side of the buffer yard. d. Landscaping along 4th Avenue. e. Irrigation for buffer area. 14. The interim use permit will expire if there is a change in the land use in the LI District. Mr. Brixius explained that between the September and October Planning and Zoning Board meetings, the applicant had an opportunity to conduct neighborhood meetings and work through issues of noise, appearance and setback. The amended site plan before Council at this time reflects changes made as a result of these meetings. With respect to the setback, rather than the 75 -foot setback suggested by Code a 150 -foot setback is proposed. Additionally, the buffer yard would not be on the property line but along the 150 -foot setback line. The screening is to include a berm that is at least seven (7) feet in height, and that the buffer yard be planted as suggested in Item No. 13.c. above. With respect to lighting and noise, the applicant has indicated that the storage yard north of 77th Street would not be lit, and that back -up beepers would be replaced as suggested above. Another issue was the staging of trucks. The applicant proposes to move some of the outdoor storage to accommodate staging within the confines of Molin's property and allow for egress onto 4th Street. Council Member Bergeson requested that Condition No. 12 be specified prior to consideration by Council. Mr. Brixius suggested that egress onto 4th Street and not limiting hours of operation would be appropriate items to add as conditions. Council Member Lyden expressed concern about impacting quality of life for the residents of that neighborhood through this proposal. Mr. Brixius explained that the zoning for this site currently supports the Molin Concrete operation; however, all parties recognize the possibility for problems as the operation expands, and consideration has been given to the wishes of both Molin and the area residents in an effort to come to a satisfactory compromise. Council Member Bergeson asked for detail on the height and variance regulations. Mr. Brixius stated that the proposed batch plant will be 80 feet in height, with the standard being 45 feet in General Industrial areas. Council Member Bergeson asked about the water tower. Mr. Ahrens stated that the proposed water tower will be 150 feet in height. Council Member Bergeson asked if any concern had been expressed regarding the Airpark. Mr. Brixius explained that there has been communication with the Airpark, and it has been determined and agreed that this project would not interfere with the Airpark operation. Mr. Schumacher requested detail regarding the proposed landscaping plan. Mr. Brixius provided a sketch of the proposed landscaping, and indicated that the proposed details will be carried forward through the adjustments to the site plan. COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 27, 1997 Mayor Landers asked the applicant if the backup requirements for trucks operating during nighttime hours would apply to any trucks on Molin's property. The applicant explained that changes have already made to distance - sensitive beepers which are much quieter than those used previously, and that OSHA has given its approval to changing to strobe lights as required. With respect to trucks belonging to other companies that might enter Molin's property, there would be no control over their backup equipment. Mayor Landers suggested that Condition No. 11.c. be reworded to refer to a requirement for strobe lights on Molin's trucks specifically. Council Member Lyden asked what percentage of increase in business would result from this expansion. The response was 30 %. Mr. Brixius suggested the following wording for Condition No. 11.c.: "Molin equipment and trucks shall be outfitted with strobe lights to replace backup beepers during nighttime hours." Consideration of FIRST READING, Ordinance No 31 97 Establishing Open and Outdoor Storage as an Interim Use in City's Light Industrial (LI) Zoning District (4 /5ths Vote) - Council Member Lyden moved to approve the FIRST READING of Ordinance No. 31 - 97, as presented. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Amended Conditional Use Permit - Council Member Kuether moved to approve the amended conditional use permit. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Interim Use Permit - Council Member Bergeson moved to approve the interim use permit. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Variance - Council Member Kuether moved to approve the height variance. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Street Vacation, Resolution No. 97 -156 - Council Member Neal moved to adopt Resolution No. 97 - 156, as presented. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 97 - 156 can be found at the end of these minutes. Council Member Kuether expressed appreciation for the applicants' patience with respect to the City's consideration of their project. Consideration of Highland Meadows Requests: Mr. Brixius explained that North Suburban Development is proposing approval of a 166 -unit mixed density development called Highland Meadows on 65.9 acres of land west of 79th Street and north on Marilyn. Applications for consideration are rezoning from R -1 to R -3, approval of a planned unit development, approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment, and approval of a preliminary plat with conditions outlined by Staff. Following numerous Planning and Zoning Board and neighborhood reviews, the density issue remains predominant. Medium density is desired as a transition between the area zoned Light Case Number 00233015 Details • CASE DESCRIPTION: OC - NOISE INDUSTRIAL DATE OF INCIDENT: 10/28/2000 08:23 LOCATION OF INCIDENT: 415 LILAC ST, LINO LAKES, MN 55014- NAME DOB SEX INVOLVEMENT PIERCE, RANDALL BRUCE MOLINE CONCRETE 3/16/1950 M MENTIONED OTHER REPORTING OFFICER(S): R0251 CARROLL, JAMES S NARRATIVE: Synopsis: I received MDT information from an anonymous complaint about a noise ordinance at Molin Concrete. Upon arrival, I spoke with Randy Pierce who is the supervisor. I told him about the ordinance and he said that it applies to the back north side of the plant. He stated that he had told the employees to wait till 0900 bu tthe employee was still out using a power saw. Pierce said he would stop using the saw till 0900. Clear. • • Case Number 00235915 Details • CASE DESCRIPTION: OC - NOISE INDUSTRIAL DATE OF INCIDENT: 11/1/2000 05:06 LOCATION OF INCIDENT: 415 LILAC ST, LINO LAKES, MN 55014- NAME DOB SEX INVOLVEMENT MILLER, DOUGLAS WILLIAM MOLINE CONCRETE 2/21/1959 M COMPLAINANT OTHER REPORTING OFFICER(S): RMMH HAGERT, MELISSA NARRATIVE: Synopsis: 1 received a radio call of trucks beeping in Molin Concrete. I arrived and checked the area and could hear a faint beeping sound coming from Molin Concrete. Cleared. • • Case Number 2000210657 Details • CASE DESCRIPTION: OC - NOISE INDUSTRIAL DATE OF INCIDENT: 9/29/2000 04:32 LOCATION OF INCIDENT: 415 LILAC ST, LINO LAKES, MN NAME DOB SEX INVOLVEMENT CABLE, DIANE JO MOLINE CONCRETE 8/27/1944 F COMPLAINANT OTHER REPORTING OFFICER(S): RKJL LEIBEL, KYLE NARRATIVE: RECEIVED A RADIO CALL OF LOUD CONSTRUCTION SOUNDS DISTURBING COMING FROM MOLINE CONCRETE EQUIPMENT. ARRIVED AND HEARD SOME EQUIPMENT SOUNDS VERY NOTICEABLE IN THAT AREA. CASE ALREADY BEING FOLLOWED UP. REF CASE #00- 209086. • Case Number 2000229944 Details • CASE DESCRIPTION: OC - NOISE INDUSTRIAL DATE OF INCIDENT: 10/24/2000 04:54 LOCATION OF INCIDENT: 415 LILAC ST, LINO LAKES, MN NAME DOB SEX INVOLVEMENT CABLE, DIANE JO 8/27/1944 F COMPLAINANT REPORTING OFFICER(S): RMMH HAGERT, MELISSA NARRATIVE: 00- 229944 Officer: M. Hagert #112 Date: 10 -24 -00 Synopsis: I received a radio call of trucks beeping at Moline Concrete. I arrived and checked the area and did not hear any noise. Clear. • 641-01 04 r LINO LAKES, POLICE DEPARTMENT 840 Torn Center PeAOwey Phone (651)982.2300 Fex (851)8822389 ORI MN0020700 CLAS$IFICAT10 CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION REPORTING OFFICER{$) C-a5/27 tAiy ICE ADD'L PAGES CASE NUMBER CO Z- 2,3Cp3® CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION DATE REPORTED ASSIGNED ARRIVED o> tC' aSW EARLIEST DATE/TIME OCCURRED - LOCATION OF OPFENSEIINCIDENT CD �Y C, /mac AJJ REPORTING PARTY'S NAME tr 4 /4 t ie j LATEST DATE,II E OCCURRED VALUE STOLEN $ DATE OF BIRTH SEX VALUE DAMAGED RACE VALUE RECOVERED HOME PHONE ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP WORK PHONE Cam, NARRATIVE PERSONS IDENTIFIED IN REPORT NAME CODES A -ADULT ARRESTED, 8 -WARN, C- COMPI.,AIWWT, D -DRIVER- F- FAMILYIPARENT, I- INVOLVED. J- JUVENILE ARRESTED. M- MENTIONED, O-OWNER, P- PASSENGER R•REPORTED'BY, S- SUSPECT. T-TICKETED, V- VICTIM, VV- WITNESS. X- TRANSPORT. Z- WARRANT ARREST RACE CODES A- ASIAN, 8- BLACK, I- INDIAN, 0 - OTHER, W -WHITE AU CODE NAME DATE OF BIRTH SEX RACE HGT WGT HAIR EYES ADDRESS APT CITY STATE ZIP ALIAS ( ) NOME PHONE ( ) WORK PHONE ( ) OTHER PHONE AAJ CODE NAME DATE OF BIRTH SEX RACE HGT WGT HAIR EYES ADDRESS APT CITY STATE ZIP ALIAS ( ) HOME PHONE ( ) WORK PHONE ( ) OTHER PHONE NJ CODE NAME DATE OF BIRTH SEX RACE MGT WGT HAIR EYES ADDRESS APT CITY STATE ZIP ALAS ( ) HOME PHONE ( ) WORK PHONE ( ) OTHER PHONE 1 d 09L1' °N 11/.\ 1NDAVd30 3)110d SDIV1 ON 11 NV814: 11 0002 ' 91 ' .00 • • To whom it may concern: My name is Kathleen Schwartz. I live at 472 Greenwood Lane. This property is attached to Moline Concrete's property. I would like to address the planning and zoning board and the city council about the conditional use permit for Moline Concrete. I am against the continuation of the conditional use permit for many reasons and see no reason at all to permit changes to the existing permit. The first reason is the noise. Moline Concrete in accordance with the permit is not allowed to run the beepers from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 am. I can not tell you how many times the beepers are on all through the night. My family is not able to sleep with the windows open in the summer - If we do we are awaken between 3:OOam and 4:OOam. and unable to get back to sleep. We are still able to hear the beepers with the windows closed but it is not as loud. This has been reported to both the company and the Police by my neighbors. (the Cables, Miller's and myself). This is only reported about one hundredth of the time it occurs. I have also called Moline in 1997 and 1998 and never received a call back from Randy or Tom Moline. I have received a copy of the letter dated November 7, 2000 from Randall Moline to Mary Kay Wyland. In this letter Randall Moline stated that the company conducted tests on October 24th and 25th. I do believe these test to have been preformed. I question the accuracy of these tests however, 1 am never awakened by the traffic from the freeway. I do agree that I can hear the traffic when I am outside and no other activities are going on but the noise is very faint. Mr. Moline would like the city to believe (as stated) that the noise is really coming from other sources and they(Molin's)are getting the blame for all noises. This is not true — I do know if the noise is coming from the freeway, other business or the forklifts 400 ft. from my windows. I feel that when these tests were taken — the beepers were either not monitored to see what the noise level was or they were on next to the factory on the south end of the property. We have never complained about the beepers when used on the south side of the property. I would like to have a test run when the neighbors and a representative from the city can be present. The police department did a test and found the noise to exceed the noise limit. Moline states that this test was done incorrectly. Why? How should it have been preformed? The letter also states that OSHA rules have changed causing the conditions of their agreement with the neighbors and the city to need changing. He continues stating that the safety and welfare of his workers is the most important issue. I agree with this statement. I don't however see how this effects the conditional use permit. If the company is concerned with the workers safety and under federal law is required to follow OSHA law then they should not run the heavy equipment on the north end of his property until after the hours agreed upon. If as Mr. Molin states in this letter that "the company is locked into the way it does business and can not abide by the condition for approval" they should be required to provide something to reduce or eliminate the noise. The one suggestion that I have is a • • • concrete wall. This seems to work on the freeway noise and would probably work for our situation as well. They could pay for the wall out of the moneys provided by the city and state to expand their operations. This money came from us the taxpayers. They have (or will) provided a berm. This was built for the view not the sound. It was states at our meeting that a berm does nothing for noise. Randall Moline was quoted in the City of Lino Lakes minutes as saying that he has only received complaints from two of the neighbors. I don't feel that this is an accurate statement. I know that he has received calls from the Cables, Millers and myself. I try to _ be a good neighbor and not complain. I have never placed a call to the police. I felt that the company was aware of the problem when they received one call and didn't need to get several before that took the complaint seriously. Randy also stated that he gave us a phone number to call in 1997 but he has never returned any of our calls. I do not hear the beepers very often in the winter when my windows are closed and the furnace is on. I do hear them everyday in the summer if I leave my windows open. In order to sleep through the night I have to sleep with my windows shut and my air conditioner and fan running. I do not think that this is a sacrifice that I should have to make in order to sleep in my own home. I pay taxes — which have just increased to $3,200 next year. This is a great deal of money to pay to live in a home that my family has troubles sleeping past 4am, can't use my yard a couple of weeks a year due to the sand flying off of the yard and berm , has damage done to the south side of my home (also due to the sand), and pay extra money to run electrical appliances in order to drown out the sound of Moline Concrete factory (and deliveries). I know that this has or will depreciate the value of my home if or when I choose to sell it. There are Cranes, Dump trucks, forklifts, and Semi's that come with in a few of hundred feet of our property lines. All of these vehicles make a lot of noise. The machine that lifts for walls of concrete is also loud and all of these machines shake the ground. They also use chain saws to saw off the end of the rebarb. All of these sounds awakens us. There is currently a pile of sand on the north end. Moline has been selling (or giving away) the sand. This means that we are still going to have the dump trucks and cranes at the berm next summer. There is a lot of dust created by the movement of all of these vehicles. I have photographs of this —I will enclose some of these. I would like to have the pictures returned if you don't need it. I am contemplating hiring a lawyer about this issue. I am unable to use my yard or leave my windows open if the wind blows at all. If I do leave a window open I have sand all over in my house. If I am out in the yard I get sand in my eyes and am unable to enjoy my property. It was agreed that Moline were going to lie down used asphalt to eliminate this problem. I'm not sure what made it into the permit but the company, neighbors and the city agreed this to. We also agreed to a berm. The berm was to be off of the property line 150 feet. They showed us a lay out with pine, deciduous trees, and bushes mixed to cover the whole berm. It has been three and a half years since we all agreed on this. It took Two and a • • half years to get the berm. There were a few trees place on the berm in the Fall of 2000. I however have no trees of any kind behind my property. There is one bush on the side that should grow to around three feet. This causes two problems - The first being the dirt that blows from the berm. There is not any ground cover or trees to keep this from happening. Also I have a view of concrete from all of the windows on the backside of my house. In conclusion, I feel that Moline Concrete and the city of Lino Lakes have both not held up to their part with this conditional use permit. Moline has not done what they promised the neighbors and city. The city also has not held them to implementing the conditions that made it possible for Moline to use this land. The city said at the meeting that this land does not have to be rezoned to heavy industrial in order to let Moline use it. They felt that since it was just being used for storage that this would not be a problem. I have to disagree with this. With all of the heavy equipment and the work shifts running almost around the clock it would have to be zoned as a Heavy industrial area in order to be zoned correctly. If this were used as a light industrial area we would not have to deal with the noise or sand. 1 look at the rest of the small business on Apollo Dr. and they are not creating any noise. Most of them run a day shift and the work is done on the inside of their building. This conditional use permit is also in direct violation of the 20/20 vision for the city. The city vision states that there should be a separation from heavy industrial business and residential. This plan was in place when the conditional use permit was allowed. The zoning board also stated that they would make sure the conditions were carried out and as far as I can tell they have not done this. I know that if any of the members of this board lived where I do this zoning issue would not be allowed. Please keep all of the constituents in mind when planning and rezoning (issuing conditional use permits). Thanks Kathleen Schwartz 651 -780 -9684 home 651 -263 -3255 cell kathleen_schwartz. z%hotrnaii.com Please call or write with any questions. I will be also be attending all meetings • • • STAFF ORGANIZATION: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM V. B Cindy Sherman, NAC February 13, 2001 PDO Preliminary Development Plan/ Preliminary Plat Staff has been working with Ryan Companies, US Inc. on a proposed retail development located in the northeast quadrant of Lake Drive /I -35 W. Interchange. The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the concept plan for the site in December of 2000. The main issue raised by staff, and discussed by the City Council and Planning and Zoning Board relate to the site layout and design and the departure from the Town Center vision. The direction provided through the concept process was to incorporate special pedestrian- oriented design features, as well as some special architectural elements into the proposal with the goal being an "above average shopping center ". This has been done and is more fully discussed within this report. This review is based on plan submittals stamped received by the City on January 16, 2001. Preliminary Project Summary Site Area Target Superstore Other Retail Space Parking 40.15 acres 182,760 sq.ft. 150,198 sq.ft. 1,644 stalls Existing Comprehensive Plan: Shopping Center Draft New Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Existing Zoning: SC, Shopping Center Proposed Zoning: SC /PDO Overlay • Ryan Companies Target Superstore Page 2 of 5 Zoning: The property is currently zoned SC, Shopping Center District. This designation anticipated the development of a single center generally under one ownership. There is no provision in the SC ordinance to allow zero lot line setbacks for buildings and parking as proposed. In order to accommodate the development as proposed, it is necessary to process the application under the PDO, Planned Development Overlay District. Section 3, Subd. 3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a PDO to allow subdivision of lots for a single building. This process allows greater flexibility and consequently a more creative and imaginative design. It allows flexibility in the internal setbacks and in parking for combined uses and is the appropriate means for review of a development of this size and scope. Transportation Access to the site is proposed via an extension of Apollo Drive from Lake Drive through the site to 77th Street. An additional access is proposed to Lake Drive approximately 520 feet north of the Apollo access. All accesses with Lake Drive (County Road 23) are subject to the approval of Anoka County. • The City Engineer is in the process of conducting a traffic study that will identify which improvements are necessary to accommodate the development. Improvements may include, but are not limited to turn lanes, by -pass lanes and signalization. Design alternatives to deter traffic from using Carole Drive need to be examined and implemented if necessary. Utilities Detailed plans have been submitted for sanitary sewer, water and storm water management. The City Engineer has reviewed the information submitted and a copy of his memo is attached for reference. The issues raised by the Engineer are based on the plans and information provided. Revised plans or additional information may result in additional comments. Natural Features There is a large wetland located on the eastern portion of the site that is proposed to be impacted. There are 752 trees on the site and 566 of these are significant based on their size and species. The grading proposed on the site will result in the removal of 437 significant trees and a total of 458 trees. Most of the trees on the property are concentrated in around the wetland or on the southwest portion of the site. • • • • Ryan Companies Target Superstore Page 3of5 Pedestrian Elements The site design has incorporated a sidewalk layout along Apollo Drive and throughout the site along the storefronts. There are sidewalk connections shown at both accesses proposed with Lake Drive. Additionally, different pavement treatments are proposed at significant crossing points within the development. Green Space /Landscaping Green space on the site is concentrated around the perimeter of the site and surrounding ponding and wetland areas. The landscaping plan calls for plantings within parking lots along drive aisles and surrounding the site. The overall plan is well done and provides a variety of plantings. Some plantings are shown within MnDOT right -of- way, which will require cooperation from MnDOT. The critical portion of the landscape proposed is along the northern edge of the site, which is adjacent to existing residential uses. The plan as proposed will provide a visual break but it will not provide a complete screen. Building Exteriors Retail Sites The exterior of the buildings are proposed to be a combination of masonry materials including brick and rockface block with EIFS (stucco) sign bands and accenting. The decorative roof elements include standing seam metal that complement the roof designs in existing Town Square buildings. Awnings are proposed over the storefront areas. The backs of the buildings are designed as "backs ". Because of the site layout some type of design element needs to be applied to the buildings to enhance the look. As proposed, it is quite plain with a series of service doors that face the public streets. Target The Target Superstore uses a combination of brick and stucco on the front which transitions to stucco and rockface block on the sides. The rear elevation is proposed to be painted CMU (concrete masonry unit). With the surrounding land uses, more attention needs to be paid to the architecture on the rear of the building. It will be very visible from 77th Street. There is a screen wall shown on the rear of the building, but materials to be used were not identified. This should be constructed of materials to match the building and should be of sufficient height to screen the dock area. • • • Trash enclosures have not been identified on the site plan. of all dumpsters shall be addressed prior to City action. Park Dedication Ryan Companies Target Superstore Page 4 of 5 The location and screening The applicant has proposed that the City accept outlots that include ponding and right - of -way in lieu of park dedication. This would not be consistent with City ordinance or policy. Cash fees in lieu of land dedication should be provided at the rate in effect at the time of the final plat. The current rate is based on a formula of $133 per 1,000 square feet of building, or approximately $44,000. Environmental Assessment Worksheet Based on the size of the proposed project, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is mandatory. This process is designed to identify significant environmental effects that may require a more detailed environmental impact statement. No final action may be taken on applications related to the site until the EAW process is complete. Rice Creek Watershed Review Wetland delineations and mitigation designs that have been completed cannot be verified until spring. The ability to fill and replace wetland area could have a significant impact on the site design therefore any action by the City would be premature until the wetland issues are addressed. Signs The sign ordinance allows one pylon sign per street frontage, up to 200 square feet, with 25% of the sign designated for the Center name. The applicants are proposing two pylon signs with a sign face of 285 square feet plus the center name, which is approximately 35 square feet in area. On the retail buildings wall signs are proposed over each tenant space and on the rear of the buildings. Staff does not support signs on the rear of the building unless it is incorporated into some enhanced design. The Target facility proposes a number of signs on three sides of the building. There is no signage proposed on the rear of Target. The total square footages allowed are based on the wall area; up to 20% of the wall area or 100 square feet whichever is less. In this case, the wall areas are very large and 100 square feet is not adequate area for signage. The front of the building is approximately 9836 sq. ft. in area, which allows up to 1967 sq. ft. of signage. Target is proposed to have a total of 1320 square feet of signage on the front elevation, which is within the 20% allowed. Ryan Companies Target Superstore Page 5 of 5 Preliminary Plat The application includes a preliminary plat for the site. The plat as submitted is incomplete in that it does not include dimensions on property lines. A more detailed preliminary plat is required in order to perform a complete review. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board discuss the site plan, building design and signs proposed, provide direction to the applicants and then continue the public hearing until such time as the EAW process is complete and wetland fill and mitigation plans are approved by Rice Creek. • • eTKDA • • TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: John Powell Reference: Target Copies To: From: Jason Wedel 1500 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-2140 PHONE: 651 /292 -4400 FAX: 651/292 -0083 Excellence est Lino Lakes, Minnesota Date: January 23, 2001 Commission No. 11985 -012 I have reviewed the preliminary plans for Town Center received on January 16, 2001. I have the following comments: 1. The 99 feet of right -of -way shown on the preliminary plat for Apollo Drive at Lake Drive will likely be inadequate. The developer will need to work with Anoka County Highway Department and determine what turning movements will be necessary. Then the appropriate amount of right -of -way can be determined. 2. The access to the site off of Lake Drive, between Apollo Drive and 77th Street, will need to be reviewed by the Anoka County Highway Department. 3. Details are needed for sanitary, watermain, storm sewer, streets, and erosion control construction. 4. A licensed surveyor must sign the preliminary plat and all lines must be dimensioned. 5. The drainage calculations need to include the calculations for the time of concentrations used. Currently, they are directly entered. 6. The calculations for the post development 10 -year storm were not included in the report. 7. The calculations for the pre - development 1, 10, and 100 -year storms were not included in the report. 8. A copy of the soil report from AET must be submitted. The current submittal only contains the soil boring logs. 9. All pipe lengths and grades for the sanitary sewer must be shown on the utility plan. 10. The minimum allowable size watermain is 8 inch. 11. The minimum allowable size sanitary sewer main is 8 inch. 12. All watermain fittings must be shown on the utility plan. 13. The size of the water service for Retail D must be shown on the utility plan. 14. Connections to the existing sanitary manholes on Lake Drive must be outside drops. 15. The draintile must be shown on the utility plan. An Equal Opportunity Employer John Powell January 23, 2001 ID Page 2 16. All watermain is to be listed as Ductile Iron Pipe Class 52. 17. The flow arrows for the sanitary sewer from Retail D to SSMH104 are pointing in the wrong direction. 18. Storm sewer manhole STMH54 is labeled as STMH69 in the storm sewer table. 19. Storm sewer information including pipe size, lengths and grades must be shown in the plan view. 20. The flow arrows from CB55 to STMH54 are pointing in the wrong direction. 21. The flow arrows from F 1 to CBMH 19 are pointing in the wrong direction. 22. The 894 contour around Pond 1 and the bioretension basin is drawn incorrectly. 23. Why do the storm sewer manholes and catch basins to have 3 -foot sumps? 24. Additional calculations are needed to support the bioretension basins. If you have any questions or comments regarding this review, please contact me. • incLokes \DWG \lino Preliminary Plans for Site, Grading, Sanitary Sewer, Water Main, Storm Sewer, Lighting, Landscaping, and Infiltration for Town Center Lino Lakes, Minnesota PREPARED BY: PARSONS PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP INC. 111 Third Avenue South, Suite 350 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 USA Phone: (612)332 -0421 • Fox: (612)332 -6180 PREPARED FOR: YAN Ryan Companies US, Inc. 7001mematioual Cane 900 Second Avenue South MI:m=olis, MN, 55402 -3387 612036-1200 eocporate 131rilding j-ast 1g Rclatiooships 6121337 -5552 fax LOCATION MAP REVISION DESCRIPTION DATE SHEET NAME NO. TITLE SHEET TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY D ... DRAFT PRELIMINARY PUT T PRELIMINARY TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 4 M SITE PLAN 5 PRELIMINARY SITE PUN 5 .. - PRFIIMIN ARYGRAOING AND DRAINAGE PUN � 8 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN PRELIMINARY UGHTING PLAN ..____ _....... PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN PRELIMINARY SITE INFlLTRATION. 110 PRO.ECT 110. 644268 PLOT DATE 01/15/01 Lino Lakes Town Center PREUMINARY PLANS LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA TITLE SHEET 1 /// -- — — ,C4A YE1 OR/ AY CONCRETE ORIYEWAY • LEJ W vo 11 2.0 R2HT OF WAY PER DEED OE 8428401 WAY PER BOOK 27 OE DEED2 PACE 491 S$9 ,.'n 3" Coll 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin Cities Area 454 -0002 MN. Toll Free 1 -800- 252 -1166 77TH1 j_ TREET) 91 942 ACK TINE 1 911 Y6U .y 44C / /P4 J IJ / iANY N897 11422 G 709.25 AS PEARS ' BY I PETERSON rNHRpMEWE Ur . I N. O 9, SE m /3 91!5 9 461 /APPROACH 917.3 tst 10 o 4 81200 ( N897202 iik o N�� No. TERST PTE tiN TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PROVIDED BY: WWestwood Professional Services, Inc a MI MN s Mosa.L9wJ/sm9Aaw MI LEGEND ExtSnNG — — — — RIGHT— OF—WA7 U NE — — — — PROPERTY UNE O—c JJ CATCH SET�MA FLARED ENO SECTION W/RPRAP CATRU 8A9N AY4R TOPOGRAPHICAL CONTOUR UNE r TREE -b REGULATORY SIGN CT COMMUNICATION JUNCTION BOX HYDRANT .pl POSER PCtE • ARKING SE I73.40( LOW N89'12'03 'W — — — — — — • —} 709.25 + 1 1 unuTY EASEMENT O 66' VB SW'`S "G� `eLey ILYG .GNG dNG' -' �&.r�� LOT 6 LOT 7 Oo••�� O O 0 0 d LOT 8` n p o 0 o C VACATED 77p STREET) 1172.00 Oj Q0 S89'12'03 "E UDLITY EASEMENT 0 0 aoG V\ LOT (VACATED 77TH iS TREET) r I �PARKNG SETBACK uNE —. — —. — — - ; 1 j 11 `r\ OU7LOT B I `S 5..WG SETBADY LAE DRAINAGE AND UTVJTY EASE IIT OVER ALL OF CU LOT 8 0 0 z� n OS Z: a"$ ce 1342 IN ra, Z §• 0 I-„ EL tgg 01 ac> 1 l 1 I ; r I E 30' —Al I — OU7LOT A s DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT OVER ALL OF OUTT_0T A 1 • O LOT 1 s — O O O CO LOT 3 391.01 N8912'02 "W OUTLOT D 0 - / r� - / .c - -j/ - / — ` 05 D 46' OUTLOTC - - - -$. - - • - ��/ DRAINAGE AND UDEN, EASEMENT�� / oVER AU a OBROT O ARXN'G SfTBALN ENE 0 DR1/VE- OUTLOT E 808.43 (MEAS.) 81200± (DEED) N89'12'02 "W — 35\14 (° S- No. PRELIMINARY PLAT PREPARED BY: wWestwood Professional Servloes, htG ten sea sureowat Nes aan•wrraemoa NORTH eo so ao w FEET 3 0 m Call 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin Cities Area 454 -0002 MN. Toll Free 1 -800- 252 -1166 MN PRESERVED TREES • OTT ROM= rmavx. a.eea Iw.* i..m�r`� s NVmo er+ wwwr ..w Comma iShrnittaeo wr ce•••• NORTH T2. 180 SCALE IN FEET hil ig bab 1 ; .'.k' o 1 mi w ih Ail ICI • • / L7 / / i, // 17./ TED STREET) Call 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin Cities Area 454 -0002 MN. Toll Free 1- 800- 252 -1166 i (VACATED 77TH STREET) T• 1 LPticxwe S0 T9Aar (00 1 � I / I 814.09'7 5E19400 I EArST 3✓' /.6aSi,/G/ / 4C7PVG 27.0' 4223' (»371555 4310910 PARXNO OFF. GET E2760 LL 807.4' 10i h 6 POND 1 -__ :2 :2 7�✓ 2304 1: j 1::;11 111i. iii �rctnr t40.ltt r1::.i i:t . 4fj 100801E1411ON BASH / 34 • --611u16NOV IIOETT 41XTURE 610' • Ao RETADI96 WALL i���6,.�w�■ =47222:: R R�Tn� TREE GRATE (1TP.) 3D• RETAKNO WALL ORNAMENTAL WALL (TIP.) 40' PYLON SIM / AELYM0 SCRAM' CPC — SITE DATA LOT HLOCK Lcrr ACRES BUILDING S.F. PARKING P:1RffiNGG 1 1 14.17 182.760 1,006 910 1 2 1.34 11,006 61 82 2 2 1.49 13,346 74 72 3 2 1.5 13,346 74 65 4 2 1.16 6,400 36 34 5 2 1.41 6,400 36 34 6 2 3.08 37,003 204 150 7 2 2.33 .31,500 174 134 8 2 2.79 31,200 172 132 TOTAL 29.27 332.958 1,837 1,645 OU1L0T A 3.85 — — — OUTLOT 8 1.49 — — — OUTLOT C 1.07 — — — OUILOT 0 1.03 — — — OUTLOT E 0.06 — — — OUTLOT F 0.49 — — — GRAND TOTAL 37.26` 332,958 1,837 1.644 'NOT INCLUDED: 4.6 ACRE APOLLO DRIVE RIGHT OF WAY. !' COME1E SDEEWIALN (TIP.) SITE NOTES • ALL DRff7SI0N5 SHOW/ ARE TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • CONTRACTOR SKILL HELD VERFY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXSRIG UTUITES ANO TOPOORAPWC FEATURES. SUCH AS r]G51FC CUTTER GRIMM AT THE PROPOSED ERNEW4 YS, PRIOR TO THE START OF SITE GRADMI0. THE CQimAC70R SHALL 6 400461ELY N0197 THE 0661EER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FOOD THE PLANS. • HA00GFPED PARKING STALLS RILL BE PROVIDED AND IDENTIFIED PER AEA CODES AND LOCATED ON 511E AND 57046 E PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION. • ALL CURB AHD GUTTER TO BE CONCRETE 0612 UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. • TYPICAL FULL 500 90 PARXING STALL IS 9X19' UNLESS NOTED 01HEA615E • ALL CURB RAW RILL BE 10' muss No1ED OTHERWISE • CONCRETE APRONS TO BE INSTALLED FOR ALL ACCESS D RIVES ON TO 4(16110 514atla PER CRY STANDARDS. • REFER TO UCNLDN: PLAN FOR FOOOYNOLE PRN1 • BOUD943 061940440 REIER TO 041181E OF BU5Df46 FACE (OP.) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • VA REFERS TO VAR ACCESSIBLE STALL WMCH MOIRES AN B' STALL AND B' LN1O6010 AREA • RETAP NG WALL - COLOR OF MODIAAR 8LOCN TO 00 50105106 BY GUIDING ARCHITECT. WRIST COCOA AND TEXTURE SELECTIONS FOR APPROVAL MI LEGEND — — — — RIO6T —OF —WAY 1)90 — — — — PROPERTY LNE CURB ONE 6 UGNT 41)OIIRE (SHOEBOX) ORNAMENTAL UGHT FIXTURE VAN ACCESSIBLE PARIaNG PEDESTRIAN RAMPS NORTH 120 180 N FEET ®®12®® F7aafC1•t "/f :11 T'aR.:}_ • to Til1NINAr'T.11 •. ��•∎•37 r '•AIf -fir u T17�1TJ "L/'.x�i L''Y.Z 7it':14 WinF ..,Ya V/YINAJir9 ii `Fifer F ALAN wImimiewe 1]•,fl foot N •a�l�l? mseree s->•;:var":s-a�Ar.,r• - TeiTi'••Fna R: \64426&i noto ke s \DWG \I in / / / / / / / /- / / / // / / L ROCK $UNITED ACCESS TO 77114 STREET DURING CONSTRUCTION (LIGHT VEHICLES ONLY) .. :r* -�. (.. 913 - 9IJ 1 1 '_ Aimarawirram 015417 CE WAY PER DEED CY R/OHr Or WAY PER BOOK 27 GC DEED5, PAGE AN Call 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin Mee Area 454 -0002 MN. Toll Free 1 -800- 252 -1166 77TH] TREET) s� A EXIST: MC PUG \D� r +� END (U.S. PROPOSED EXISTING ,.. NII1T -•Of -WAY UNE i PROPERTY UNE DAN= CURB UNE SE M1144 5 - 1 -1 -1- (ATD't MAN O. • YAHHOrEJ5007TARY SERER ROCK CONSTRucTION ENTRANCE 1! STORM SEWER DMA 907 ®® ® ®® • ri[ 7iI CAT i[ i. f•C,�" i'CCa { .71.0 =1 .1r.. n.1WTOIAAl11L>j Sa • r4( 1. nai: .. . 1fir i f�af =i� 111.-. a .-emir' ij r1•i� X' 1r • lr AF IT 1A - =a 1i:�r'>•i ral74141 .Sr1D�T1 L..i 17ft r Ear Lr .. ][ VALATFAMI ` - ',Amer >.1 ]P'TIC- .fir - t -Al r%irlir .1711 .1 11 X 1CLZ l i 'r ai .x 31'� 11 1RID'L al n ri 7n' T7raT It FACE ..AI fr_I•r_a� for_• .. r: , ■1• •fi AI[1. Jte -i tf>•r i.:.C:f1{:•pf•i�{y 1°a %AB r airtAIt i"1 .I: r a,:., FTAIMIN •i C.11 fl.1f7J-1•,VT., 'iLi •. h ∎{"F f1F 1 J• 1C'vrl- ra t�4AI•[.let :4 •1. )E ar c a:i •a •. rTIIINI f ac 111 .11TA 7•'...7 .a ,FAIar i•1 ;'. 11 .r 1117E X11 ,1'x ua r5AI•r M[�''F�l�F' lI AIr.TlJ''i t•[ ®® ® ®® raterr' 1 r ft. . If AI Z -l. J,.i rr••1fi1•r ", ,D t 11 - AIt Z l f t•ar'd�( tJl •1- AIr alfJ a T/merrino •1 AI( Z,rr mi r>_F !•r JT �p•tai . lrrl Ma'. AI Fi�F"AIar A •1 Nat AII Z i S" +i Fly y1•{ .lc r•1 1C'i ':w I•:i•F.!•i [•f . . ]1• • iFLa.w: � - rr�F`a[ Ltlr - .1F 'AIR .. -ax•' I PI•EN.FAIT'•Fal ;mil[ AIr3:f?k`111 !1 C4 AIa•�1•. -ltAL Er E. C ll rIr F•TJ i r4 r r T / T 11 it`Tg' nNIA C 1MFAIaf t 1r- 1F + 11 F :AI11F'AIar 7If >[ >•l Srh •%LAIN F �P1N /W flu • 11 i1 D 1•A,f_a F WINk:AIaT.'.T L. 1w717Y1':1[TIADA/?`a Art ®® ®®® •/•F. !MU •FM I M. J• 1 ;J. W •.> • l•r • I arAP a� J AIa4 AmI ..elf ■ F .111 RIM Zg.:A me 1 ! JI r •1 AIr, .7 l •• 1'�AIAI i u 7r"•"af 1[1.1 AIAI1 .E••[ 511 TWAT ?• a LIMINFTI■1 Tel a•N■C -r•1 •S • — •.l D •OI 11,MNIrrl1 =xx.( 'Slit' 4A c:,7'• =a r1�rAIr.C.-tarL`T' v =a ^.l {.:x �AI• l i Plaanraa[ �. Raiff, .. •I: I �) l 11••r —r " 1�r)amr_ A aor�t L'lr La•1fr>[ .,a l•FANNI1 .lR iCAI/fr1 7 1r rAINIF=VVIT .PT". Au C> A SIMI TO lr Su r4 MI GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES • CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES, SUCH AS EXISTING GUTTER GRADES AT THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS, PRIOR TO STMT OF SITE GRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM PLANS. • CONTRACTOR IS TO CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" FOR UTIUTY LOCATIONS - 454 -0002 48 HOURS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION\CONSTRUCTION. • REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR MOST CURRENT HORIZONTAL SITE DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT. d• 1 • THE SITE GRADING OPERATIONS, WHEN COMPLETED SHALL RESULT IN ALL AREAS BEING GRADED TO 'PLAN SUBGRADE ELEVATION ". THIS 'PLAN SUBGRADE ELEVATION" SHALL BE DETERMINED BY CHECKING SLAB THICKNESS ON THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. THE 'PLAN SUBGRADE ELEVATION" 114 THE PARKING LOT AND DRIVEWAY AREAS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY CHECKING THE PAVEMENT SECTION DETAILS, AND REFERRING TO PAVING PLAN FOR LOCATION AND WATTS OF VARIOUS PAVEMENT SECTIONS. • INSTALL SILT SACKS IN ALL CATCH BASINS LOCATED WORM DISTURBED AREAS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST 8E INSTALLED m PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF GRADING OPERATIONS AND BE MNNTNNED UNTIL ALL AREAS ALTERED ON THE SITE HAVE BEEN RESTORED. • ALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE SURFACED 87114 CRUSHED ROCK ACROSS FULL WIDTH FROM ENTRANCE PONT 10 50 FEET INTO CONSTRUCTION ZONE. REFER TO DETNL • CONTRACTOR SHALL STRIP, STOCKPILE AND RE- SPREAD SUFFICIENT TOPSOIL TO PROVIDE MINNAUM 4" DEPTH (COMPACTED) TO ALL AREAS DISTURBED, TO BE SODDED OR SEEDED. • CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALL. CATCH BASINS IN GUTTER SHALL BE SUMPED 0.15 FEET. RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS. • ALL ROOF DRAIN LOCATIONS TO BE VERIFIED WITH MECHANICAL • ALL SILT FENCE TO BE ORANGE IN COLOR. • HEAVY DUTY FENCE TO BE INSTALLED ON SLOPES OF 3:1 OR SlLLYER AND NEAR AREAS WHERE MATERIAL IS TO BE STOCK PILED, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. MPOGRAPHCAL CONTOUR UNE 1.110111 POLE HAWAII GATE VALVE 5GE. 800845 MT FENCE 4405 BALE NORTH 120 180 FEET 11 z m y 1 • C EXISTING RIM -912 INV -885! / / / / / i/ /,/ // 61 8 " -45 DIP BEND NV. •907,6 104 .•894.4 -MH 10 M -912 • NAT R { 9oi`o BETAS. D 510084 FT FFB4OOD 8' -45' DIP BEND 1 rN.-9 I3.0 FE E 840084 FR PPE-910.0 ._._._._ \ ' -6= PVC 0 0.40% HYDRANT 1 -6" GrJE VALVE 1-8x61 TEE L CONNECT TO EXIST. WATER MAIN r J I_ so L Coll 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin Cities Area 454 -0002 MN. Toll Free 1 -800 -252 -1166 676117 Q'' WAY PER DEED OF RMHT Or WAY PER BOON 27 OF 0EED5. PAGE 491., EMSP.VG ) /6:acfN /1 THYDFiANT 1 -6" GATE VALVE I1 -8x6' TEE V. ST FETAL F 37,00084 FT. PPE-W00 o 1 HYDRANT 1 -6" GATE VALVE 1- 6x6" TEE SSMH 108 8214 -909.1 INN -895.2 FETAL O 81,53p 84 FT. PPE-9100 FETAL I4 81 4 2008 FT. PPE-St/DA 0N.•9010 HYDRANT 1 -6' GATE VALVE 28' -6' DIP 1 -8'X6" TEE HYDRANT 1 -6' GATE VALVE 1 -8x8' CROSS 1 -8x6' REDUCER INN. •987.0 J _S Fr 3' SERVICE 0 HYDRANT 1 -6' GATE VALVE 28' -6' DIP 1 -8x6' TEE OFEE- 800.00 150780 U. ASr4a�•iAR6ET HYDRANT 1 -6' GATE VALVE 12' -6' DIP 1 -8x6' TEE VDRANT 1 -6' GATE 'ACNE 10' -6' DIP 1 -6x6' 1171 root M0.. 80•5 NAT. 09 9' PVC - 7Z�SSMH 109 RIM .909.0 INV•897.4 0 0.40%. HYDRANT 1 -6' GATE VALVE 1 -8x8' TEE 551611 108 RI11 -909.0 ON •896.3 -•4 • �1 Cj SSMH 110 RIM ■905.4 INV •899.2 it 211 -8' GV 1 -8x6' TEE I S5MH 111 RIM •908.0 INN •898.5 o i j SSTAH 112 RIM •908.0 INN •899.7 � 5504N 113 HYDRANT RIM -907.9 iNV •900.4 1 -6" GATE VALVE 12' -6" DIP 1-0x8' TEE 220221321510N BASH Ml. 2E60 MO, 2213 /0 • FETAL A 00684 FT FRE.906A 00 NT 1 -8' GATE VALVE 22'-6' DIP FETAL C 091800. Fr. FFEE000 L._ s 1A+�" �A►4- • SSW 100 Rao •914.3 9NV •986.9 SSMH 101 RIM -907.8 11N -88&1 S5MH 102 R91 -905.7 9N -889.0 0 FETAL 8 0340 84 P6 FFE•9060 064 -900.0 ti' PVC 8S 1 -8' GATE vE 1 -8x8' TEE SSMH 103 • Rat -908.7 9N •869.6 POW 2 10.. BMA N1t N0.• NMI UTILITY NOTES LEGEND =111 PROPOSED EXISTING 1801T -OF -WAY UNE PROPERTY UNE CURB UNE --- I -1 -1- .O• A0 V CATCH BASIN SEVER/MANN WATER MAIN MANH4E/SMOTPRY MICR UTIUTT POLE 904 KONG HYDRAN T GATE VALVE • CONTRACTOR SNAIL FED VERIFY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES. SUCH AS EXISTING GUTTER GRADES AT THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS. PRIOR TO START OF PAVING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM PLANS. • CONTRACTOR IS TO CONTACT 'GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" FOR UTIIJTY LOCATIONS - 454 -0002 48 HOURS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION \CONSTRUCTION. • REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR MOST CURRENT HORIZONTAL SITE DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT. • ALL WATER MAIN, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO 'STANDARD UTILITY SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE UNE INSTALLATION AND SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" 1988 EDmON, AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA • REFER TO GRADING PLAN FOR STORM SEWER LAYOUT. • ALL SALVAGED MATERIAL SHALL BE INSPEL1 t AND APPROVED BY ENGINEER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. ALL REJECTED MATERIAL SHALL BE DISPOSED OFF SITE • ALL WATER SERVICE PIPE SHALL BE (D.I.P.) DUCTILE IRON PIPE CL 52 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • SANITARY SEWER SERVICE PIPE SHALL BE SDR 35 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • ALL MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04'. • CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SERVICE LOCATIONS ANO ELEVATIONS WITH MECHANICAL PLANS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. • 7.5' MINIMUM COVER OVER WATER MAIN. 129 1640 RET 0 0 3 1- • • 0 N 0 as a • at / L7 .I L 05 TO EE 811RIDN0 MOUN1E0 FIOEBDX FIXTURES ON 6- Aft. 42 13 • x .a .� y u 4 FI' r •» .a. . ,v 10 ESE BUDDING MOUNTED .72 (680 RES ON ARl • ACCENT 5TL .17 It • FETAL P 37000 80. FT. FFE-0A0 FETAL O 31,500 80. FR. FFE -9X10 FETAL H 8510083. FT. FFE.9R0 ...ACCENT 62 b . MACCENT 64 .v .70 '43.3 4 ea PETAL E 610080 FL FFE-9DD • 24' :J = t9 -c3 �. CENT C(g 17 0 12 .u. gyp.. 70 •v J �., .=1-En d97Q..tea M .. • X187 FETAL D 140080 PR PPE-9110 v ® .07 . WI 72 A2 68. .02 a 04 .. .7. 7. etfi Ctiv s01 22. O •a' T, •Pt 65 • A3 32 .• ., .4 .2 .. .¢ . •• weir m6m14 0 03000 21 00 010. • PETAL 8 EGO 80 FT. FFE•O010 bc5P)r at .2 .• .• 20 .. •.6 E6 533.. .4 .. •1 .. .. .2 .1 .0 .. .p 12 ACCENT 36 .a /.. / .. / .9 / .. / MI LIGHTING NOTES 2. ALL UNDERGROUND CONDUIT TO BE ONE INCH PVC UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLANS. 2. SITE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE RNA/ PLACEMENTS OF CONDUIT WITH BUILDING CONTRACTOR. 3. UGW FOUNDATION TO BE CENTERED 3• -0- BEHIND CURB ALONG ALL ROADWAY AND PARKING LOT CURB ONES. (TYP) LIGHT STANDARD TO BE CENTERED 6 PARKING LOT ISLANDS. (TYP) FOOT CANDLE PRINTOUT PROVIDED BY COOPER LIGHTING. ALL LIGHTS ARE METAL HAUDE FLAT LENS, SHOE BOX FIXTURES. 6. ALL POLES ON 3• -0' HIGH CONCRETE BASE ABOVE GRADE. 7. FINAL SITE LUMEN PLAN TO BE UPDATED FOR FINAL POLE LOCATIONS. ACCENT 38 man moat 00 1040 LOOTS, Eel 1 cn mama orot PULSE PRODUCTS a... . -. n UR 0006746 SECURITY LEVEL 1 VIS 1.11172102. .4120. m 0.021¢rN0032 ACCENT 40 .a ENTIRE. ARH15 .. 6163366 SCH A Ar22 2.52 - g x (0 ! 20.2 !�a y. y� UM lc 0 AVERAGE/MINIMUM e 0 MAXIMUM/MINIMUM 2. 0 TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS y X3308 3.!.TISRCAL i BLDG FIT AVERAGE. fc .4 10.78 .6U81UUM lc - 20.1 M6MANM (c - 5 AVERAGE/MINIMUM .. 2.16 MAXIMUM /MINIMUM .2 4.02 • TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS .. 56 511.00. OM OTT U4e•1l 0010011 71M00 US All - 0 073 10U 1003 ON .!02 4t. 61.5 O1? craw 13i13411 10A 01 ,IN, 11500 1nro05 .755 .755 a. 3 111727 13.013333 mop• 142 2002 i*x75b MA w mew 1000 33001 755 .755 I. I 7!337- 8 90 0x 051112523 amps w 90 C. ,Ap11 17132 11028101 3000 115. .755 .755 'Y A. .2-01 1 011 215 30 1 a .93)22 501 1 7 x117531 1000 x1 10 1w x532 x00 .0 000$ .07010) b 325. .150 .755 90 p 1 2 500 1=532 Lome w .ep, DMA 0 • 27 170 Qry f 90.31125.32 00.75 117,0 c0 • x70 ).1X100 -755 .755 370 770 �. -t-0 7 02 0,071205, 1 1231123K 2:090 3 02111735, 00000 .755 .7v 770 n 1 150 1a 05000 7755 K.. 3x 4 05 2 770[ 22 a 201 a PLANE : AREA POINT SPACING LEFT -TO -RIGHT a 25 ft POINT SPACING TOP -TO- BOTTOM : 25 ft LOWER LEFTRAND CORNER OF PLANE: X560 Ys 140 Z 2. 0 UPPER RIGHTHAND CORNER OF PLANE X -3031 Ya 1738 Z n0 LIGHT Mt4L14 IS NORMAL TO PLANE AVERAGE lc a 2.52 MAXIMUM fc a 20.2 MINIMUM (c 0 AVERAGE /MINIMUM : 0 MAXIMUM /MINIMUM - 0 TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS v 3308 Aterat. 0504 MOM CCOR .4231 .40 020000 Ion. 9030 . in • i • MS At 20 3„'.x90 .2 30 • •00. nrs e I0 1m b a° 702 w °° 23 11/ A 10721 20 2� a 0 17"' ....if ; b 2:01 m b « . b.. ; uE :.2. m ° 2040 Un 1 b IS m 0.1 1031 OW 01 0 w mmW m5 04 40 NO *173 • x w ° """'":77.11::: •x . A 223221 0 • s sua 331. 110 i3n m%3 Y e 5:x3 AB M* bu i s m �a`1xlate 0 m 1° 4420.3 ,1337 .10'. 3 aw 3032 Alf a 10 1iw e 3112 130 30 30335 1035 30 1223 .7201 Cr 102021 1103 .0 07 1.020310 nlxm-a t TOOL 110210 m. . 2-22 03210110 1.22-0021 1 11-11-0-11 0062 OF 1200 -. 0002 TOOL x..01 v 0.2130 -b .met WO w CAA. MA exm. 1 NORTH 0 LO 120 180 SCALE 37 3451 O 0 4- F Z= 03 8Z 9 0 Fyn S.M nR^ za45 a z i5 IS go2 8-7.g • // // // // // rainiratiliakft11104.11M1111fardiDep.--....e"m, ill MI "411.1111 El pas El GI LEI 41:4% W'066110N JN Mt!' VP g I_ 0 ULES OF W.GAT16 OF WRGAIIOH CITY STANDARD XERAND AND P / / / kis 0 f-' ; • awe- cl: Pr Pw . r.. * In 1 IG��[� tar- 0 :411 ��I �e �r;R�. CIS r� `LJ Ea soD n ti•4l `�' i © o._ °-![,1 l„ -a Rik LH ORNAMENTAL i 01 Iti.© Ed III a© '�� �� V so sill a Ns AI Ir © :o _ WTH Ill ems Cle m AN NV. PLANTED AI 141 40MU .71E1 7.11I9 MOP Yiik RErA•dt(: WL1. 1 411 �Gi■iij :i'.0007i:i•.; MI 1'� 1 '1, 1 FETAL 0 In) 40 eill WE EICL FE PFE-0380 Ewa • al AMA lit 91. I913 El El METAL F WAC080 Ft FFE•4110.O FETAL 0 01.5D0 84 FT. FFE.4210.0 FETAL 11 =OD 80. FT. FFE -01110 QTY STANDARD SEED 881 FOR TETLAND AND P088 SLOPES FETAL 04008Q. FT FFE413O Cif El SI Ill ::EE::wcFTra��e3e2. ©i" © © © 0 _ _ o AIL a■ Y't4�l .-.o FETAL A ,CODS 80 FFE -DGRO _1) 131 Ica ■ ■..�_. y��•�.w� z ,1,11.. 7 �! u -M�• c� FERALB L R.•ti •T /� I,� o ".t�ii%'.fi�; ,rani 4-1-,Nee 13,1+0■ LFr. e ■i ; : •,i ' ,BITS Qn■ FERAL ■:iii i���i �r ..''w�.. • OaI p `i 11111 PLANT SCHEDULE. DECIDICOUS TREES / SHRUBS CODE AL AR ON CC CO CITY 18 COMMON NAME/LATIN NAME ALLEGHENY S'- R(CEBERRY ANFLN:EFEER LAEVS 44 RED SUNSET MAPLE ACFR RLPAUM 'MANIERED' 23 RIVER BIRCH 17 35 BETULA HG THORNLESS COCKSPUR HAWTHORN CRATAE0US CROS -D.).1 vM. RIF1DFs COMMON HACKBERRY CATS OCCDE/17MM SIZE CR 8 GRAY DOGWDOD_TREE FORM) MINUS RIGFYUSA 1.5" CAL. 2' 2 CAL. CAL ROOT REMARKS B&B CLUMP FORM B &B 8 &8 B &8 B &B 1C 9� B&B STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER A110 FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER Af,'0 FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER CAL FP 28 GREEN ASH 2' FP2 FN GT LL 74 23 57 115 FRA61808 PENNSYLVNDG MARSHALL'S SEEDLESS ASH FRA%INUS PENNSYLVAN A 'MARSHALL'S SEEDLESS' BLACK ASH FRAJONUS MORA SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST CLEWS)/ 11IACNOH05 'SNYCIXE TAMARACK 1NRX LANCWA CA 2 CAL 2' CAL 2' CAL 6' HT. B&B 8&8 B &B 8 &8 B &B AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL FORM DECIDIUOUS TREES / SHRUBS CODE CITY COMMON NAME/WIN NAME VL 13 NANNYBERRY VIBURNUM 413LLRN6 LEMAGO SIZE ROOT PA PS VT QR 17 AMERICAN PLUM PRUNE AMER`CANL 8 BLACK CHERRY PAUM15 SERVAL% 55 AMERICAN CRANBERRYBUSH 018. 0Ula TIL _1806 27 RED 0AK 7JERCU5 RI18RA 24' POT HT 1.5‘ CAL T.5' CAL 18• HT. REMARKS FULL FORM 2" CAL 8 &B B&8 POT STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN STRAIGHT LEADER 470 FULL CROWN FULL FORM B &B STRAIGHT LEADER AND FULL CROWN EVERGREEN TREES CODE PG PN TY 25 22 COMMON NAME LATIN NAME :F M' LL R'•1 PICEA GCMG% DEN5AIA AUSTRIAN PINE SIZE HT. ROOT B&B B &8 REMARKS FULL FORM FULL FORM PP 17 RADS NIGTU COLORADO SPRUCE PICEA PUNGEN5 HT. HT. B &B FULL FORM P5 6 WHITE PINE PANS SLRO805 6' B&8 FULL FORM CITY STANDARD SEED FIX FOR WERAND AND PAID SLOPES. LLB LANDSCAPE NOTES REDWING MU. • ALL PLANT MATERIAL SUCH AS. SOD AND SEED AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SHOP DRAWING OF IRRIGATION PLAN TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL • ALL TREES RLZa0VED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE CHIPPED AND STOCKPILED ON OFF 511 FOR LL R USE WHERE SPECIFIED. REMAINING WOOD CHIPS 5HA BE DISPOSED • ALL DISTURBED LAWN AREAS TO 8E SODDED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • ALL 80TERIOR PARKING LOT ELANDS 10 BE PLANTED WITH CLTY STANDARD NATIVE 871006A5S MIXTURE AND COVERED vim ER05105 CONTROL BLANKET UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • ALL EXISTING ASPENS AND COTTONWOODS TO BE CLEARED TWO GRUBBED. • ALL OVERSTORY AND UNDERSTORY TREES PLANTED IN 50D AREAS SHALL BE MULCHED W/ A 4' D10. MULCH CIRCLE TO A DEPTH OF 4' MINIMUM. TNORTH O BO no 180 80666 W FEET • • L L7 / // / ' / TED STREET) OW CC , 'cC CC 0 J • Coll 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin Cities Areo 454 -0002 MN. Toll Free 1 -600- 252 -1166 VA CA TED 77TH STREET 0 0 1- 1- • 6CC34 NPURATN1N•fRENCH AT BACK OF CURS NNLIRAMON ROE (f0 EACH: ( Z 0 • (NISI G Stir. J 1 DRAM ME (TYR) ,",, ;mayor. /a FPE 0 132.7130 al 1/ N UR42ON mBE (TMP.) (10 EACH) / FETAL P 27,0000 FT. PFE••IDO IETAL 0 31500 S0. Ft FFE -01011 IETAL H 01200 ECL FT FFE•DD 0N0TRA1TON TAM M (40 EACH) * • • * • • * * • * * K * * s * * * • * * * * */ / * * .* • FETAL / / PFE -01D / / L ;iiYr �=7.i.0i % / /,.G: %fi::7r .a __. -- STOANNAIER POND TED MOH S00( (I1P) / 5E4 .c.4 ACHIgRTL 80- SYIAIES /ND REILTRAR1N OUCHES MAT 8E INCORPORATED ALONG APCLD MOE. MTENt OF THESE 11EMS 20 BE COMMA= NRM OTT ENGINEERS AND ism MAUNA' DESCN. •// TERSE PEE NOTES • SIRUCI1IPK S01.• SMALL SE COMPOSED or 10GMLY ANCA0)8 CRUDTm 51111E (3/4-1 1/2') •TN NO FNE: MAY LOAM (GRAVEL 05T. SAND 25 -30x, SLT 22-401. MAY 25 -402). ORGANIC IMTIER (2-52) 1NOROCD. (ACING AS A TAC ATER) • NUS 1LE SHALL 0E INSTALLED DNECRY N THE 'STRUCTURAL 50L' ( \.J WM LEGEND E7050NG RIGHT --OF -NAY 181E FNOPERTT i8E CURB ME LASTS CF STRUCTURAL SOL 36' DEPTH 4 PREFERRED BRAN TILE • STORM SE148 CATCH SASH • STORM 5E1ER MANHOLE 10REIENDEM SASH NORTH O e0 120 100 t !� SCALE N FEET Vo:111 UM, . 1 P 7081/18/98 4:f5 pm FLOOR PLAN 1/8• . I'_0' • R. JAN EIVZ 7' 6 2001 CITY OF LINO LAKES JAN 1 2001 CITY Or 1 INC) 1 AKES : P RSP Architects, Ltd. 120 First Ave. N. Minneapolis. MN 56401 FAX 612.339.6760 P11 612.339.0313 cere.hanl• 1 uttr9 that We plan specific.. or repo.. was prepared b9 na or under .., dv.et .up Lion and 1601 I an • duly nun... Ircht.et Wdr the la.. of 0-. Nate or Mr.... Ss. hr. Flesh Ma lion No. al. ProJ.ct on WANE Ryan Companies US, Inc. ■alai.. a.. «.■ ■a.....us LINO LAKES, MN RETAIL CENTER ReJact as 6396.021.00 o..■ ey MJL / EL ae.ed ad, CLK / WW at. 15 JAN 2001 60T1CN, The e.g. moon .d d.crond Mme Including 11 t.d.4ai bbi gs. graph ...4 nodoIs Neel, we pro - pnd«y and cadet y. cp114 0. do01 d o cc.wecYi/a ...rda .d. Y One or Y part, Wheat .+p «s wilt. pr. . of MP *401... Ltd nese ar. rvsl4bl. for era Red f.Nos and sweat. by ctl.nY: corvette.. cone.. tors. goverment agate., vendors ed erec. proceed only In eeeerd.e• WIN Wt Not.ea C.pyncfa RY *001.cts Ltd. 1000. All 1111.4. reserved. Mirk 0a1. Ce.alp1I.. BUILDINGS "A & B" BUILDING "B' A MIRROR COPY FLOOR PLAN AE1.1 1 0 :6n 02 /10/98 4:15 pos ttin*adwp BRICK CMJ7— • 7 AE2J 0 70' -0• 70' -0 70•-0• 70••0• 34'•4• METAL CAP EJPJ3. CORNICE AONRYs METAL CAP ✓ 1 r 1 1 L J L ✓ T L k 1 r EJ}L•S. I L ' SION AREA 1 FRONT ELEVATION BRICK r 1 I L 1 I 1 L J MEI TOP OF PARAPET EL • 130•41• TOP OF ROOF EL • 171' -8" TOP CP CORNICE r'r4'�911•-^i�`1- r�1"". 1 LJ PAINTED METAL / \ / \ \ / _1yL EL • DD'•1 FISH FLOOR A EL • 100'.0' -+�- 1/e" . I' -0• 0 0 10'.0. 33'-0. 0 33••0. 00 r MBrAI • TOP CF PARAPET 05 EL • 130-8" TOP CF ROOF .L SIDE ELEVATION TRASH ENCL- 0.377 CMJ C171 7 EL • 01'.1" TOP CF CORNICE EL • Rd -1• FINISH FLOOR EL • 100'4• OHO 54.-4. 70'.0. 0 0 0. 33' -0" 0 0 l0'-0. ^!METAL CAP FETAL ROOFING EJFS. CORNICE r• • -Iggip ,- ✓ 7 1 k—s- SIGN AREA 1 L J METAL CAP �—� 1 1 \ et SIDE ELEVATION r-) EIRE. AWNING - BRt= O.0 PAIN ED METAL all 7 TOP CP CORNICE EL • 128.•4" FINISH FLOOR EL • 100'•0' 70••06 -METAL CAP METAL CAP METAL CAP ✓ i I I L J >. cry 7 ✓ 1 I I L J ✓ 1 I 1 L J ✓ � I 1 L J METAL 6CUPPEtf L J L ME AL DC1w5POUT 4 AE2.1 CPU 7 REAR ELEVATION F r 1 all I CP41-.1 CtJ 7 Cf 31 •I TI E CF PARAPET • 06.1• TOP OF CORNICE • 00.4 TO•• OP CORNICE ,L EL • I15.0" f� VS" • 1' -0• E 5H FLOOR JAN RSP Architects, Ltd. 120 First Ave. N. Minneapolis. MN 55401 FAX 612.339.5750 PH 612.339•0313 Co.ulun4 1 hereby c t,?5 that I.1-Y• p44 opn•Treallen. ropers ..is prepared by •I. or under my direct . t.perv4fon and thin 1 • • duly N d een.e ArWt•ct under 0 lees or d. nude or MY.•..eu. Registration Nor D.t. Protect Tn. lairANEMO Ryan Companies US, Inc. a urea c•• nn • LINO LAKES, MN RETAIL CENTER 7+et.a Na 6396.021.00 prep5yr MJL / EL 0.6Ael Br CLK / WW D.t. 15 JAN 2001 NOnQ, ihs dreg. to and dacrfoed brsYl xcnding Y gr.pNc , wd wde, Unroof, •• pro- prietary mad cam. be mpl•4 dpllul.d or m..rc.ly •pbit•d, b .hole et In pod, .IUwt apa• *Man pr• ▪ Inn or RSP MW Oct• Ltd Dien• t....14b4 for I.• Nod me.. and «.LatIan by eY.n, e..ulYd., eaN.e- t -. gce,een .grow, vela. and erne. pr.am.l only In ace«d.ncs ulttn w. Not.. Cape. MP Malteds Ltd. 2000. MI rkjw• r••«v.d Date Description BUILDINGS "A & B" CITY Or' LINO LAKES TERIOR ELEVATION. AE2.1 P [27:1---02/10/98 Ins pm ,ntiAfadup Floor plan vEl. • 1'•0• RE -Pkf 1 JAN 31 :lp NSP Architects, Ltd. 120 First Ave. N. Minneapolis. MN 55401 FAX 612.339.6760 PH 612.339.0313 COreseents 1 ....lay enemy net W. plan .p.elrlwttan or report was prepared by no or under my direct aup rvi.lo. and 1.011 an. duly llC....d /.wuet undo. u.a law or We State or MNrnou. Nguty. R.94t,•UOn No. Dalai Protect Ton NYANEN Ryan Companies US. Inc. •.allay G4le. .dnl•••r.ln LINO LAKES, MN RETAIL CENTER Project No. 6396.021.00 txn. do. MJL / EL c..d1.d ey CLK / WW DA. 15 JAN 2001 NOME. That dotage Odd and described tor. bc.,yug 11 14000.1 0.1.49.. graphic.. .d sod.i. Vow,... pro• weary and 410.01 be .plea dpllut.d a ra....eu11y .grbnd, b .104 or In pet, 011104 ..ern. onto p.• aisatot or ..SP Md.4cl. Ltd. Thew art 1vIIl.bl. 1p 10. 0.d r.vl.. and .. W tlon by CA.n., contubOl.. convK• an, gavot.* .94x., v. /ore and and. p.•om.l ony N aced... 1410. W. Nom.. Cepynot. Fsr *0101... Ltd. 00.90_ An .1511....0rvd. BUILDING "C' FLOOR PLAN AE1.1 I1 • Hark Date Description BUILDING "C' FLOOR PLAN AE1.1 I1 • • t — 02/10/98 4:15 pn tAlinfo.dwy FRONT ELEVATION I/O' • 1' -0• EJFD. BRICK 011 00 00 3. 34.0. 34.,0. 0 0 10'•0• METAL CAP - METAL ROOFING EJFJ5. CORNICE PETAL CAP SIGN AREA CMU CMU •I• CT'11 •I SIDE ELEVATION PAINTED METAL CT1'2 C11U el TOP CP CORNICE EL • 120' -4• FINISH FLOOR EL. • 100-0• I/O" • I' -0• REAR ELEVATION US" • P.D. 0 ,4._4. 20.0. 20•0` 0 0 AIL 0 32'•0• 0 0 +.•0. a SIDE ELEVATION cru US• • I' -0• 0 0 20.3. cru C1'LZ METAL. CAP 20.3. ✓ i I I L J r 1 METAL SCUPPER PETAL DCALNEPOLIT 34. -a. J TOP OF PARAPET EL • 00 -S. TOP OF CORNICE EL • 00.0• TOP CF CORNICE EL • 119 -0• FINISH FLOOR EL.. 100••0• JAN CL GI T Y O- Lilt) LAKES fp R5P Architects. Ltd. 120 First Ave. N. Minneapolis. MN 55401 FAX 612.339.6760 PH 612.339.0313 cdnuha,t. 1 hereby ertty that 1)Y. plan .p.elneatIon or report ea• prepared by .r or 000 ny cane. suprvIelan end 0t 1 an • duly licensed Ardneet bider t1. 4w of the out. of M41meeta. &g .40., Registration Nd, Data ProJ.ct fa. RYAN! Ryan Companies US. Inc. ..,t,... ...,I.. 4t•N.u41e• LINO LAKES, MN RETAIL CENTER Project Ha 6396.021.00 ▪ MJL / EL ot.x.oey, CLK / WW Dot. 15 JAN 2001 NOTICE. The deny. .Man ed dansbed we« Mateing . ...al d..:ng4 esp.U, and esdeh Owe., ere pre. W enn .c1 con. ber �r� n tl a tepblted .al. r Nw1. to ,dinstae. e.ka Rnr Adned Ltd .. e s evadable to . Fed r.0.. a.d eve Wtwl by c110*., 0,401,.40 .04141,•4. toe. gweeet 4g d...ears we ernes pe.end only in aeeerdenc. PIN W. Neuo. Capylgl Roe Mdytact. Ltd 7000.01 dente teem BUILDING 'C' 11( _l %7j1 EXTERIOR ELEVATION AE2.1 111,6 Dan D..alet . _ BUILDING 'C' 11( _l %7j1 EXTERIOR ELEVATION AE2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ins• 1 1 Floor Plan WV. • r -0• JAN _ C 1C 31 CITY OF LINO LAKES h 1 1 $ P Architects. Ltd. 120 First Ave. N. Minneapolis. MN 55401 FAX 612.339.6760 PH 612.339.0313 Crnr6t1eta I.p hereby that tu. pMWr paelneatl0,l or P. real by a.pervl.ion anal that I an a duly Ilc �t It C. ltw laco the but. of IMWO14 elye4r« Registration Not a0. R0Je.t ror. NYA&le Ryan Companies US, Inc. Lll /La L•rl•. ,.1.0•utq. LINO LAKES, MN RETAIL CENTER ReJaet No. 6396.021.00 ou. ey MJL / EL Chocked tly CLK / WW oat« 15 JAN 2001 NOTICE. The erlq• aean aad dassb.d harsh 0014109 al uontual dra.09s, 4spsO. a4.Od 1. threat. we pe- 904419 r4 eenm be cowed dplle.ud or comeratally emplaned, 1.bu r in part. dthpt a+pa• rl te, pr- aNbn or na• Archtacu Ltd. 2N.se are available or la- nai rodeo MCI OVA 14Ibn by clout•, eared... c0Mr tra. sower* .seaIa. 0.4001 .d erne. remora oat, M •erddarae ullh W. Nollea. Capyt9Fa R:1. M111.eu Ltd. 2000. All dohl. resat* BUILDING "D" 6 // FLOOR PLAN • AE1.1 Mot Date Daaulplbn BUILDING "D" 6 // FLOOR PLAN • AE1.1 P • • • s. s fP RSP Architects. Ltd. 120 First Ave. N. Minneapolis. MN 55401 FAX 612.339.6760 PH 612.339.0313 t Hamby certify that ti * plot ap.elneatldrt r W P report . .pared by under .y caramel •up.nvl•lon .nd that 1 .n • duly Ikon. of Malts. lards Y. tar M Y. awl. e r PT..'..1ela. R.9NtraU.kt No, Pat. P•OJ.et rr. Ryan Companies US. Inc. Ira.. 4.114 1.1.11•.0■•• LINO LAKES, MN RETAIL CENTER Project Not 6396.021.00 or.R ey. MJL / EL Orchid Ey. CLK / WW DA. 15 JAN 2001 NOTICE. T. d.ig. hose. 1d doc/bw Fan.. hcmvg t td•aeal aloha., waP1e• and scab aunt arc pro - pti.ury and carrot be eopSd d.plldsd or oa•.•.clana .I•pdt.d h WIa r in pat dncut .p... snarl pr- 0.0. of PCP Ara tech Ltd. Tow are available ro. I.- IUd rM.0 and wvabatlan by deal. eorwk.,tt ow..a.- b. yow..rl ay.cW, vendor. and .rrks pr...W only h accord... with tiv. Notice. Coprole. Rain Arduous Ltd. 7COO. At t149. Mark Date DeKtiptIon BUILDING "D' EXTERIOR ELEVATIO AE2.1 O O 37•13. O u' -a• O y -s• O 33737•11. O I I I ` PROPRlETARr RETAIL MADE 3r.• I I PET METAL CAP ) I 1i I EL. • 1215' ` TOP l METAL CAP CF PARAPET ii EL • 123••0• 4 .. G 1�1 111 d AL'; r! � EJP.S. DRlac i �Q TOP a I L----- SIGN AREA `a I I i L • :ate,. Riy PS _ aRiyri , �r� s= . r_ �a EL ILS-c r a ri� y 7424141allti 10.11 —a \1L .:LR q + nt � BRICK •`R _ • ► v �1r Av o . Cnu a DRUK mCORNICE EL. to• FMISNFLOOR $ � \, 1, q 9 +:IIt4R , ,. '1 I i / r.�/ J I CTU .2 \ 067 - 1 FRONT ELEVATION AE2J vb.. 1• -0• s ♦ b'-0 0 447-0• 0 0 O 415•-0• I I I ( I 0 4 6 v ' na �'li tl'� \134 37 `-t v..----METAL CAP t TOP OF PARAPET = • 0 4 6 EI$A 7 EL 123• Y • -0• 1 TOP OF CORNICE Orgar r ` Grill 9 \ \ jI ,(%4 , a• �1 EL • 16' -0• I II 1C ` � 1 B T FINISH FLOOR / EL. • 100••0• iJ D �• • p i CI'111_ \d•IU 7 s . SIDE ELEVATION ,t Ire• . r -m• TOP CF PARAPET 3r.e• y. -a. 3r• -a• 0 37.•5. 0 0 0 37'-15' I 1�` METAL CAP j j I j 17•e• 1 EL•123' -0• \ EJFd �J TOP OF CORNICE t Y EL • a5' -O• CM L PMISN FLOOR EL . 100'•0' IJ CM .2 CM a 7 * .- .—.. • ®BACK ELEVATION ®0 Ya ••? CA It L -. x•% JAN S ' , 6 Z ! ] 1 va- . term• r: 1 IWO LAKES (-,Ty 1° fP RSP Architects. Ltd. 120 First Ave. N. Minneapolis. MN 55401 FAX 612.339.6760 PH 612.339.0313 t Hamby certify that ti * plot ap.elneatldrt r W P report . .pared by under .y caramel •up.nvl•lon .nd that 1 .n • duly Ikon. of Malts. lards Y. tar M Y. awl. e r PT..'..1ela. R.9NtraU.kt No, Pat. P•OJ.et rr. Ryan Companies US. Inc. Ira.. 4.114 1.1.11•.0■•• LINO LAKES, MN RETAIL CENTER Project Not 6396.021.00 or.R ey. MJL / EL Orchid Ey. CLK / WW DA. 15 JAN 2001 NOTICE. T. d.ig. hose. 1d doc/bw Fan.. hcmvg t td•aeal aloha., waP1e• and scab aunt arc pro - pti.ury and carrot be eopSd d.plldsd or oa•.•.clana .I•pdt.d h WIa r in pat dncut .p... snarl pr- 0.0. of PCP Ara tech Ltd. Tow are available ro. I.- IUd rM.0 and wvabatlan by deal. eorwk.,tt ow..a.- b. yow..rl ay.cW, vendor. and .rrks pr...W only h accord... with tiv. Notice. Coprole. Rain Arduous Ltd. 7COO. At t149. Mark Date DeKtiptIon BUILDING "D' EXTERIOR ELEVATIO AE2.1 Ryan Companies US, Inc. S.W./ ••••••••••••• .1•■••• ••• •• Ow. moo •••••• 1;•■••• 1 z 0- : lz 0- c> 0- or ; -Nor + i . ,.. 0 ili . • CC • ; It. i i i i i i I i t! r ■ i .1 1 ; ; ; 1: I 11 I • i 1 i 1 1 - 1 k i.-+-A-4-- i 1 i • -4-4 i i I i i .1 I , ■ t...4....:........... ; ; ...,, If IS .1e I ii ■•■•• !I ---r- ! 1 .1 i i i 55 !I — ! ! 1 1 I i ! ! 1/4- -P i I I 1 1 i i • ; .. ; 1 1 r ......L._._._._....0 , i i i I 4 t vi'• ..„ 1! ■ IIT t • I 1— • • .: I .„ • , ... I ' I I r.1 4 _ li• L.• a Allk _ r'• a • ul . I 4> 1 . .....-/ van: Lcsdiiii, 44r.(ifmnit -r-- 4441_.-• sp.4.4.117" " •-• • • f• • • 0 Owc4'"" 1■1••••••• F t - • _L _ H . •••• ••••• •NO•• • 21251r117,1"" "•• • IN MO MBA._ VW n '11111M1111.1rWR • Mee 11 1•MI 1.0. • 11:=11••1 •■••• Man. INV a NI MAK, • 5gle" • 1, Rd 116n11110"• • rlarLIMAC•1.•■ G lamor • MON <V Mal ONSOIMI• ..,.......reft ae__ 1111W .." . 0 ,e;er-TAFIGET LAKES _ AM u. FLOOR PLAN ■• Al . • MU 0•11011,•-••1 Vil• ■•1114,7KA LINO LAKES RETAIL CENTER- LINO LAKES, MN 15 JARIARY, 2001 I RE :.;EIN/L.....) I JAN I C 211 , 1 1 CITY tl'W IJO LAKES *NI colv VALTua t4igfr.4aw -4Ics 1 I 1 1 1 51111" I LL • zn 'dn — eipszewie cheilarti TZTAIENiert 4cP 1,013.12,413T 229t5'. IPPARRNIACY -.11‘ FAITPINTa: ■■•■••■•■1..., ete6e-T;ost-- -etric51 4,0-4A likkAteirS • CoW, w4v4'- .._to..A. WA 1. 1 ..••••■Zasio..•■••11""""" • INANE VIcf: Ryan Companies US. Inc. 3•114-g 2.8•Na. is ZZZZZ 1411141. %fps ••■■11 swir• Olt owsum, t I LINO LAKE RETAIL CENTER- LINO LAKES, MN p.. -1.13./A/70.1 lq'POL.Lo P211/6 l'AINTTSD GNIU rtzcit-it nliarAL -r..141544 for.lbase. alt= R I JAN 1 C ?::91 15 JAWARY. 2001 CITY OF LINO LAKES -2 .1" P PM. aechiMeta. Ltd. 011%/AROIrph.114 1411110141 IT41 • • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: February 13, 2000 TOPIC: Preliminary Plat Northwest Corner of 12th and Holly AGENDA ITEM V. C Cynthia Putz -Yang / Cindy Sherman (NAC) BACKGROUND The Land Holding Group has submitted a preliminary plat for the northwest corner of 12th Ave. and Holly Drive. A concept plan of the plat was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board on January 10, 2001. This review is based on the following plan submittals: Preliminary Plat Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan Utility Plan ANALYSIS Project Data: Site total Wetlands Upland Number of lots Gross density Net density (upland only) 8 acres approx. 1.2 acres approx. 6.8 acres 13 1.75 units /acre 1.9 units /acre Received 1/16/01 1/16/01 1/16/01 Land Use and Zoning: As shown, the site is zoned for residential development. The site is within the existing MUSA. Lot Sizes and Layout: The R -1X minimum lot size is 12,825 sf of upland. All of the lots meet or exceed this minimum lot size. The proposed lot widths are compliant Comprehensive Plan (existing) Comprehensive Plan (1998 draft) Zoning Site Single Family Resid. Low Density Sewered Resid. R -1X North Single Family Resid. Low Density Sewered Resid. R -1X East Single Family Resid., and Rural Low Density Sewered Resid., Low Density Unsewered Resid. PDO -SF Resid. and Rural South Single Family Resid. Low Density Sewered Resid. R -1X West Single Family Resid. Low Density Sewered Resid. R -1X Lot Sizes and Layout: The R -1X minimum lot size is 12,825 sf of upland. All of the lots meet or exceed this minimum lot size. The proposed lot widths are compliant • • • 12th and Holly February 13, 2001 page 2 with the minimum standard of a width of 90 feet for interior lots and 115 feet for corner lots. The minimum lot depth is 135 feet. All the lots except Lot 8 comply with this standard. Lot 8 has a depth of 127 feet, which requires a variance. Variance Criteria: The ordinance states that in considering requests for variance the City shall make a finding of fact that: 1. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use of used under conditions allowed by the official controls. 2. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstance unique to his property not created by the landowner. 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 Planning Commission may consider that the site is impacted by wetlands and it is located at the intersection of two collector roads thereby limiting design options as a basis for granting the variance. Grading: The applicant has not submitted information about what house styles are being considered. The grading of the site must accommodate the house styles. Lot grading and critical house elevations need to be added to the grading plans. Existing Structures: An existing shed and pole building are located within the new street right -of -way and must be removed. Transportation and Utilities: Utilities exist in both 12th and Holly, and an extension of utilities down the proposed cul -de -sac is proposed. The water main needs to be looped to 12th Street. The utilities plan is subject to City Engineer review and approval. Holly and 12th are both major collector roads. The purpose of major collectors is to channel traffic, and direct access from lots is discouraged. The number of lots fronting on 12th Avenue has been reduced from five lots in the concept plan to one lot in the preliminary plat. The number of lots fronting on Holly Drive has increased from zero to one. The rest of the lots are proposed to front on a new cul -de -sac street. Based on modifications to the plan which reduces the number of accesses staff supports the layout. • • • 12th and Holly February 13, 2001 page 3 Parks and Trails: A trail is envisioned along Holly Drive, but has not been designed yet. It has not been decided whether the trail will be on the north or south side of Holly. It will be within the road right -of -way. A trail exists on the east side of 12th Ave. as part of Peregrine Pass. Park dedication for this new development would be cash. Wetlands: Wetlands exist in the north central and southeast portions of the site. Although the boundaries of wetlands are shown on the preliminary plat, a wetland delineation report has not been submitted and is required. A created pond that is proposed to be filled exists in the southwest portion of the site. Wetland review should determine if the filling of the created pond is subject to the Wetland Conservation Act. If so, additional mitigation may be required. Parts of both the north central and southeast wetlands are proposed to be filled. Mitigation (replacement) is shown near the existing wetland areas. Rice Creek Watershed District approval is required of the delineation and mitigation plans. If the Watershed does not approve the filling, Lots 1 and 13 would not be buildable and must be eliminated. It is City staff's policy to require preliminary approval (tabled with approval for administrative action or TWAFAA) from the Rice Creek Watershed District before City staff recommends approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. Landscaping and Tree Preservation: The site is a former pine tree plantation. A plan for tree preservation must be submitted. The Environmental Board has suggested that some of the trees might be moved. Because the site is located at the intersection of two collector road staff will work with the applicants to develop a landscaping plan to provide a buffer between the right -of -way and the homes to be constructed. Open Space: No dedicated open space is proposed. Environmental Board: The Environmental Board reviewed the project on January 3, 2001. The Environmental Specialist's memo includes the Board's comments. OPTIONS 1. Recommend denial of the preliminary plat due to the lack of a tree preservation plan and impact to existing wetlands. 2. Continue the public hearing to allow time for additional information as outlined in the planning report to be submitted and reviewed . 12th and Holly February 13, 2001 page 4 • RECOMMENDATION It is City staff's policy to require preliminary approval (tabled with approval for administrative action or TWAFAA) from the Rice Creek Watershed District before City staff recommends approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. Therefore, we recommend that the application be tabled to allow time for the Rice Creek Watershed District to review the project and to allow the applicant to submit additional information with regard to tree preservation, wetlands, grading and house elevations. • • Lino Lakes Parks and Recreation Department 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 (651) 982 -2440 Fax (651) 982 -2439 • • February 8, 2001 TO: Jeff Smyser, Senior Planner FROM: Rick DeGardner, Public Service Director SUBJECT: Land Holding Group Preliminary Plat At the February 5, 2001 Park Board meeting, the Park Board members reviewed the Land Holding Group Preliminary Plat. The board talked about the name of the development, the trail currently in the right -of -way in Trapper's Crossing and whether there is an existing trail along Holly Drive. They also asked if staff saw a need to connect to 12th Avenue. Rick responded to these questions and advised the board that the future trail along Holly Drive will continue to 12th Avenue. After further trail discussion the following motion was made and passed: Pam Taschuk made a motion, seconded by Michael O'Connor, to ask for 100% cash dedication for the Land Holding Group Development. The developer should make sure potential homeowners along Holly Drive are aware a future trail may be placed within the existing right -of -way. If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact me. I will be back in the office Monday, February 12, 2001. I will be checking my voice mail if you need to discuss this prior to Monday. sw /rick/PB Motion - Land Holding Group Preliminary Plat Memo to Smyser.doc INDIVIDUAL PROJECT TRACKING SHEET 177/ CITY OF LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL Board January", 2001 PROJECT #: 21 -2... •OJECT: Land Holding /12th and Holly /Concept Plan DATE OF ORIGIN: November 5th, 2000 TO: Environmental Board Members City of Lino Lakes FROM: Marty Asleson Environmental Coordinator OVERVIEW STATEMENTS: Directly West of Peregrine Pass. Zoned R -1X, 8Ac, 14 Lots, 2.13 Units /Ac Water Drainage to Wards Lake Pine Plantation Trees STAFF COMMENTS /ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION: • Peregrine Pass required a variance. Zoned R -lx, this variance allowed staff to work with applicant on a conservation development PDO. Please see photography. Land Holding /12`" and Holly site does not require a variance. Land Holding Intends to submit standard zoning Preliminary Plat to Boards in the near future . • A Conservation Development Ordinance would allow for Conservation Development planning in this (12th and Holly) type of site. I have enclosed a modal ordinance. Environmental ISSUES: The following identifies potential Environmental impacts: Soil Compaction due to construction activities /effects on surface water infiltration rates and Volumes. Surface Water Runoff: quantity and quality changes due to increase of impervious surfaces soil compaction, and volume increases. • Tree Preservation: Site has existing pine plantation. Some of these tree might be moved. • Wetland study has not been submitted. • Site should be surveyed for Husveth rich fen evidence /suitable vegetation and soil banding occurring on this site. If found /site design should include buffering and minimization of hydrologic Impacts. 17aprccr &_Pexpearrov_Boap8 Xirt oO Acvo Aarcev • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD COMMENTS: The following is a summary of the comments made by the Board: All of the above Driveway concerns on 12th ave. • Remove lots 4 &5 or allow for smaller lot sizes and conservation development Planning. • Make the street shorter. kniironmentM;Board .Comment` xivary 31,._.Environmenta1 B "oard Meeting: • Restate all of above November '5 meeting, an • Lots 8 and 1-driveways remove to retain more open space. Board states concerns about Iifulfilled'past obligations in another development, i.e.. Gemini "Estatei and the replacement-trees. • All of the standard recommendations as listed on the developer check list, from the EB. Environmental Board regards this 'development proposal as a step. backwards in terms of EB efforts to preserve and conserve open space; and environmental ,amenities ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD ACTION /POSITION STATEMENT: the Board reached the following consensus: See comments above /December and January Environmental Board Meetings. FINAL VOTE COUNT: Board Member Yes No 6 0 FINAL VOTE DATE: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION (IF NECESSARY): pending .... DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION DATE: .... pending ... 17aprco= &_PexpeanovBoap8 Xin_oO A1vo_Aaxeo- 2 •COUNCIL ACTION (IF NECESSARY): pending .... COUNCIL ACTION DATE: . ... pending .... PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION STATUS: The following defines staff observations related to actual implementation. This includes issues raised (and resolved) during implementation, general observations, and project outcome. pending .... PROJECT FINAL COMPLETION DATE: . • ... pending .... ENVIRONMENTAL Coordinator Date • I7aptco_ &_Ps%peartovBoap8 Xi n oO Atvo Aatceo • LAND HOLDING GROUP, INC. February 6, 2001 Dear Homeowner: We would like to take an opportunity to introduce Land Holding Group, Inc. to you. We are a land development company with most of our projects in the north- east metro. Our primary emphasis has been single family developments. Most recently, we have completed Gemini Estates in your neighborhood which you may be familiar with. We are currently proposing a new 13 lot subdivision on the north -west corner of 12th Avenue and Holly Drive. The project consists of a cul -de -sac with a single access on Holly Drive. The current zoning of R -1X will be exercised. We anticipate that homes will sell from the low to mid $200's. The preliminary plat is currently being reviewed by the City of Lino Lakes. We would invite you to contact us with and questions, concerns or suggestions that you may have regarding the project. Sincerely, Land Holding Group, Inc. Jeffrey Bock Project Manager 4704 HIGHWAY 61 • WHITE BEAR LAKE, MN 55110 (651) 762 -0928 • FAX (651) 762 -0939 FIRM. f 1„f NARY PL..,4T FOR LAND HOLDING GROUP LEGEND: Nola 81erWga twee as on as reamed Mum. NBA Yertkd Datum CS Denotes Iran pipe set Jo, 75.73 wi _.....__tl �!PrtNa?' PIPS trued,. am IaOel�d -•-- a tun Demise: a fisting seal rlrwtlin Og Denotes saNary:erurgltaphaM Denotes hydrant Denotes ealstInq'contours FIELD TOPOGRAPHY AND I ROVEME NTS SURVEYED AND GATHERED .OY E.G. RUO MID 9019 NOW111101 22000. / ..; \w / W . \ L1- b / \Qo W \_I PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Sorth 800 fest of the East 580.8 feet of the Southeast Ouarter of Section 28. Tasmania 31, Range 22. Moira County, Minnesota Subject to Holly Drive , 1219 Avenue and other easements If any. NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 800 FEET OF SEI /4 OF SEC28 / 589'411'26 "W 580.$ FDJCE ON PROPERTY UK 115.0 ■ / 1 a '13.507 sq. ft.; LA , 7 T.•1 r 13.759 sq. R. 8' i 127.0 13,815 4. R. 19-A 130.9 ` z z O 1.� .7 , n.1 i l /18,236 sq. tiff / , l„ 244.8 r I 1 1 I LfllM AKA • 11.8•n i n 1 r--j11 I 1 1 23,740 Sq. 1t. - --J 288.4 r / / 12.825 sq. 0 O 0 N Lu 1 A14A e no. 1)91 811.24 80 o. a r 1 INCH - 50 FEET TOTAL AREA. 0,00 Mme NUMBER OF LOTS 13 LOTS AVERAGE LOT AREA 0.47 Ara TOTAL AREA OF LOTS 0.50 Ages DENSITY. 1 02 Units /Acre RIGHT OF WAY AREA 1 50 Ara ZONING R -1X SINGLE FAMILY EXECUTIVE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT MIN. LOT AREA 12.825 SO.FT. MINIMUM LOT WIDTH AT 40' SETBACK 90 feet MINIMUM LOT DEPTH (DOUBLE FRONTAGE .LOTS) 135 feet (145) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH AT CORNER 115 feet BUILDING SET3AOCS FOR 171 -5 ZONING FRONT 30 FT. (40 FT. FROM 121)1 AVENUE) HOUSE SIDE 10 FT. GARAGE 5 FT. REM 30 FT. Al (•') SO • 2 \ \ L L av t:. ;sue"'• .r�Sn:;:ir, �'» 7 _�, -. _ 'tL'� }a°.*?._t ra .aa >'L�R.aa2Y„w- iy+�•"� :•,: ":7eircaw';iih:+aTk ?,�i a, lg�h� e.r. `'t ra4.ik. '�� J S89'41 26 W itPAN?jfr4k INV 908.78 r.' 28 T31 22 OEN01(8 NYPRO9. PRw0x0 POW ANO WICA1CN WA: 91 D 1 DENOTES (288N0 OXNTfy/I 8 j DENOTES WETLAND TO BE FILLED DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOW TMJSI 8 -7-4 _L_J L_J__ LTD 10-1 BEING S FEET IN 1MOTH AND ADJOINING SIDE LOT LINES AND 10 FEET 1N MOTH AND ADJOINING STREET LINES AND REAR LOT LINES Lyd.ESS OTNER'MSE SHOW ON THIS PLAT. 1 hereby alrtI1 that this surrey, plan. or report e." prepared by me or under my direct aupervlalan and that I an o duly Registered Land Surreyar under the laws of the State of Minnesota Dots Registration Nd Job No. 0055981 JAN 1 6 2001 CITY OF LINO LAKES NORTH LINE CF THE SOUTH 600 FEET OF SE1 /4 OF SEC.28 VARIES 18' VARIES _I 16' VARIES R/W -e TOPSOL & SOD (BY OTHERS) LOT 8 LOT 7 • P LOT 8 LOT 5 osYr LOT 9 COMA RIM 911.94 IE 901.73 - � 911.94 44 IF 1S' 1E 900!.110 RCP • 0.179 LOT 10 DOSING VEIL T9 at IMMO 4 BERM DIT -H BIAC1t LOT 3 O 00 °OO �0 0 00 ° 0 0°0O 00n 0 0 O 00 0 0 0 �0 0C 0 , , 000000 0 0 0 0 _- 000 0 00 0 000 _1 .,.. - - . - . -- . -°0 0 n 1/11' MrM. w - / 0 O 094 o.1 W LOT LOT 2 7111 911.94 1 IE 9D8.,6 IE 908.0 D. 19. 01P WY Ex. VI' Plc f.N HOLLY DRIVE P UN MN P • NM DE 908.7 PLAN VIEW I I r -1.5' -2350 TYPE LV 4 BR. WEARING COURSE TACK COAT 2 2350 TYPE LV 2 OR 3 BIT. NON - WEARING COURSE r AGGREGATE BASE. CL 5 (PLACED ON APPROVED 9UBORADE) 24• SELECT GRANULAR BORROW mpt SLOPE 2.01 SLAPS -ta D412 CUTTER cuRe TYPICAL SECTION (URBAN STREET/PERMANENT SECTION) 4ud. 1011 CONCRETE SPILLWAY RFC -310H NOT TO SCALE MOM RECEIVED JAN 172. 1 CITY Of LINO LAKES 1. •.dr.9.. 9.d p.M .. a►. r 1. 1.0p w+i rear.. Wasp .d• ..i9.. ▪ 111. 2. Al 0601 MO Okla . wr 9...011 M. tei. tm1 .e11 mod r M1.d.../.d. Y ..rlr 4.0.00 11.1101 /WA 1 M M.1 elan .M MM. 01•11 00 M lad .Y Mw M. A I r w1 .•M .ir. 0 _..mr►b (110 00 r 9 of OM 1012010 N Mb 1104 ./1 Fr_ 11 -12-19 o m p T la .M 14►70 1. w/ •.wr b la b 11 .1 12 ..M Y 00 Of ■4 99. N M 2 MI di*N1N Iw11000 1 1101110 7K 0 20 10 ..9 M...1M - 01• f1. 100. Ow 00. 110Y0j10 0. 0 II 7 el dip 4. boom oned 00 001. q .. u.. 0 r .w.M 9.19.0dw rw al. Okla at 11. 70•02 001 0 IMMM 11S I.la.. 111. 0 0.1d p.9..10. swam =a Is lad. le 800 IM. 6021 10 011.0 1, 011 r will. 1.0161 - 9. p,ad 0 a.i 0 lbws O 01 M r1. • _veld •w 0 W lad. 0.1 M d.W 11111.. 11 So ld M 0 d., f1d1'■'00i0. 0100110009.""".i'0'.: :r�r9 7.1...0911 0.9.1.. di 00 ■ 0•.w09 00.2 201 0... be M � MM .r 100 0_ 60 ww �.r - w9. rd1. x+ w11 .. 1 NI swila i1MUN.. 01 M. 1..tlMwd 011 be 11010, 4.1.111 00 •11 10 •d .1r Oklw bar 1. 9. l 1s Um 001101p at be erudw 1• d0pa• a/ 01-r• ■ ••• lump% 02. r arw 20 90 aii •Al r.000 vela. 10. M 01.4 00 0.0 nerd 01. 001 ..0.4. 11. 0 000 1110 Tali 00 lad 010 0 0 0•02 .OM• M 00122 p00 11.1 •1001. r1M• 1. 000 0 00 .o...M% .y.. 0 wN 0000 11 The 0010, 01 010 0 0 02. 1. 0 00 lima I• 0011, be ...}d 11.19. y02 Dad rlw 9 010•0 M M. 00911 lad 002 .I 120 700 00 1• 10004 9 ... 000 4 L• 010... 0 40' S0' 160' LEGEND - - - -Editing Centaur Propoeed Contour Proposed Sanitary Sewer « Proposed Storm Sewer -i -(- Proposed Watarmaln ■ Proposed Catch Bain • Proposed Manhole • Proposed Valve ♦ Proposed Hydrant - •- •-• -•- Wetland Boundary -Lot Lila -- O- -o -S4c Fenn r r r r r r rte^ VA Denotes Proposed Wetland Mitigation Area Denotes Wetland To Be Filled DATE REVISION 1 WREST CERTIFY THAT DRS PUII WAS PREPARED BY AC OR UNDER w DIRECT SUPE?MSON AND TINT 1 AM A OILY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENC)NEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF AaWESOTA. DATE REG. NO. RFC ENGINEERING, INC. Consulting Engineers 13635 Jahnean Street Ham Lake, MN 55304 Telephone 763- 862 -8000 Fax 763 - 862 -,9042 GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN LAND HOLDING GROUP LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA DESIGN BY: JGF DRAWN 8Y: DBB CHECKED BY: JGF DWG 01010rad DATE: 01/16/01 JOB NUMBER: 0101 SHEET: 1 of 5 FILE: 23 -4-059 WWI 911.94 NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 500 FEET OF SE1/4 OF SEC.28 (., • . M . .111+r■.1t r r 101100101•-• r r r LOT 8 LOT 7 1 LOT 6 YMG LOT 5 440 4� YELL 10 le NUM 1\ TEL 004 1011 01220 It 901.00 — 4r BERM LOT 3 LOT LOT 2 Dow 11314" —1— 1 OoNNETE ani n 4' BERM I- 1- 1- 1 - i -1- 1— 1 _1 HOLLY DRIVE carve 1r r 1EE r OP WO WOW _ 10P OF c t1EY 900.47 1 -1 -1 r- 91P-Am- 1- 1- 1- 1 -1 -1 -1 SliN EPM OSA PRO N IE Mean IMMO L M.mer e.. .L.. Weis mum maim fiee4 peed pale e.e► maim ewe 1. web r .4446 w dose.lt by mw ewl�l we vellb wY t~ pal weed rlrw. M.. us +fMn.i bmemrld ie. M� f. roved iu _ it R ~ ~ �M end. eeeY.O• Awed we. Meet wdim�le.Aai p re L 1Mine de.e l be MOON 1001, .MAR OMB • pie N Ow 7 Wide) /w OP me IM Idea ildM eel weiedYwa 4.1�Iyseee ee.Aeeel. Mel me1M M* WOW AA 11 , • emir r d .Me.. M seem IY*Ai0en. 7N Mewed TIN 0 PsAet dpq it !eels.. mill e. Om Mn sed Der e9.wee. Lee. di. l M M O.A..e/ =.= WeirmerOe M.Y MueMO OMe.As Ar ~ CeeleaMer PW — d— eaglet w ~ + el le eemob . W q. y Ode 0 40' 80' 160' RECE.IVE:0 JAN 172001 CITY OF LINO LAKES LEGEND - - - - -Watling Contour Proposed Centaur Proposed Sanitary Sewer « Proposed Stomn Sewer 1 -1— Proposed Wotamaln • Proposed Catch Basin • Proposed Manhole • Proposed valve • Proposed Hydrant --- --.—t- Ditch - •- • -• -•- Wetland Boundary —tot tins — 0-- 0SOt Fence Denotes Proposed Wetland Mitigation Area Denotes Wetland To Be Filled DATE REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT IRS PLAN WAS PREPARED sal NE OR WIDER MY DIRECT SUPERVSDN AND THAT AM A DULY REDSTERED PROFESSIONAL ENDNEER UNDER THE LAWS Cr THE STATE Of IANRESDTA DATE RED. ND. RFC ENGINEERING, INC. Consulting Engineers 13835 Johnson Street Ham Lake, MN 55304 Telephone 763 - 882 -8000 Fax 763- 862 -8042 UTILITY PLAN LAND HOLDING GROUP LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA DESIGN BY: JGF DRAWN BY: 988 CHECKED BY: JGF DWG: 01010ead DATE: 01/1./01 J08 NUMBER: 0101 SHEET: 2 of 5 FILE: 23 -4-060 • • • • • AGENDA ITEM V. D STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: February 13, 2001 TOPIC: PUBLIC HEARING: Saddle Club Rezoning Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Allocate MUSA Reserve Preliminary Plat BACKGROUND The site is at the corner of Old Birch St. The site currently is split in half by the MUSA and by a zoning line. The north half is in the MUSA and zoned R -1. The south half is not in the MUSA and is zoned Rural. The draft Comprehensive Plan future land use map shows this same situation. The site is one parcel. It is clumsy and inadvisable to have a single property split by a zoning boundary. Staff is recommending that the City Council amend the land use map to include the entire parcel in the future Phase 1 growth area. Then the southern portion can be included in the MUSA and rezoned. Alternatively, MUSA reserve acres could be used for the site. The public hearing for the three actions was published and neighbors notified. The applicant, Heritage Development, has requested a postponement of the project (see attached letter). The City notified the neighbors of this. To save the expense of re- publishing, staff recommends opening the public hearing and continuing it to the March meeting. We will re- notify the neighbors when the project is ready for public review. RECOMMENDATION Open public hearing and continue it to the March 14 meeting. 02/02/01 14:57 HERITAGE DEUELOPMENT,INC. -) 651 982 2499 NO.985 P002/002 • 1111 � DEVELOPMENT •Mnnnssota $Wlsconain Indiana •Kaneas 1/31/01 Planning & Zoning Board City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Re: Saddle Club proposed development Dear Planning & Zoning Board, Heritage Development of Minnesota, LLC. is requesting that the review of the Saddle Club development be tabled until the March 14th Planning & Zoning Board meeting so that concerns regarding a second exit out of the property may be addressed. John Hill Heritage Development of Minnesota, LLC. 422 East County Road D • St, Pout, MN 56117 • Phone: (651) 481.0017 • Fax: (651) 481 -1518 • Toll Free: (800) 644 -0017 herltagedevoiopment.com • • February 2, 2001 Dear Property Owner: You recently received notification of a Public Hearing before the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board concerning development of the Northwest Saddle Club property. This letter is to advise you that the applicant has temporarily delayed review of this item. The City will not be holding a Public Hearing on Tuesday, February 13t. Should this item be reviewed at our March Planning and Zoning Board meeting you will again be notified. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this notice please feel free to contact the Planning Department at City Hall, 651- 982 -2426. 600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 -1182 Phone: 651 - 982 -2400 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2499 • TDD: 651 - 982 -2410 • • • AGENDA ITEM V E STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland MEETING DATE: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 TOPIC: Circle Lex VFW, Apollo Drive, Minor Subdivision DESCRIPTION: The Circle Lex VFW owns approximately 7.48 acres of land just west of the Community National Bank & Fast Break 66 Station. The property is split in two by Apollo Drive and Zoned GB, General Business. It is guided for commercial development in both the current and draft Land Use Plan. The VFW has recently sold a portion of the property to Lino Lakes Dentistry and would like to split the north side of the site into two parcels containing 1.5 acres for the dentists and 1.47 acres for future development. Staff anticipates submittal of a site plan review for an office building on this site some time in the near future. The VFW, however, is anxious to close on the property prior to this site plan review, thus the minor subdivision request. ANALYSIS The submittal complies with the GB zoning standards as follows: Access to the parcel will be provided from Apollo Drive. The City has a Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County that limits direct access to Apollo Drive to "not more than one (1) access on each side of the roadway in each 600 feet of length...". This agreement mandates one (1) access on the north side of the VFW property along with a shared driveway agreement with the parcel to the west. In review of this request staff would recommend approval with the following conditions: 1. A revised survey document is provided indicating a shared access drive with the parcel to the west. 2. A shared driveway agreement is provided for the access drive. The City approved a site plan/conditional use permit for the VFW on their site at 7868 Lake Drive. To facilitate that development, the VFW asked for and received approval of a MUSA Land Exchange authorizing the transfer of 2.25 acres of MUSA from this site on Required Proposed Lot size minimum 20,000 sq.ft. East - 65,340 sq.ft. & West - 64,203 sq. ft. Lot width minimum 100 feet East - 418.6 feet & West — 285 feet Access to the parcel will be provided from Apollo Drive. The City has a Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County that limits direct access to Apollo Drive to "not more than one (1) access on each side of the roadway in each 600 feet of length...". This agreement mandates one (1) access on the north side of the VFW property along with a shared driveway agreement with the parcel to the west. In review of this request staff would recommend approval with the following conditions: 1. A revised survey document is provided indicating a shared access drive with the parcel to the west. 2. A shared driveway agreement is provided for the access drive. The City approved a site plan/conditional use permit for the VFW on their site at 7868 Lake Drive. To facilitate that development, the VFW asked for and received approval of a MUSA Land Exchange authorizing the transfer of 2.25 acres of MUSA from this site on • • • Apollo Drive to 7868 Lake Drive. This transfer has not taken place yet. The transfer location should be determined before additional development activity occurs. To assure this, the following condition should be attached to the subdivision approval: Before City Council approval of this minor subdivision, the specific location from which the MUSA acres are to be taken from must be determined to complete the MUSA land exchange. For P & Z information, the VFW has asked the City Council to review an extension of their existing site plan review and conditional use permit at the February 12th City Council meeting. The request is to extend the permit until Summer of 2001. Staff has recommended approval of this extension to December 31, 2001. OPTIONS: 1. Approve minor subdivision with conditions outlined above. 2. Return to staff for further consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 ELI Map Q� TrAT NO 00 0 IlL Il U I I III 1,1111111 I Fr sigammiqualla eMpl r© odd " 0 #401 gate � Eaa I ii o aocst� ���e� ��i� o ��mmmmmm 1 00i0o��o -vv o ool� ��a���A illigniiiiiiiiii �.' Alla PARK u � - I _ .I�' NORTH 0�� f �I� ov. Pdm`Or r iJJ4Y4IIIi..ia. lopipmmilrpr-, ' Alum atigi iti��� 2L'iiIIII_____ m r � , ELEMESTISRY saOSI. �v •�D,koo a a �r� : • L l ;� o- l�Ila��; � ■loo e �_ I�!�'rw�hw��tF��P���� �O��ID�OO' �►�P = aoEt���:o •v firfAe 00110 1 mm1111mm• s m 1 Vii. OUTIOT u aorta ;,000:$ v.��,r; .: o GEORGE WATCH 1ST. .M. ��••I11 N1IIIII " °m. ° iM �Iusm°° wit- zniarinien 0o Ao . ass ° ®o U =ll,SO ! m VI'' e Km cRipprz .91.91e. "'Li REIM MEP z d t 72 Zr 6 Itre- C©.b�.rt ' ca RIPCIVOCIWEIr NIL c ill Wimp! ... •aw1 v� � • Ar-L� VA elary _ j - . —aouwrn m gUg.: • IIIIII!II!! rt• / -4 I-- � __7. 'tn. •9 •0aS Jo sz•zJE 1 Jt..9s.Z17.00S _ OS WIN 4 :0: * *6� w 1 C9 o Ale ON t 1 4/t MS aql to 809 •3 • • Y, (pT tiss 1001 099 •M \ \\ Act eA \ \\ Sf,0\ \ \ eql to eon 9catt \ 9,G1E9 u 00 u 0 t 0 u 4 0 T 0 0 U 0 c 0 uE d OC 6 F 0 0 W 0 0 \11,.86, .00S \\ ► \ \ 1 tt 3 0 0 0 a) 3 to 0 c 0 0 31) L. 0 c 0 L In N rn 0 a) CO 0 0 LL 0 t_ a) 0 c a) • a) V) 0 L rn (3) 0 c a) 0 0 N Cr) N 0 0 • • • AGENDA ITEM V F STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland MEETING DATE: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 TOPIC: Rockey Goertz, 325 Birch Street (Apitz) Minor Subdivision DESCRIPTION: This case involves a request by Rockey Goertz and Larry Grubbs to subdivide a 39.67 acre parcel of property located at the north/east corner of Hodgson Road and Birch Street. This minor subdivision would create two parcels: Parcel A 3.98 net acres /3.51 upland acres Lot size: approximately 493 x 330 Parcel B 35.69 net acres /26.85 upland acres Mr. Grubbs would retain ownership of the 3.98 parcel for future commercial development and Mr. Goertz would retain the 35.69 acre parcel for development similar to the enclosed sketch plan for Spirit Hills. The property is currently Zoned R -1 Single Family Residential and located within the existing MUSA line. The property immediately south containing Apitz Garage and the small corner house is Zoned GB, General Business. Utilities can be extended to serve the property. The Draft Comprehensive Plan guides this area for a mix of commercial, low density residential and medium density residential. The current Comprehensive Plan guides the area for single family residential. Mr. Grubbs also owns the adjoining Apitz Garage and is the potential owner of the adjoining City /County owned property at the corner of Hodgson Road and Birch Street. The City /County and Mr. Grubbs are currently working on an agreement that would include right -of -way dedication along Hodgson Road and transfer of the remaining parcel to Mr. Grubbs. The property owner has agreed to dedicate an additional 27' to 29' of right -of -way on the east side of Hodgson Road in this location which is acceptable to the County. Only the minor subdivision is being reviewed at this time. The concept plan is for illustrative purposes only. Mr. Goertz plans to submit a preliminary plat/PDO for April review by the P & Z and Council. Staff has reviewed this minor subdivision request and would comment that the applicant has demonstrated that a future street layout is possible to serve the plat and minimize access onto Birch Street. The applicant has met with Anoka County regarding right -of- way needs for Hodgson Road and is willing to dedicate the additional right -of -way along the west property line and has revised his sketch accordingly. The proposed new lots (A & B) meet the minimum lot dimensions and other requirements under the current zoning. We would, therefore, recommend approval of this minor subdivision with the following conditions: 1. Dedication of 27 — 29.73' of right -of -way is dedicated along the west property line of both Parcel A and B as required by Anoka County . 2. Approval of this minor subdivision does not guarantee, nor imply approval of any subsequent development plans for the property. OPTIONS: 1. Approve Minor Subdivision with conditions outlined above 2. Return to staff for further consideration RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 • � ao EMI ©M KIM °o� i121 0© NI WM ® °oo MAIM 0 -n• �i' Alin SUM NMI EMI °� MUM mai MUM 111121E11 MO,m ae MUM '°mot U© vv neo MEUMITMO or�n000000a^m rY©�i.YZWmym oc's�igraCira NE Eriaimdicamerz Evizimc Puao �000 onN ® ©d' r�NEe�b i�eO�dnennoon olltDCM lD Alpo � .� i _�. ,,T ^° CPI Nor it- �p � ®mss _ acc - 2`�` mm a llowrimumrs.m. mis 0 grie Jaw fq it..., _ Ei � • awQV .Q..m■ WWWW_�n Q, CON2 1 � .0 ©t1 cam �� ���► � yam: a E ` . G coma i�a i° o` N ANOKA " COUNTY E DRAWN REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. SEP. 1974 REVISED JAN. 1987 REV. REVISED NOV. 1994 NOV.1978 REV. MAR.1980 REV. AUG. 1989 REV. JULY 1997 SEP. 1981 REV. FEB. 1991 REV. JULY 1998 DEC .1982 REV. FEB. 1992 REV. AUG. 1999 JULYI985 REV. FEB. Y 1994 REV. DEC. 1985 REV. J • • • BOUNDARY AND TOPO SURVEY (PROPOSED MINOR SUBD.) FOR: SPIRIT HILLS INC. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (Parcel A) That part of the Noedra0 Omuta of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, T.31, R 22 Anoka County, Minnesota, described u follows: Commencing at the southeast coiner of said Northeast Quarter of Swnhar Quarter, thence wen along the earth line 533.41 feet to. point disant 513 feet not more or Ica; from the intersection of the centerline of Highway NoA9 and said south lice, being the point of beginning of the land 10 be described; thence oath at right angles 538 feet; thence wart at right angles 628.54 fed room or Wes to the aotainte of said Highway NoA9; thence aiuth along said ototerline to the interaction with the south line of and Northeast Quarter of Southeast Quarto: hence ear Jong sad aonth line 513 feet, mom of leas to the point of beginning. Except that pert described as follows Commencing at the intasaotion o(tbe marline of Highway NoA9 and the south line of said Northeut Quarter of Southeast Quetta; thane east along said south lime 513 fees more of leas to the aforementioned point of beginning; thence north at right angles 208 feet thence west J right angles 305.09 feet; thence meth at right angles 12 feel; thence west at right angle. 221.92 (end to said eanaline of Highway No.49; thence south along said centerline to the point of commencaoen. Subject to Highway No.49. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (Parcel B) That pan of Government Lot 5, and that pat of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, T.31, R 22, Anoka County, Minnesota lying easterly of the centerline of Highway No.49 and southeasterly of the following described line: Commencing et the southeast eons of amid Oove menent Lot 5; thence North 1 degree, 18 minutes, 49 seconds Eat, assomed bearing slag the east Um thereof 950 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 66 degrees, 29 minute, 55 seconds Wen 72130 feet; thence South 9 degnes. 08 .000100., 52 seconds Wet 654.19 feet; thence South 28 degrees, 25 minutes, 51 seconds West 881.74 fed, more or Ices, to the intersection with the natheasurly right -ofway line of Highway No.49 and said line these terminating Except that pan of said Northeast Quota of Southeast Quarter lying west and south of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast coma of said Northeast Quarter of Southeast Quarter thence west stag the south line 533.41 feet to •point distant 513 feet, more or lea, from the intersection with the matedi0. of Highway No.49 and said south line, bung the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence north at right angles 538 fees thence west at right miles 628.54 fact, more or less, 0 the centerline of said Highway No.49 and said line there terminating aster y...J Subject to Highway No.49, and except that part platted u Anoka County Right-of-Way Plat No.I I. 174//7// //111:::\/itk/1,11',14/ II \ II\ 1 11\ ili il:"N-' ‘\i‘NI \\s" ' I i‘ 11 f‘ :*---"2' 1 \ ki , ''',,;; \\; N., // ‘I, 11 \ril 1.---..NNIs,,''':::N'',i9:s;\::;"■4A4C':.;■......::.*:"::•:. :111 1 ii PARCEL A UPLAND AREA . 3.51 Ac. a PARCEL B UPLAND AREA xx 26.85 AC. (.? .1 / / ..4, ,,) 41) % I 1 \ 1 \ \ I i ■ t \'') 1 SP DOCTES SPRUCE A DENOTES iSil N. i / 1 b / .., i .... i srl.. I ..„ gd, 4 / i + . i/j/I / we/ /1"4411- \i jb;/ IPMICE% 11/1 11.,i / : r"""..... "1„:„ 14 DOMES MAKE / E DOOMS ELM LEGEND: \ , ,,,._ J de , r / , / z in .0 DENOTES UTILITY POLE \ \ / .Y f ~ .i. + - / rP" • / / . r r /! • 101.0 DENOTES SPOT ElEVAncti \ \\\ \ \ \ i y l — — — /: r. t � rr � / ! r r " / r — — / /.,. o DENOTES SET PON MONUMENT \Os., — M / v 1 ® / ! o DENOTES FOUND RON MONUMENT \ \ \ \\ - ..irk' .. 4, 4, • 4,r / / \ Qm DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY OAST IRON MONUMENT \\\ ta ,, 1 tat l4• / s 1081.36 / is 710 I ` .... ItMTYH'et • WWI ,ILL 1,, .,‘ \ -- , It..1 IICE►1101T osrvTION II I +Lt ..1 •h um C.LAK to 2.0aRa7 )r a SAW.47..s A! S.-A.K. -N,o.4-10— — ..:-40 ---' z y .... t[ use of NE 1/4 of SE Vs. '�"` "".,` ▪ — — Ii I it BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOr4 ARE BASED ON MELD MEASURO (TS. GLENN 1/d EHBE/N m�teta. ... NMI 14. 95. I Fogey artily that tax b . hue and mock opreontsbon d • any mf the bondv1s d So abase &salmi Ind add the location of d btfdingg r any, Snit. and d tLt61e incroxIvo1It8. If my. hen of en odd Ica Dated thb_dly e(_i(0I By Yin Reg. Nor 18213 f/ RE ED JAN N 4 2001 crry OF LINO L..A.,74Ea GRAPHIC SCALE ( Yilt ) 1 e.at a 100 ft. J • • • r( CONCEPT PLAN OF: SPIRIT HILLS PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (Prod A) That part of the Northeast Quotas of the Southeast Qnerl r of Section 30, T31, R. 22 Amin County, Minnesota, described u follows Commencing st the southeast caner of acid Northeast Quarter of Southeast Quarles theme wet along the south line 533.41 feet to • point dims 513 feet ad, more alas, from the intersection of the semen= of Highway Na49 and mid south line, being the point of beginning of the laud to he described; thence rash at right angles 538 feet theme west at right angles 628.54 feet more a lea to the centerline of mid Highway No.49; thence south along said amwiia to the iotasectim with the sash line of midNattltesst Quarter of Soothe= Omelet hence asst along said south Son 513 test, more of lea to the point of beginning. Except that pert dronbed as follow Commencing at the imasation of the =tulips of Highway No.49 and the Guth line of said Northeast Quarter of Southeast Qua= thence eat =mg aid south line 513 fm mace of less to the aforementioned point of begindng; thence north at right armlet 208 feet theca won at right sogles 305.09 feet theme malt at right angles 12 feet; thence west at right angles 221.92 feet m aid centerline of Highway No.49; theme south along said centerline to the point of amnmmoamat. Subject to Highway No.49. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (Parcel B) That put of Goverment Lot 5, and tut put of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, T.31, R. 22, Anoka County, Mime= lying comely of the oenmEne of Highway NoA9 and southeasterly of the following described lints Commencing at to saoham caner of said Oovuom= Lot 5; =awe North 1 degree, 18 minutes, 49 seconds East, ..mood hearing, along the east line thereof 950 fm to the point of beginning of the line to be dumbed; thence Smash 66 degrm, 29 minutes, 55 seconds West 72130 feet thence Sash 9 degrees, 08 mina, 52 seconds West 654.19 feet thence South 28 degree, 25 mines, 51 seconds West 881.74 feet, more or leas, to the hste action with the nmthamerly dgheobwny line of HighwayPloA9 and said Ilan tom laminating. Except tut part of mid Northeast Quarter of Soothes Qua= lying west and south of the following dexnbed Eon: Commencing at the southeast come of aid Noatheat Quotes of Southeast Quarter tonne west along to south line 5335.1 feet to • point distant 513 fee, mom or leas, tom the Imaae0on with the eantabm of Highway NoA9 and said south line, being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thous north at right angle. 538 feet thane west at right angles 628.54 fee, mm alms, to the centerline of said Highway NoA9 and aid lithe tare Subject to Highway NoA9, and except that pert platted.. Aorta Canty Right-of-Way Plat No. 11. LEGEND: solo O O° 4& Thom. PARCEL A NET AREA - 3.90 Ace UPLAND AREA - 3.51 M. PARCEL B NET AREA - 35.69 Ac. UPLAND AREA - 26.83 AC. TREE LEGEND: Si DENOTES HICKORY AP DENOTES APPLE RP DENOTES SPRUC A DO40IES ASH PI. DENOTES POPULAR C DENOTES CEDAR P o 0O401ES RFD OAK M DENOTES MAPLE P DENOTES PINE S t DENOTES Box EDEN ▪ DENOTES ELM DENOTES UII,TY POLE DO401ES SPOT ELEVATION ri DENOTES SET PON MONUMENT \. \\ DENOTES RUM RON MONUMENT \ `.` \\ DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY CAST ANON MONUIENT h•1711/14' M -31.38 TYPICAL SINGLE FAMLY LOT SE B ACIC UNE HSE GAR 9 R 85 FT Street 10.600 SO. Ft MIN. UPLAND 2 UNITS 3 UNITS TYPICAL TORNHOIIE SAS 30 Ft FRoI1 CITY STREET R-0-W 30 Ft SEMEN REAR AND SIDE YARDS 15 FT BET8E74 T614-HMS 24 FT. PRIVATE ROADS 24 FT. PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS r • 1 a I ergs / 9 o(''' 1016 IVI Pi • f l f Was BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHORN ARE BASED O 4 FIELD MEASURD1ENT / 1 GLENN EHBElN oarwae rr • nerd`. N00Is M'L 1 EkCIPigN CSA.11. 10 Z (0 1-'1411"1"1/ Weems / 1J lI i , a WIFiCH EET..a. Aw�_ _s 4134. __..._... -- ..- - .... -_ mom__._.._.. .a. era ac fE06Trav-w ......mace• ^""" — / i 7 I- / iI 1 1 JAN 2 4 2001 CITY Or LINO LAKES GRAPHIC SCALE (■ Miff ) 1 W - 100 BL • • • AGENDA ITEM V. G STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jason Lindahl /Alan Brixius P & Z MEETING DATE: February 13, 2000 TOPIC: Minor Subdivision and Site & Building Plan Review Ryan Companies for Summit Fire Protection 2xx Apollo Road BACKGROUND The applicant, Ryan Companies on behalf of Summit Fire Protection, is requesting minor subdivision and site plan approval to allow the construction of a 30,076 square foot office /warehouse facility on the property located in the 200 block of Apollo Road. The site plan also illustrates a 22,800 square foot future expansion and parking for this expansion. Should the applicant wish to construct this expansion in the future, they will need to receive separate approvals. Summit Fire Protection was started in 1999. According to the company's biographic information, they design, manufacture, install, and service fire suppression systems. The company has approximately 80 employees with facilities in Savage, Roseville, Rochester, and Fargo, N.D. This review is based on the following plan submittals: Site Plan dated 1 -12 -2001 Preliminary Utility Plan dated 1 -10 -2001 Preliminary Grading Plan dated 1 -10 -2001 Preliminary Landscape Plan dated 1 -11 -2001 Proposed Floor Plan dated 12 -2001 Proposed Building Elevations dated 1 -12 -2001 Sketch and Description Plan 11 -12 -2001 • • Summit Fire Protection February 7, 2001 page 2 ANALYSIS Land Use and Zoning: The City's Comprehensive Plan guides the subject property for Industrial Use. The site's L -I, Light Industrial zoning classification is consistent with this land use designation. The chart below illustrates the surrounding existing and proposed land uses. Land Use and Zoning Data Location Existing Land Use Proposed Land Use Zoning Site Undeveloped Industrial L -I, Light Industrial North Undeveloped Industrial L -I, Light Industrial South Apollo Dr. and I -35 Apollo Dr. and I -35 L -I, Light Industrial East Industrial Industrial L -I, Light Industrial West Low & Med. Density Residential Low & Med. Density Residential R, R -1, and R -3PDO Lot Size and Setbacks: The lot and building performance standards for properties in the L -I, Light Industrial District are outlined in the chart below. The proposed lot, parking and building meet all of these standards Lot and Building Performance Standards Item Required Proposed Lot size minimum 1 Acre 4.92 Acres Lot width minimum 100 Feet 315 Feet Setbacks: buildings from street rear lot line side lot line residential parking from street rear lot line side lot line 50 Feet 15 Feet 10 Feet 75 Feet 15 feet 5 feet 5 Feet 135 Feet 39 Feet 41 Feet 240 Feet 39 Feet 5 Feet 53 Feet Bldg. height 45 Feet 16 to 28 Feet Green space 10% 62.3 Building: The applicant is proposing to construct a 30,076 square foot office/ warehouse facility. The building is considered one story; however, the office and warehouse portions will have different heights. The office section will be 16 feet high while the warehouse portion will be 28 high. Both of these heights conform to the 45- foot height limit for buildings in the L -I District. The site plan also shows a 22,800 square foot future expansion along with future parking, which will be subject to further review in the future. The buildings exterior materials conform to the standards in Section 3, Subdivision 4.B of the City Code. The warehouse portion of the building will be constructed of pre -cast concrete panels with a painted band. The office portion of the building will be • • • Summit Fire Protection February 7, 2001 page 3 constructed of a mix of pre -cast concrete panels, rockface masonry veneer, and aluminum framed glass windows. The office section will also have pre - finished metal canopies over all entrances. Trash Enclosure: The applicant's plans indicate that all trash and recycling containers will be stored inside the principal structure. Lighting: The applicant's plans did not include a detailed photometric plan. The site plan does show shoebox light fixtures both on the building and in the parking area. Staff recommends that a condition of approval require the applicant to submit a detailed photometric plan prior to City Council review. Signage: Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and separate permits are required for all signs. All signs will be reviewed with the sign permit applications. Landscaping: The applicant's landscape plan presents a varying mix of coniferous and deciduous plants, trees, and shrubs. Most notably, the applicant's plan calls for a native mix of prairie grasses and wild flowers throughout the site. Typical turf grass will only be used along the front of the building. The prairie mix can grow as high a five feet and will have a very natural appearance. The applicant must submit a maintenance plan for the native prairie grasses. In general, the trees and shrubs should provide an effective screening of the front of the building and loading areas. However, the applicant should add screening along the western side of the site to screen the loading areas from the adjacent residential use. In addition, should the applicant decide to construct the future parking stalls along the western side of the site, they will need to add landscaping to screen it from the adjacent residential use. Utilities: According to the applicant, sanitary sewer and water service will come from the existing sewer and water mains constructed as part of the Marmon/Keystone site to the east. Water access will be stubbed across Apollo Court and split to serve both Summit Fire Protection site and the parcel to the north. Stormwater runoff from the subject property will be stored and treated on site. All utility plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Parking: The standards for calculating the off - street parking requirements for office and warehouse uses are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code. For the purposes of calculating parking spaces, the ordinance requirement is to use 90% of the gross building area. Gross Area 90% of Gross Area Code Requirement Required Spaces Office 9,636 Sq. Ft. 8,672 Sq. Ft. 3 +1/200 Sq. Ft. 46 Warehouse 20,440 Sq. Ft. 18,396 Sq. Ft. 1/2000 sq. Ft. 9 TOTAL 30,076 27,068 Sq. Ft. N/A 55 • • Summit Fire Protection February 7, 2001 page 4 As shown in the table above, the total number of required off - street parking stalls for this property is 55. The applicant's plan calls for 48 stalls and another 27 future stalls. If the proposed addition were constructed, it would need 10 additional stalls (22,800 X 90 percent = 20,520 and 20,520 / 2,000 = 10 stalls). Together, the proposed and future parking exceeds the total number of off - street parking stalls required by the ordinance. Roads, Access, Circulation. The standards for access and traffic circulation are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code and illustrated in the chart below. The subject property meets all of the requirements of this section with the exception of the curb cut opening. It should be note that a property may exceed the curb cut opening standard with the approval of the City Engineer. Access and Traffic Circulation Data Item Required Standard Proposed Standard Status Curbing Perimeter curbing Perimeter curbing Compliant Curb Opening 26 feet* 32 feet Non - Compliant Curb Spacing 30 feet from intersection 61 feet from intersection Compliant Access Drive 24 feet 27 and 24 feet Compliant Stall Width 9 feet 9 feet Compliant Stall Depth 18 feet 18 feet Compliant *Measured at ROW line. May exceed with approval of City Engineer. The applicant's plans indicate that they will construct Apollo Court as part of this development. The right -of -way for Apollo Court is labeled as parcel H on their Sketch and Description Plan. This land must be dedicated to the City and Apollo Court must be constructed to City standards. All plans for Apollo Court are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Easements: The plans should show the necessary drainage, ponding, and utilities easements called for by the City Engineer. Park Dedication Section 1001.14, Subdivision 4 states that the park dedication requirement for low labor intensive industrial uses shall be equal to $133 for each 1,000 square feet of proposed building. As a result, the applicant shall pay a cash park dedication fee of $4,000.10 (30,076 sq. ft. / 1000 = 30.076. 30.076 X $133 = $4,000.10). This fee must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. An additional park dedication fee will be required should the applicant construct the proposed expansion. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD ACTION IIIIThe Environmental Board reviewed the project on January 31, 2001. In general, they had a favorable review of the site. Their comments and recommendation are attached. • • Summit Fire Protection February 7, 2001 page 5 OPTIONS 1. Recommend approval of the minor subdivision and site plan to allow the construction of a 30,076 square foot office /warehouse building based on the findings outlined in the February 13, 2001 planning report and subject to the conditions outlined by staff. 2. Recommend denial of the minor subdivision and site plan to allow the construction of a 30,076 square foot office /warehouse building based on findings of fact from the Planning Commission. 3. Table the application and request more information. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision and site plan to allow the construction a 30,076 square foot office /warehouse facility. This recommendation is based on the findings contained in this report and subject to the conditions listed below. 1. Maintain the perimeter curb setback along the northern fire lane at five (5) feet. 2. Decrease the size of the curb cut along Apollo Court from 32 feet to 26 feet or receive approval from the City Engineer. 3. Store all trash and recycling material within the principal structure or apply for and receive approval for a trash enclosure. 4. Outside storage shall be prohibited without an approved conditional use permit. 5. The applicant shall submit a detailed photometric plan and cut sheets of the proposed lighting by March 2, 2001. These lighting plans must be reviewed and approved by City staff prior review by the City Council. 6. Install additional screening along the western side of the site to screen it from the adjacent residential uses. 7. Plans must show all drainage, ponding, and utility easements required by the City Engineer and deeds conveying the easements shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. A maintenance plan for the native plantings must be submitted and is subject to the approval of the Environmental Specialist prior to issuance of a building permit. . 9. City Engineer's comments in the in the January 23, 2001 TKDA memo must be addressed to the City Engineer's satisfaction. oTKDA • TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: 1500 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 -2140 PHONE: 651 /292 -4400 FAX: 651 /292 -0083 Excellence `- John Powell Reference: Summit Fire Protection Copies To: From: Jason Wedel Lino Lakes, Minnesota Date: January 23, 2001 Commission No. 11985 -012 I have reviewed the preliminary plans for Summit Fire Protection received on January 12, 2001. I have the following comments: 1. The City minimum watermain size is 8 -inch DIP, Class 52. 2. All storm sewer must be RCP. 3. The size and type of sanitary sewer must be noted on the plans including lengths, elevations, and grades. 4. The elevations, lengths, and grades of the storm sewer connections to the proposed building must be shown. 5. The storm sewer structure labeled CB2 appears to be located behind the curb. 6. Pipe Foundation, Pipe Bedding, Sanitary Sewer, Concrete Curb & Gutter, and Sanitary Sewer Service details must be added to the plans. 7. An 8" x 6" reducer needs to be shown along the front of the building for the change in watermain size between the service to the building and the fire hydrant. 8. The proposed grading is not contained within the plat. 9. The Normal Water Level and the High Water Level for the pond must be shown on the grading plan. 10. The drainage calculations state that the emergency overflow for the pond is at 905.7 at the north driveway, however, according to the grading plan the pond will overflow at approximately 901.5 and flow to the west. This elevation would still be above the 100 - year high water elevation of 900.3. 11. What is the purpose of the berm on the west side of the property? If you have any questions or comments regarding this review, please contact me. An Equal Opportunity Employer • • • AGENDA ITEM 1 - 03 STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson DATE: Summit Fire Protection TOPIC: Site Plan and Minor Subdivision Application Review A ," eiJc(u(ai ) BACKGROUND: The site plan for this area was reviewed at the June 28, 2000 Environmental Board Meeting in conjunction with the Marmon Keystone project. Marmon Keystone is an approved project that is currently under construction and is located immediately to the East of the Summit Fire site proposal. Summit Fire is located on what is platted as parcel F. At the June 28,2000 meeting, existing excavated areas that could serve as infiltration ponds were discussed. Pond 1 is the pond that is on the SW corner of this commercial development area and in the SW corner of this property. Virtually all of the surface water drainage for the Summit site will go to this pond #1. This is exactly what was discussed on June 28th. Project engineer John Johnson has created additional swails to slow and infiltrate the water from this site. Pond 1 will also take the water drainage from 2 acres on the parcel to the north. As noted from the submitted infiltration checklist sheet, water from roofs will be directed into storm pipes feeding directly into two constructed infiltration basins. Curb and one catch basin in grass area will be directed to infiltration basins. Soil compaction is indicated to be 95% (engineering standard for settlement assurances). I have talked to John Johnson about this and John will write a spec for the vegetation growth areas that would reflect the soils are no higher in density than 1.7 grams per cubic centimeter. This is the limiting soil bulk density for plant growth in fine sand soils. The landscape plan reflects the standard that seems to be acceptable in the business district. That is, irrigated turf in the front and native materials in the drainage areas. We have in the past asked for a maintenance contract to be signed with a company knowledgeable in native plant culture, for the areas that have these native plant areas. • OPTIONS: • Change soil specs in growing areas to reflect less than the 1.7 G /cu cm. • Require native plant maintenance contract. • Require a few native flower gardens in front area. This is consistent with other commercial sites where native flowerbeds have been planned. RECOMMENDATION: Options listed above as well as recommendations of the Environmental Board. Recommendations and Comments of the January 31, 2001 Environmental Board: • John Johnson was present to answer questions. • Favorable review of site plan. • Standard recommendations from Environmental Board Recommendations to applicants. • ■ I \ -- -1 33 30 20 I ~s' 21 1 i1dled 00 7i O O Li' § P 0 45 EV 00 J33 MARVY STREET •0 SO0'01'09 "W 425.00' • LAND SURVEYING k ENGINEERING • ♦ P'4t2 phone: e:(881 Reed 0. ea C.od.. MN 56117 leaphon surve)788 -01I2 F.c(85L)768 -0812 E- melt: .Mrvay.metrote 0000 NORTH LINE OF THE ---••\ SOUTH -EAST QUARTER N88-22'57 "E 561.18' 0e 404.01' Nere ` a eeef US. 00 e t eel My Of rine / SAW PASEMENP 1 / 16/0 / S80'18'27'1( 225.00 Pal "NI PARCEL F nil L__ S = -) 214.147 sail. S '{••djl 0.9z earn 3 1 5 off° I x 9rs'19�oA /S G O 5 \ / \ �O j b \ / / / it'(V1 _ Tly PARCEL C 479.102 win. 9.62 acres SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION FOR: STJ T FIRE MINOR SUBDIVISION AT APOLLO BUSINESS PARK N88e22'57 "E 2277.92' \'40..70 r :8, of Z ann.. r„51 Z 0-4 o"'I PAC I 1\ N 1, 311i-5.3r l x 1 p ,+ =f oa POINT A 101.37.03 "E 46.00 74TH PARCEL E PARCEL H e0 Soft! 40* / �La aro 5 76 /3 • 55-.5‘ ... •'• 1D L 9 Ley of Tf yovi 3•N J�a V �• , / 780 pQ.1 � /Y :��jq9 91 ¢ "E ay. 82 43 b• �gAi 5" ti 14 6 afi "$gG / GHM // D w0 wP /_ °0 2119(4/ 2 METRO • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND (UNLESS OTHERVASE MARKED) o DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET AND MARKED 17765 hereby 0ert)7y that th)s sur.07 plan or report Was prepared by me • under m direct su 0.010'• 0 th t t am o duty Lr1 ea. Land Su do I \,tote or .sofa. onold 9. A*W)n L)cense No. 77765 2099.84 JlREE -- / \ / PARCEL F NORTHEAST CORNER - - -� OF SOUTHEAST QUARTER \ Nat part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18. Toensn9 31, Rope 22. AneW0 Cooly. 10.4.Ia 0.4.7(4.0 as commencing at the Northeast comer of said Southeast Outer; tn. * saute 68 degrees 22 m.4ule 57 seconds West. • d beang Nang the North the of safe Southeast Quarter, 2099.84 lest; thence South t degree 37 mein. al seconds East 6.137 feet !hence South 58 dprw 22 minutes 57 a.cands W.sL 70.00 feet: thew Soule I dpee 37 e rule. 03 seconds Ea0L 16.00 Net to a poet to be henaUter b.o as Pant •8' and d. the pant of 074 50nq; thence South 66 ape 22 minutes 57 feu,. West. 131.85 Ml; hence South 50 dpees 20 minutes 19 seconds Wes. 20319 le••: thence Soule 80 dpees 18 minutes 27 aecanda W.I. W 225.00 lest to the Mel tee of saki Southeast Qualr. thence South 0 Owens 01 minutes 09 seconds Weal atanq safe West line. 425.00 feet to the Nerthe..My line of Me City of Lino Lobes Rlgnl -0l -sly Rat No, t1. AU. Otve accordeg to the recarMO oat MreeS thence Natheos7My 41482 1.t. dang safe Northwester. line and danq o ran- Imgenlial caeca. to the Northwest hovi.q a reeks of 799.00 fee• a central ante of 29 dpws mnules 48 seconds and a chard which Seas Nate 65 degrees 12 minutes .3 seconds East. thence 0. 5 50 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds East. tangent to the fast described ve. 30446 feet to its :ntrfectbn with W Ida. „deaab. tee; Segenn9 t aenouely deaoaed pool B: thence South 1 Owe. 37 minutes 03 seconds East. 30.00 feel: thence S.Mwtry 156.03 feel. don9 a tonsorial cave c.r re to the Northeast having a radius of 235.00 t and a cent. angle of 38 Maw 02 m70.t. 28 sand. thence South 39 degree* 39 mnules 31 ucoaa Eases tangent to the bast deacrbed clove 70.31 feet to said Natheeslety line said Ise Mort lamnotng; thence Hart. 39 More. 39 minutes 31 seconds Was. 70.31 feel: thence Northwest.Y. 156.03 feet aanq a an9entke cave concave to W Northeast having 0 radus of 235.00 1 .1 and a contra. an9b. of 33 dean. 02 minutes 26 second.; thence North 1 degree 37 minutes 03 sewed. WnL tangent to the last ...Wed ur.. 30.00 feel to the pant of begennq Parcel 7 -1 (Orono.. and Ullily Easement) A or0etud soaement far subtle ba■0g0 and uliity Wraoaes. eve, u0der and *Toss the followed d.sabed properly: O.at tort of the Southeast Cuartr of 5ec1kn 10. To.oY, 31, Range 22. Anoka County. 04,.wte tying North of the C4, of Lino Labe Right -o? -way Nat 140. 1 Apoeo 0.:ve, ac0/009 to the receded Pat thereat Mw8ed a luao.0 Commencing at Me Northeast corner of sold Southeast 0uatr thence South 68 degrees 22 minutes 57 seconds West. oswm.d luring 4an9 the North the of soil Southeast Curter o distance of 2099.84 1.et: thence 50.10 1 0090. 37 mutes 03 sacones East. 0 distance of 64837 let: thence South e6 degrees 22 nem.tes 57 secands West. 70.00 feet: thence Saute 1 donee 37 minutes 03 s.ca.ds Eost. 16.00 feel: thence South 88 epees 22 minutes 57 a nds West. I menu Soule dpw 20 minutes 29 West. let: thence Saute 80 degrees minutes 27 secod We 42 115.98 feet to He pant Seg.n continuing South 80 a 18 mu a 27 sec onds West. 70 9.0 2 '* r to ee. wet Ie I said sut.o.7 aarl. thence South 00 a pea 4 of minutes 9 eands West, don q w a wet r 425.00 I Nam..tan y lee oI f t A a City o f Lio ek n MOO-ea-nay Pt N00. t Apollo OS.: .cord. p to the .eeorded Pat thereof; thence N0'MeeatMy, 360.2 4 Net l do^9 safe N t n. n M y I na and ean q in-t an 904tas curt to the a.l ^0a'9 0 ',Us 799.00 f eet a centre an9 0 I 25 degrees 49 moot. 57 seconds p chord when bona Notes aeaees mewl. 19 second. Coati me.. Nat dpw 53 minutes scanda 1N 391 75_42 feet: thence Norm degas 17 mnu 3 West. feet: thence or 39 28w mnu7•s 31 seconds 'wet. 40. 76 he South 8e 9 s on .L 51.86 feet; thence Nam 39 degrees 39 minutes 30 w West. 13400 .t U.nee North 50 duce 20 minutes 20 sec.. East. l . 20.81 W, : Unc. North 07 degrees ]3 'neut. 33 .c onds East. 127.09 1.1 70 M. paint 07 Opened. PARCEL G =hot pat al Me Southeast 0uatr of Section 18, Ta.nshb 31, Range 22. Anoka Canty, Mb.4esala. deserted o. co.mmancnq of U. Nathwal carne of said Southeast O.ortr, thence South 88 degrees 22 ...tee 57 uonos wet. aswm. bang, long the North Ws* of saki Southeast craw a aa0lrnce of 2099.64 sal to the cant 01 4.940ng of the 0arce to be des4Oert thence South 01 ep.. 37 minute 03 seconds East a distance al 6,8.37 last: thence South 88 degrees 22 mutes 57 ...Os West. 70.00 l.l: thence S.m 01 degree 37 mnut•s 03 sends E•l. 16.00 feet: Messes South 66 owe . 22 mi.ules 57 sands West. 131.85 7.t; Owe* South 50 awns 20 minutes 29 s06004. Weal 203.19 feet: Hence Sault, 80 degrees 18 mnutes 27 seconds West. 225.00 feel to the West Ise of said Soothed Water: thence North 00 degrees 01 mnute 09 second. East, 0049 safe wet line. 821.53 feet to the Nate Ise of said Southeast Quart., thence North 88 degrees 22 maw!. 57 sec... East, danq safe North I:.., 561.18 Int to the pant of be9nnng Pace 3 -7 (0104.9e k Oteity Easement) ate meatus .wont far auenc ba4age and ut.tty pipe*.* aw, under ma across the Ida.Ng 0.1070.8 pacts: 0.94nn9 at the Nortnw.l corn a the Southeast Outer of Slott. 18 Toenanb 31. Range 22. A0a00 County. 0*nelolc thence North 88 degrees 22 mnutn 57 .00070* Coat dan9 the North Ise al said 10.177.041 aalr. 404.07 feet: menu Southwesterly to of pant an the W.t Ina of said Southeast Guertin distant 393.91 flyt South.ny ham Me 7Wthw.t coma of said Southeast Water. as measured otanq said Wet Inc thew. Nartheey to the pont of beginning Parcel a -2 (P.rpewd Raaa.ay Faunae!) A praelud foment her peen roadway Pupas. aver. under and across the West 30.00 Lest of the North 695.00 1.1 of the 5oulh.st Outer of Section 18. 70.W.b 31, Range 22. Anoka County. Minnesota. Pace 5-3 (0ra4ag• & Ut7ity Eosem..t) • opal.. ..*anent Ia publc drainage and utiity 0ur001.49 over. under end across the Weft 5000 1.1 of the North 825.00 feel al Section 18. T0.nd.71 31. Rage 22. Mobs County. Mnnnota 0.0.1 the Wes! 30.00 teat of the North 695.00 feel threol. Poch C -4 (lamprey Raodeay Easrn.t) A trnparor, easement for public 7eadwoy Ou70afea Oyes. under and areas the Southeast Quarter of Section 18. Township 31, Range 22. M04a County. Minnesota demob. of commencing 0l the Nrineast can. of said 50utneost Quarts, thence Soule ea dwees 22 anent. 57 sac.. West aswm. beo7ny don9 the North Ina o id Southeast Guenter. 2099.84 feet thence South 01 epee 37 m Des 03 * ands East. 508.37 feel to the point 01 begin gi Innca c hung South 01 Ow. 37 minutes 03 seconds East. 1.0.00 *oe . thew* South 88 4. ., 122 mewl. 57 seconds Wes. 140.00 feet; these North 01 epee 37n...utes 03 second. 'es. 140.00 feet: thence North 88 Mar: 22 minutes 57 seconds Eel. 140.00 1.1 le Me pant of beginning Pace C -5 (0ranage & Utility Eos04nanl) A perpetual easement r0' pubNC drainage and ullity purposes over. undr and *crass the 5auth.st Quarter of 5.000, 18. To.nsha 31, Range 22. Anoka Counts uiw.0lo dearb.4 as commences of the Northeast toner of said Southeast 0u rte thence South 88 dpw 22 minutes 57 sends West. oswm. be0079 04009 the North Ise W said Southeast Warta 2099.84 feet to the of 4.94009: thence South 01 donee 37 minutes 03 seconds East. 6.8.37 7.91. thence Saul, 88 dens 22 minute 57 seconds West. 70.00 I.L thence North 05 dpw 16 minutes 11 seconds East, 250.15 I.. thence North 011 degree 37 minutes 03 seconds W.1. 400.00 feet to the 9*7h tn. of sons Southeast curly. thenc• Nrth 89 Ow.. 22 minutes 57 secan0, Cost. 40.00 eel to the pant of beginning PARCEL H That put of the Southeast Outer of 5e0tbn 18. To.n04 31. Range 22. Anoka County. Me.esata descr0ea os commencing at lee Natnwl coma of said Southeast 0urtr, thence South 88 degrees 22 mettles 57 seconds West. wined beans along the North Bee of said Sart.wst Outer. 2099.8, 1.1; hence Said' 01 dues 37 minutes 03 sec.. East. 64837 feel to a poet to M hereinafter kn0.n of Pont dso being the pent of be90nn9: thence South s8 degrees 22 minutes 57 aeco.44 Weal, 70.00 lee. thence South 01 degree 37 minutes 03 1..41 East. 46.00 7041: theece Southeaster.. 156.03 feel aland h.e a 1.9.1id turn concert to the Northeast eve') a radius al 235.00 N. and o anted angle 01 36 degrees 02 meat.. 20 ..wand. thence Saute 39 dpees 39 mnutes 31 s.ceda East. tangent to la daurb. curve. 70.31 feel to Northwesterly line of th• City of 1.400 Lobes Right- of -.ay Plat Na. 1 Apo. Orin, acceding la the 7eca4.4 Pat thereat, 7004. North 50 degrees 20 m■ulsa 29 seconds Ease along wad Nrthweteny tee. 70.00 lee?, to its 0.lrsect, . nth o fine Muribed os Ialawa b7g-m09 0l ae.we.Sy Mso7,* Poet thence South 01 epee 37 mnules 03 seconds East. 46.00 feel: teens Saetnwte4y. 109.55 Int dug 0 tangential cur. Dom ue to the Northeast 0.n9 a rade.s of 165.00 1.7 and a centred onot al 38 degree 02 mnules 28 seconds: trance 50(7(7 39 degrees 39 minutes 31 secrels East. tangent to the last d.urbed curve. 70.31 1..7 7o soki rm.asteny Ise wood wad lee there terminating a.e.ce North 39 deaeea 39 cmrwle 31 seconds Wet. 70.31 feet: 10ncec Normweslely 109.55 leet alanq a tmgeeliaf curve. concave to The Ncrlh.al hovng 0 .0444 o1 165.00 feel and a central 0n91a of 38 door., 02 minutes 28 seca4da th040. North 01 degree 37 ..rotes 03 seconds Wet. 1.9.1 la the last d.rbed cave. 46.00 let to the Pont of be9nneg NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE . ( IN STET ) 1 Inch . 100 ft \ Ims‘ LNG JOB NO. 613 -002 02000 RLK- Kuueleto, LTD. MEWS PRAIRIE MIX N\ \ PRAIRIE MIX \\/ N SCALE: 1" = 30' 0' 30' 80' SO' EXPANSION AREA / Rini LANDSCAPE NOTES SUGGESTED PLANT SCHEDULE OVERSTORY DECIDUDOUB TREE - AEN RED OM WARE AVG. 2 DIA. NORTHERN Pa OM Ro0eRM cwt APPLE ' 04000 0MERRr; Alwm=04 LINDEN OVERSTORY DECIDUDOUS 7ItBE - RRED oak RED WALE noRnmen PRI evx RO00000 CRAB APPLE 040004 Lx10EN CONDrnn TRkEs GREEN 0PINOE RED OMR AVG. 114' DIA; SAVG. HT 8' Win 000'0000: RED 1W10 DOGWOOD AVM 00440 0 EMERALD SOURS NONneiau F4. 000EEN00Rer m100 * ROSE E0000 JUNIPER WEEENIrr MIRE =00 AVG. HT 18' • ALL DISTURBED AREAS ARE TO BE SEEDED TO UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • ALL TURF AREAS. SHALL BE IRRIGATED TO BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • REFER TO SEED MIX TABLES FOR RATE OF PLANTING. • REFER TO LANDSCAPE DETAIL SHEET FOR GENERAL PLANTING NOTES, IRRIGATION NOTES AND PLANTING DETAILS. • LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SHOP. DRAWING OF IRRIGATION PLAN TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL POND MIX Common Name 'lantern, big Canada anemone Marsh milkweed New England aster Swamp aster Brame, fringed Bluejolnt grass Showy tic-trefoil Wheat grass, slender Wed rye, Virginia Jo-pyy weed Bonnet Manna gross, reed Manna grass, fowl Easy sunflower Blue -flag Hs Meadow blazIngete Tall blazing/tor Great Nue lobelia Rye grass, anal Monkey flower 688 Bergamot ReOreen Swltah grass Bluegrass, fowl Block -eyed Sutton ?e Green bulrush • Wool grass Grass- leaved goldenrod Indian grass Cordgross, prairie Blue vervain Ironweed Culverts root Golden Alexander?! Rote 30 lbe /ocre (33 kg/ho). Installation Note: Sedges, meadow grosses and meadow forbe are best Installed by broadcast method, separate from main grass mix, in early spring or full H possible. Neo note many of these species require pre - germination treatments. FORBS MIX Common Name Botonted Name Milkweed, butterfly Axdepios tuberose Aster, heath Aster eolcoides Aster, smooth-blue - Aster loevis Mlkvetch, Canada Aktragdue canadensis. Partridge pea Chomeecrlsta faelculnlo Prairie cover, white Daleo candidum Prairie dove, purple Dales purpureum Tick- trefoil, showy Desmodium canadense Ox -eye, carman Bellops's helkntholdes Blazirgsta, rough Little aspen Blazingster, toll Ltatde pycnostachya Bergamot, wild Monad] tktuloea Penstemon, showy Penetemon grondiflorurh Coneflower, grey- headdd Rotbida panto Block -eyed Susan Rodbeckld hkto Gdldenrod, stiff SAlidago rigida Spderwarl. Ohio Tradescantio ohieess Vervain, blue Verbena hastota Vervain, hoary Verbena strict° Alexander, golden Zlziz aurea Rata 5X of Praise MIL An species shall be provided In equal Weights. Substitution should not be allowed.. Description: Native forts to be added to riative grass mixture F SE Minnesota. PRAIRIE MIX Common Name Bluestem, big Grams, sideoats Mild rye, Canadian Wheat gross, sender Rye gross, annual ReGreen Forbe (Table F -1, F -2, or F -3) Switch grass filuestem, little Indian grass Rate: 30 Its /acre (33 kg/ha). Seeding Methods 8 1 Site Preparation ? The ante should be prepared by plowing to a depth of 124 and then disking. Fertilizer 7 Conduct soil test, if required, fertilize per soi test recommendation. The fertilizer used should be a commercial grade of sow release complete fertilizer. C) Seed Installation 4 Seed should be installed with a seed drill that *II accurately meter the types of seed to be planted and keep all seeds uniformly mixed during the during (Truax - type). The drill should contain 0 minimum two seed boxes; a fine seed box and a box for large /fluffy seeds, and it should be equipped with disc furrow openers std packer assembly to compact the soil directly over the drill rows. Maximum row spacing should be 8 inches Small and fine seeds should be drop- seeded onto the ground surface from the fine seed box. Lotge /fluffy seeds shbuld be placed to Obtain a find planting depth of X to X inch. All drill seeding should be done at a right angle to surface drainage. D Seeding Rotes Mates are specified kn the mixture tabulation for the specified mix. E Harrowing ? The site should be lightly harrowed or raked following seeding. F Packing 7 Compact the site following harrowing to ensure a fine seed bed. Mulch 7 The site should be mulched and disc - anchored following packing using a weed free mulch at a rate of 2.0 tons per acre. H) Planting Season ?Planting season is between April 15 to July 20 and September 20 to October 20. Dormant seeding frorn October 20 to November 15, With a maximum soil temperature 6f 50 Botanical Name Mdropogah gerard Anemone canadenele Asdeptos Incarnate Aster novae - anginas Aster punicau5 Bromue cMato Calomagroelb canadensis Deenodtum canadense Eysnus trdchycaulus Bymus vkglNas Eupatortunl maculatum Eupatoriunt perfalbtum Glyoeld grounds Glyceri0 atriata Hellopeb Hdianthddes kis virghlda -shrei Llotrls Ilpohstytb Liable pychostachyo Lobelld dphiitico !Alum Itdlam Mlmulue ribgens Monads Bstulosa NA Paticum Argot= Poo paluetrb RudMEckia hkta Scirpus etfo*ene Scirpus Soak goo hNdk Sorghastrum nutons Spartba pectinate Verbena hasteta Veronlo faeciculata Veronicaethlm Hrginionum 2Rea ]urea Call 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL, Twin Cities Arad 651- 454 -0002 MN. Toll Free 1- 800 - 252 -1166 % of Mix 5.0 0.1 0.5 0.8 0.8 8.0 0.2 0.4 8.0 6.0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.1 10.0 0.1 0.6 35.0 1.0 10.0 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.2 5.0 3.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4 Total: 100.0 Botanical Name Mdiopogan gerardi Bouteloua curtipendula Elymue canadenels Bynlus trachycaulus Lolkim Itdicum NA NA Panibum virgatum Schlbachyrlum scopaium Saghaatrum nutane % of Mix 5.0 10.0 5.0 5.0 10.0 34.0 5.0 20 120 12.0 Totab 100.0 s_j li5 i� ER { { tt z a m b t:IVE JAN 1 2 20Q1 ,,.,TrY OF t,c.eAo _, ., - • 225.00' 11. PLUG VALVE 8' TEE 131.85' VALVE 45 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN 340 ti RETENTION POND !!V 8DS50 16 Ira x . RIM 908.84 INV. 877.28 (NE & W) a LEGEND B EXISTING SANITARY SEVER MANQE • PROPOSED MANHOLE PROPOSE➢ WATERMANN EXISTING UTILITIES PROPOSED SANITARY • CLEANOUI VALVE GRAPHIC SCALE 0 U 30 00 120 (01 FEET) 1 twit 90 LL ED 1 LEGEND .EXISTING CONTOURS PROPOSED CONTOURS PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS EXISTING ELEVATION SNOT PROPOSED DRAINAGE ARROW OPTIONAL CONTOURS VARIBLE 3.00 FT. 0.70 FT. 0.00 DITCH BOTTOM RIP RAP DITCH CHECK DETAIL PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN GRAPHIC SCALE A 0 NI s Is rtipi INFILTRATION ZONE ImE . SM DOT 6, M CONFORM TO TYYPEE & -FENCING ALONG CONTOURS AS DI DIRECTED BY N FR SILT FENCE BATE STAIWABB LRAAVD,G wa DRG art ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NO SCALE pp,( 1��i �ri� � •�iMri•vr•o � •• l��' � • a' . '• r% •� iisce i14•:4..• •i••••• •ice �4• J r010111aI111u11►l IN rMOA, rLy���.!�•Li •I��.� 6' MINIMU i' — 2' WASHED ROCK SEDIMENT CONTROL BALES PROPEX 'SILT STOP" FABRIC OR - EQUAL— FASTEN TO STAKES NOTES ANCHOR WITH (2) -3/4" STEEL REBAR DRIVEN INTO GROUND (TYP.) REAR YARD STORM SEWER STRUCTURE PRIOR TO ROUGH GRADING, INSTALL SILT FENCE IN LOCATIONS SHOWN OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER,. ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE WILL BE REWIRED WHERE LOCAL CONDITIONS REQUIRE. ROUGH GRADING SHALL PROCEED CN AN AREA BY AREA BASIS TO MINIMIZE UNCOMPLETED AREAS. AS EACH AREA OUTSIDE THE STREET 15 GRADED, PROVIDE NATIVE TOPSOIL SEED, AND MULCH ANCHORED WITH ,A- STRAIGHT SET DISC WITHIN 48 HOURS OF FINE GRADING. •av�, --„a _ 1 MAINTAIN AND REPAIR SILT FENCES (INCLUDING REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATED SILT) UNTIL, VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. SEED TO BE MnDOT TYPE 500, MULCH TYPE 1 (2 TONS /ACRE). CE 1 RYAN COMPANIES US, INC 1 M coraly t04 Ws pen. opooMonten. noon om mood by rre or wow my moot arerviom fl are ern • clay Avowed Architect =lir re iron of to Dabs of Eat. Reg. No 1 Ryan Companies US, Inc. 700 Intonational Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis. MN, 55402-3387 612/336-1200 corporate 612/337-5552 fax AN Building Lasting Relationshi•ps 1 2 1442001 fle PACKAGE ft IMAM, 2001 CITY 5USSYTTAL. .ja.CleTgerwret Access msca SURFACE SLOPE NDT TO EXCEED DO OD IN AU. DWECTIONS. D. CALLIC SCEWALKS AT WATER SUSCLEIBLE ALLEM CLOSEST TO 8106. ARMS AT RISK WOULD II•CLUDE BASENDES, AREAS WM POTENDAI. HEAVED PROBLEM %EWALD TRAMMON FROM EXTERIOR DOOR STOOP TO ON 680400 90EwALK SMIALKS ADJ. TO 01D6. WITH NO ORAN TU. 4;-----til JAN 1 2 2001 CITY OF UNO LP ' 4s i fl f57 SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA err PLAN TRW AORTH w AI.1 relierre. MC 058-000 GRAPE BAYS PIPE FABRICATION SMOKING AREA COMPUTER ROOM 26.-r . 22' -7' 1 RYAN COMPANIES US, INC. I hereby certify eV we pn geancsuat relent ameed ly rre a veer my area egevlmm en eM 1 en a hay teed IraiNCt mew en leveed as Sete of Date 1 Ryan Companies US, Inc. 700 International Centre 900 Second Avemfe South Minneapolis, MN, 55402-3387 612/336.1200 corporate 612/337 -5552 frac Building Lasting Relationships 0 0 WOMEN SERVICE DNI510N 28'- . 42'' CUSTOMER SERVICE ENTRANCE OPEN OFFICE 11 WORK AREA RECEPTION VEST WAIT OFFICE 13'-4' . 133• -0' OFFICE U/ BOARD ROOM 15'-2' MAIN ENTRAPCE 1 IZ 7AN14RY, 2001 CRY SUBMITTAL 0 0 O O ra b%ge. Y JAN 1 2 2001 .TTY OF x e PLAN AIOR771 5 SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN A2.I I,_ ....... 058-000 RAMP BEf000 RAIL cIGRETTEE RETAN WALL WEST ELEVATION 1' 1 TOP Of ACCEM p4 , 109-4• 0 0 LUYMNATED FFi OWV7E M IT IRE PROTECTION PRECAST CONCRETE PNEL- MFORM GROOVE- PANTED ENV 0 WALL MIMED 000080x US K FIXTURE - 1 P OP 7 LW BM W 0 0 SOUTH ELEVATION —J J METAL COPMO ALIPANat PRAM awes. wwoes 0 ROCKPACE MASONRY VENEER PREPRISIILD METAL CAN7Pr IIIIFIIII. --■ 1 ■■.■.■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■.I ■■ ■Y■■ mumummompiggem .r'-I' ••.ii ■. ■... ■-������ iiiiii ■ ■ ■...• ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ti 111111 ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■....■ vs' - r4• 0 O - -. ■■■■■- ■.■■■■■■■■.■■■■■■ ■■UU■ ■■■■■■■■E■.■■■M■■ MEMMEMMEMMEMEMEMEEMEMMENEMEMEME an- EAST ELEVATION ■11.11.. ■ ■.■ ■■■■ MEM a mom � MENU ............ ■ ................. TOP OP Plfi ily TOP of (TT TOP O PReCA TCP OP IM I7b650f,RY TOP OFICCENT D p4. \ TOP OF 4. 0 6 0 PRECAST 0 fii)Epedif PRECAST • FeCP MA Y IOI'4' ACCR4T BA0V 0 TOP OP A TOP O MA 11%6 PREC, 5• TOP Of ACCENT MM TOP Of 109My O� AA- 0 mom mom 1111■■ mom 111.1 — NORTH ELEVATION_ —MN ��f- mod .. . mil mum MEM ENE II EMMEN MEE EMEMEMMEMMEEMEMEMEMMEMEMEEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEM MOMMEMEMMEMEMEMMEMEMMEMEMMMEMMEEMMEMEMMMEEM 0 0 J.-'1N 1 2 2001 RYAN COMPANIES US, INC. 1 hereby Certify aar VYS pen epecMUUUi, mot wee aepaat by rrc Cr wee' my direct Apelvewn at •et 1 an • Wy Watered Arwte t wa the ie... of be sae of Data AtU Nlt 1 Ryan Companies US, Inc. 700 International Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN, 55402 -3387 612/336-1200 corporate 612/337 -5552 fax 1 12 SMART. 2001 - C$17 momilmq. ti T- -1— II L 1 i SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION LNO LAKES, MINNESOTA PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS • • AGENDA ITEM V H STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland MEETING DATE: February 13, 2001 TOPIC: Public Hearing, Ordinance pertaining to Accessory Buildings in Commercial /Industrial Districts DESCRIPTION: Staff has prepared an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to accessory buildings in the commercial and industrial zoning districts based on discussion at the January Planning and Zoning Board Meeting. This draft would allow only one (1) accessory building a maximum of 400 square feet in area. Roof height would be limited to 12' and district setbacks would apply. No site plan review would be required, but standard building may be required per the Uniform Building Code. Roof and exterior color and material is to be compatible with the existing building. Metal buildings and pole barns are unacceptable excepting those used for bus storage. Should the P & Z be in agreement with this draft ordinance we would recommend forwarding the document to the City Council. OPTIONS: 1. Adopt Ordinance Amendment as present. 2. Adopt Revised Ordinance 3. Return to staff for further consideration RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 or 2 • • • Council Member its adoption: introduced the following ordinance and moved ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF LINO LAKES ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN THE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. Section 3, Subdivision 4.D. Accessory Building & Structure shall be amended by adding: 9. Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts. The following summarizes the maximum number, size, and height of accessory buildings allowed in the commercial and industrial zoning districts. a. Only one (1) accessory building shall be allowed not to exceed four hundred twenty square feet (400) except when intended for storage of buses per Sec. 3 Subd. 4.2.a. b. Building setbacks shall not exceed base district requirement. c. Building height shall be limited to 12 feet maximum except when intended for storage of buses per Sec. 3.Subd.4.2.a. d. Metal buildings and pole barns are prohibited except when intended for storage of buses per Sec. 3.Subd.4.2.a. e. Roof and exterior color and material shall be compatible with the principal structure. f. Accessory buildings on commercial /industrial sites shall be limited to typical accessory storage uses, no auxiliary commercial /industrial use shall be allowed within an accessory storage building. g. Site and building plan review shall not be required for accessory building construction as an accessory building that meets the requirements listed herein shall be considered a minor project for the purposes of Sec. 2.Subd.5.A.. • • • h. Accessory buildings shall not be located within an easement. i. If the principal building is expanded to cover more of the lot, the accessory building shall be removed unless the access building is constructed with masonry walls (such as brick or concrete block). j. Building permits shall be required as regulated by the Uniform Building Code. Section 2. Section 7, Subd.1 .G.of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance (NB District Accessory Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows: 4. Accessory building and structure per Section 3. Subd. 4.D.9. Section 3. Section 7, Subd.2.G.of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance (LB District Accessory Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows: 4. Accessory building and structure per Section 3. Subd. 4.D.9. Section 4. Section 7, Subd.3.G.of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance (GB District Accessory Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows: 5. Accessory building and structure per Section 3. Subd. 4.D.9. Section 5. Section 7, Subd.4.G. of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance (CB District Accessory Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows: 4. Accessory building and structure per Section 3. Subd. 4.D.9. Section 6. Section 8, Subd. l .H.of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance (LI District Accessory Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows: 3. Accessory building and structure per Section 3. Subd. 4.D.9. Section 7. Section 8, Subd.2.H.of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance (GI District Accessory Buses) is hereby amended to read as follows: 4. Accessory building and structure per Section 3. Subd. 4.D.9. Section 8.This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of 2001. ATTEST: Ry -Chel Gaustad, CCM City Clerk CITY OF LINO LAKES John Bergeson, Mayor The motion for adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said Ordinance was duly passed and adopted. • Planning & Zoning Board January 10, 2001 Page 10 people, which the City would get, and Qwest would simply own and maintain the tower. • He stated if that happened, the City would come out ahead. • • Mr. Lysiak stated it was a good location for this tower and the next tower that would come in would have a more difficult time finding space. Mr. Lyden stated it was hard to image the continued need for towers, and asked if technology changed and the towers were no longer needed, what would happen then. Mr. Lisiak stated if the tower were abandoned, Qwest would be required to take it down. However, he stated the reality of that happening was very slight. He indicated towers were coming down in size and stated that vertical real estate was more valuable than horizontal real estate at the present time. Mr. Schilling asked if there was any concern regarding security or safety considering where it was located and there would be children in the area. Mr. Lisiak replied the towers were very safe. The equipment could not be damaged, or the tower climbed. He stated the bigger problem was the potential radiation issue. However, he stated the radiation on this tower would be very low. Mr. Smyser asked how did they get up on the towers. Mr. Lisiak replied there was a safety wire for the climbers, there would be no steps. A person could not climb the tower. They are too big to put your arms around it to climb it. Chair Schaps asked if there was a chance another monopole could go on the site. Mr. Lisiak replied that could be a possibility in the future. He stated these towers also need a T -1 circuit to get back to their networks. Mr. Lyden made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:35 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Schilling. Motion carried 6 -0. Mr. Smyser stated staff felt rezoning was justified. Mr. Lyden made a MOTION to approve Qwest's request for a rezoning of City Hall Park to Public Semi - Public, and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 6 -0. D. PUBLIC HEARING, Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to allow accessory building in Industrial and Commercial Zoning Districts. Chair Schaps declared the public hearing opened at 8:37 p.m. Staff reviewed amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow accessory buildings in the Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts. Staff noted none of the Commercial or Industrial Districts included any type of accessory buildings in the list of accessory uses. However, parts of the Zoning Ordinance imply that accessory buildings were acceptable in the Commercial and Industrial Zones. Staff recommended the City consider the issue and determine if accessory buildings were desired uses. If so, the City could clarify this by adding them to the list of allowed uses in the respective zoning districts. Planning & Zoning Board January 10, 2001 Page 11 Chair Schaps asked if this was an oversight in the zoning Ordinances. Mr. Smyser replied he believed it was an oversight in how it was termed. He stated there was some ambiguity. He indicated there was nothing wrong with having accessory buildings, but there should be a size limit, and exterior concerns. Chair Schaps inquired about allowing more than one accessory building. Mr. Smyser stated this could be addressed also. Mr. Lyden requested the City consultant look at this and list the pros and cons so they could make an educated decision. Mr. Zych left the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Mr. Smyser replied they had looked at other Cities and they all differed as far as their requirements. He stated it was up to the City as to how they deal with it. He stated some places allowed it and some places did not. He stated again accessory buildings are fine as long as they were accessory buildings and were not a warehouse building where another business could be run. He stated he would like to see the exterior of the building be consistent with the principal building. Chair Schaps stated in some respect this could be a problem if left uncontrolled, however, it does give a business a temporary place to store items. Mr. Zych returned to the meeting at 8:47 p.m. Mr. Schilling stated he believed accessory buildings should be allowed. The number of the buildings and the size of the buildings go hand in hand. He liked the total square footage idea. He stated as far as matching the exterior of the main building that might be difficult, but they should mandate the types of materials used. He stated he did not believe a site plan was necessary for an accessory building. Chair Schaps asked if there was an expansion of the principal building, should the accessory building be removed. Mr. Smyser stated that was an option they could look at. Mr. Rafferty stated he liked the idea of having accessory buildings, and thanked Mr. Johnson for coming in. He indicated he liked the idea of matching the existing building. His main concern was the ability of these types of storage facilities becoming something other than storage facilities. He stated the site plan should be required, so they know in the general area where the accessory building would be located. He believed staffs recommendation was a good start. He stated multiple structures would be a problem and he did not want that. Mr. Gordy Johnson stated his appreciation to the Board for going through all of this effort. He stated, for their purposes, one storage building was adequate. The way it was presented at the previous meeting was what they intended, and the building would be very attractive. • • • Planning & Zoning Board January 10, 2001 Page 12 Chair Schaps asked if they did expand their main building, generally speaking, would the accessory building be needed, or should the City require the expansion building be removed. Mr. Johnson replied it would still be very useful to have storage facilities, and did not believe this suggestion would be a good idea. Mr. Lyden made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to February 13, 2001, to allow staff time to prepare the appropriate Ordinance language amendments, and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. E. Resanau Park Estates Homeowners Association /City of Lino Lakes, Black Duck Drive, Minor Subdivisions for Trail purposes. Staff presented the application by explaining over the past few years, City Staff had been working with Reshanau Park Estates Homeowners Association (RPEHA), the private property owners adjacent to Outlot B and Anoka County Parks on development of a trail around the north end of Reshanau Lake. A resolution between Staff and Resanau Park Estates Homeowners Association had been reached. Staff presented its analysis of this resolution, nothing the City, property owners, and RPEHA had agreed to a proposal that provided this trail segment. A 15' wide park trail would begin at the north end of Black Duck Drive, through two residential lots, proceed through Outlots A and B (connecting to the Anoka County Park trail) and included a larger triangular parcel at the north end of Outlot A. To facilitate this agreement, minor subdivisions were required to adequately define and record this trail segment. Staff recommended approval of the minor subdivisions to facilitate construction of a trail around the north end of Reshanau Lake, with the following conditions of approval: 1. The City would ensure perpetual access for the RPEHA to its outlots, including vehicular access to the boat ramp. 2. Signage would be placed at the trailheads indicating that only authorized vehicles were permitted. 3. The City would relieve the Association of is obligations with respect to the Easement and Option Agreement with the Schut's and the Easement Agreement with the Kuzel's. 4. The RPEHA would be responsible for any desired fencing along the proposed path. 5. The City shall record the minor subdivision with Anoka County. Mr. Lyden indicated there had been a tremendous amount of work on this and he commended everyone involved. Chair Schaps asked if there would be an addition of the signage regarding the use of the trail for association use vehicles and a public trail signage. He stated at this time, there was only a private property sign. He requested similar signs are placed here as there are on rest of the trails. He also asked about the fencing and asked for an explanation of that. • • AGENDA ITEM V. I STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: January 10, 2001 TOPIC: Amend Conditional Use Permit to Allow Outdoor Storage of Recreational Vehicles Central Suburban Inc., 416 Lilac St. BACKGROUND Central Suburban, Inc., submitted an application to amend its existing conditional use permit (CUP) to allow storage of recreational vehicles on the site. At the Jaunuary 10 meeting, the P & Z opened and closed the public hearing, then tabled the item to allow the applicant to work with staff on unresolved issues. Since then, the recreational vehicle firm that wanted to utilize the site decided to locate in another city. Central Suburban then submitted a letter withdrawing the application for amending the CUP (see attached). Since the item was tabled to the February meeting, the P & Z should remove it from the table and acknowledge the withdrawal of the application. Though it may seem like red tape, a vote on the matter will ensure the record includes the termination of the application. OPTIONS 1. Vote to remove the item from the table and acknowledge the applicant's withdrawal of the application. 2. Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option 1 • Central Suburban, Inc. 1 630 NE County Highway #I0 Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432 (763) 786 -8642 fax (763) 786-7469 January 23, 2001 Mary Kay Wyland, Planning Coordinator City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 -1182 VIA FAX: 651- 982 -2499 Ms. Wyland: Regarding 416 Lilac Drive, Lino Lakes, we are withdrawing the application that we submitted to your office on November 21, 2000 for motor home outdoor storage. We would like to thank the staff for their time relating to this matter. Sincerely, CE % SUBURBAN, INC. Bruce D. Kerber Vice President ZO 'd 69N.98L89L 'ON Xd3 'ONI INd8Nfl8flS 1VN!N3O WV SI :Oi 3(l,l, IO -E -NVI' • • • AGENDA ITEM V. J STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: February 13, 2001 TOPIC: PUBLIC HEARING (continued): Ordinance 09 -00 Tree Preservation Ordinance BACKGROUND At the November meeting, the discussion and public hearing was continued to the February meeting. Due to the demands of incoming development projects staff has no additional information at present on the tree ordinance. RECOMMENDATION Continue public hearing to March meeting. • • • AGENDA ITEM VII. A MEMORANDUM TO: Jeff Smyser, City Planner FROM: Cynthia Putz -Yang / Alan Brixius DATE: February 6, 2001 RE: Lino Lakes — Mini - Storage Regulation FILE NO.: 194.01 — 01.01 We have been asked to look at where mini - storage might be located in the City and provide examples of appropriate performance standards. Mini - storage has the same characteristics as other types of warehousing. Our research indicates that industrially -zoned land is most suitable for mini - storage. Land that is zoned for commercial uses is a possibility, but this land would be better suited for higher value uses. Mini - storage is not usually allowed in agricultural or rural residential zoning districts. The rationale behind this is as follows: 1. The purpose of the rural districts is to preserve agricultural land and provide some residential use at rural densities. Mini - storage is not consistent with that purpose. 2. The rural districts cover a very large geographic area. Therefore, allowing mini - storage in rural districts would have a far - reaching impact on the City and contains the potential for many land use conflicts. 3. If mini - storage is built, it could interfere with future land use planning in areas that are not specifically earmarked for commercial or industrial growth. In light of the previous discussion, it would appear that mini - storage is most suitable in industrials districts and potentially the R -BR district. In Lino Lakes, the R -BR, Rural- Business Reserve District, is a district that could potentially contain mini - storage as an interim use until the land is rezoned, or the mini - storage could remain if the land was rezoned to an industrial district. A disadvantage of allowing mini - storage in the R -BR District is the possibility that it could hinder the extension of utilities in the future. As illustrated in the research by Mary Divine, frequently mini - storage raises concerns about appearance and design. Examples of performance standards for mini - storage are attached. Issues to consider include green space, landscaping, building coverage, paving, security systems, and building appearance. Building • • • appearance may include regulation of exterior building materials and requiring that the garage doors be oriented to the interior of the property. Requiring a high - quality appearance will go a long way toward improving the value of the property. Performance standards should not be compromised. The City has few to no existing mini - storage uses, and now is the time to set a high - quality standard that can be maintained in the future. FEB -06 -2001 12:07 NAC 612 595 9837 P.04/07 pa lc_ Par ,.11,,-4-s • • • P- q. y 1 13,- .5i.,ess •�nc% iAi are.hoC.<5,�� iGt Adequate analysis and provisions are made to resolve issues related to demand for services. No use shall be allowed that will exceed the City's ability to provide utility, police, fire, administrative or other services to the site. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.7 of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. Mini- storage facilities provided that: a. At least twenty (20) percent of the site is open, green space which is sodded and landscaped in accordance with a plan approved by the City Council. b. Building coverage shall not exceed sixty (60) percent of the lot area. c. Parking, loading, driveway and fire lane design shall be subject to review and approval of the City Staff and Fire Marshal. d. Adequate space is provided for snow storage. e. Fire hydrant location shall be subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshal. f. All driveways and parking areas are to be hard (blacktop or concrete) surfaced and adequate turning radius for fire truck maneuverability is to be maintained throughout the site. Designated snow storage space is to be provided to insure adequate and safe access during winter months. In an 'on- premises" caretaker dwelling unit is provided on site, constructions of said dwelling unit shall conform to all design standard regulations for dwelling units of the Minnesota State Building Code and the Oak Park Heights Zoning and Building Code. The occupancy and minimum interior and floor area standards shall be controlled by Sections 401.15.0 of this Ordinance. Off - street parking shall be made available for said dwelling unit in conformance with Section 401.15.F. g- h. Any structures having exposure to an adjacent residential use or public right - of -way, park, or similar public use areas shall be of brick, rock face block, natural stone, wood, or stucco facing material. I. No retailing, wholesaling, manufacturing, repair, or other such activity other than storage is to occur within the self storage, mini- warehousing facility. 300 -7 FEB -06 -2001 12:08 NAC 612 595 9837 P.05/87 Adequate analysis and provisions are made to resolve issues related to demand for services. No use shall be allowed that will exceed the City's ability to provide utility, police, fire, administrative or other services to the site. k. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.7 of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. 7. Landscape sales and material storage provided that: a. There are no growing fields on the site. b. Outdoor sales /display area shall be limited to thirty (30) percent of the gross lot area and be in conformance with the performance standards of Section 401.15.B.14 of this Ordinance. c. Adequate analysis and provisions are made to resolve issues related to demand for services. No use shall be allowed that will exceed the City's ability to provide utility, police, fire, administrative or other services to the site. • d. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.7 of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. 8. Commercial PUD as regulated by Section 401.06 of this Ordinance. 9. Cellular telephone antennas not located on a public structure provided that: a. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.7 and Section 401.15.P of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. • 10. Manufacturing, compounding, assembly, packaging, treatment or storage of products and materials as accessory use provided that: a. The proposed use complies with the performance standards outlined in Section 401.15.B and all other applicable provisions of this Ordinance. b. All manufacturing and assembly operations shall be enclosed within a building. c. Adequate analysis and provisions are made to resolve issues related to demand for services. No use shall be allowed that will exceed the City's 300 -8 FEB -06 -2001 12:08 NAC v rv-L' C7 ` . v C. w 1 IV r.r ` — y. - 6/L./ Ty y U " ,ii' t- h' /9 e 4.144(10)(b) (ix) 4.144(10)(b) (x) 4.144(10)(b) (xi) {— 1 Vr1 , r •c ti 612 595 9837 P.06/07 r dL.cs+r,cc( 4! I5N,LT Z / -t// `).(7/(1//`/Z >i c/ /�y- Water Quality. The site development shall minimize impacts on wetlands, streams, lakes and ponding areas. Recreation: The site development shall not conflict with existing recreational facilities in the City. Public Heating. Comments and testimony of the public on the proposed use of such a site will be heard and made available at one or more, Public Hearings in the City. (Code 072684) 4.144 (11) Self Storage (mini warehouse) Facilities. Provided that: • 4.144(11) (a) Green Space. At least thirty five percent of the site is open, green space which is sodded and intensely landscaped in accordance with a plan approved by the City Council. 4.144(11) (b) Building Coverage. Building coverage shall not exceed forty percent of the lot area. 4.144(11) (c) Building Location. No buildings shall be located closer than thirty -five feet to each other to allow for parking, loading, driveway and fire lanes. 4.144(11) (d) Building Length. No building shall be greater than one hundred fifty feet in length. 4.144(11) (e) Snow Storage. Adequate space is provided for snow storage. 4.144(11) (f) 4.144(11) (g) 4.144(11) (h) 4.144(11) (i) 4.144(11) (I) Fire Hydrant. All structures are to be within two hundred feet of a fire hydrant. Sprier Systems. All storage buildings are to be equipped with dry sprinkling systems which will be subject to review and approval of the City Building Official and the City Director of Fire and Safety. Fire Alarm System. Every 2,000 square feet of the storage structure is to be separated by a fire wall and a complete and comprehensive fire alarm system with smoke detectors shall be initiated in each structure subject to the review and approval of the Director of Fire and Safety. Driveways and Parking Area. All driveways and parking areas are to be hard (blacktop or concrete) surfaced and adequate turning radius for fire truck maneuverability is to be maintained throughout the site. Designated snow storage space is to be provided to insure adequate and safe access during winter months. Caretaker Apartment. If an "on- premises" caretaker dwelling unit is provided on site, construction of said dwelling unit shall conform to all design standard regulations for multiple family dwelling units of the Minnesota State Building Code and the New Hope Zoning and Building Code. The occupancy and minimum interior and floor area standards shall be controlled by sections 3.353, 3.361, 3.362 and 4.035(6)(b) of this Code. Off - street parking shall be made available for said dwelling unit in conformance with section 4.036(10)(a) of this Code. 4 -127 072684 • • FEB -06 -2001 12:08 4.144(11) (k) 4.144(11) 0) 4.144 (12) NAC 612 595 9837 P.07/07 Buildirm Appearance. Any structures having exposure to an adjacent residential use or public right -of -way, park, or similar public use areas shall be of brick, natural stone, wood, or stucco facing material. Other Business Activity. No retailing, wholesaling. manufactur':ng, repair, or other such activity other than storage is to occur within the self storage, mini warehousing facility. (Ord. 85 -24) Outdoor Storage of Propane or LP Gas, Accessory. Outdoor storage of propane or LP gas shall be allowed as a conditional accessory use provided it is used exclusively by the occupant of site where it is stored for a use incidental to said occupant's business, it is not stored for wholesale or retail sale unless specifically permitted by another section of this Code, and the following requirements are satisfied. 4.144(12) (a) 4.144(1,2) (b) 4.144(12) (c) 4.144(12)(d) 4.144(12) (e) 4.144(12) (f) 4.144(12) (g) 4.144(12) (h) Location. All propane or LP gas outdoor storage ranks shall be located in the rear yard not less than twenty-five (25) feet from any property boundary lines. No tanks shall be permitted in the front yard and side yard abutting public streets. Open Area. Storage tanks shall be surrounded by twenty-five (25) feet of open area. Storage of any kiad is prohibited in said open area, except equipment incidental to the storage tank. Approved parking areas must be setback ten (10) feet from any storage tank Setbacks from Building. Storage tanks shall be setback from existing structures, as outlined in the Uniform Fire Code, based on tank size. Circulation. Storage tanks shall not interfere with site circulation including, but not limited to, parking, driveway, curb cuts and loading areas. Fencing. A wire weave/chain link security fence shall be required around all storage tanks. The location of the fence shall be as per the Uniform Fire Code. Access. Storage sites shall be accessible by service and emergency vehicles. Valves. All filling valves of the storage ranks shall be enclosed and have locking devices. Warning_Signage. A warning sign shall be required for every tank and shall be placed in a conspicuous location directly on the tank indicating a supplier's name, address, phone number, that highly dangerous and flammable material is stored therein and that no smoking requirements must be observed or a sufficient warning to that affect. Said signage may not exceed four (4) square feet nor may it be used for advertising purposes. (Ord. 88-15) 4.144 (13) Adult Uses- Principal. Subject to the regulations of §4.039C and 4420 of this Code. (Ord. 92 -06) 4.144 (14) Personal Wireless Service Antenna Towers. Personal wireless service antenna towers in conformance with §4.039D of this Code. 4 -128 072684 TOTAL P.07 • • • AGENDA ITEM VII B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland MEETING DATE: February 13, 2001 TOPIC: Planning & Zoning Board Liaison to EDAC DESCRIPTION: The previous Liaison to the City's Economic Development Advisory Commission (EDAC) was Bill Johnson. As Mr. Johnson was not reappointed to the Planning & Zoning Board, we need a new liaison. EDAC generally meets the first Thursday of the month at 7:00 a.m. to discuss various economic development concerns within the Community. Please select a new representative from the P & Z for this position. &Ira ivcwS Armies • • Acy,AJA 7 a t ,, F EIFS in the News httpi /www.eifsinfo.nedeifs- news.htm Troubleshooters Target EIFS - March 1996 Problems With Barrier EIFS - Spring 1998 Caution Advised in Using EIFS Systems - November 1998 Building Industry Reacts To Barrier EIFS :Moisture Intrusion Issues - Spring 1999 Crumbling Walls Creating A Stir - April 1999 From BUILDER, March 1996 Troubleshooters Target EIFS By Rick Schwolsky, Senior Editor, Building Like forecasters tracking a hurricane, builders all over the country are following a swirling controversy in North and South Carolina about moisture - damaged homes with exterior insulation and finish systems (EIFS) -- synthetic stucco applied over foam sheathing. Researchers have descended on the region to study the damage. They seem to have identified the problem: Water from outside is getting into exterior walls and damaging framing, sheathing, and in some cases, interior finishes. EIFS surfaces aren't failing. Instead, water is leaking through surface penetrations, around flashings at architectural details, and past caulked joints around window and door openings (often the only thing standing between a dry wall and a bad reputation). Here's what researchers found: • The North Carolina Home Builders Association says 95 percent of randomly tested houses have some problem; damages average $3,000 to $5,000. • The American Institute of Architects found unacceptable moisture levels in 90 percent of the 205 houses it tested. • The EIFS Industry Members Association (EIMA) inspected 68 houses: 20 had $1,500 or less in damages, 35 had damage of $3,000 or less, and six had damage of more than $10,000. The situation is keeping local inspectors busy. "Out of 73 homes we tested, we only found two that were dry," says Allen Golden, assistant director of inspections for Hanover County, N.C. (which includes Wilmington, where the problem is centered). The moisture damage in the others ranged from a couple of wet windows to total loss, says Golden. Several Carolina builders report dealing with repairs costing $30,000 to $100,000. Insurers have written off some houses as total losses after only five years. "The first EIFS home I looked at was a total loss," says Golden. "I think the insurance settlement was worth about $417,000." "When I first heard about this last August I thought it was one bad applicator or builder," says Paul Wilms of the North Carolina HBA. "But that wasn't the case because some of the best builders in the area 1 of 10 1/9/2001 9:42 PM tab News Articles httpi /www.eifsinfo.net/ei£s- news.htm • • have problems. Then I hoped it was confined to one subdivision, but that wasn't true either. We're finding problems across the board." As the experts work out the details, homeowners like Ruth Ann Southworth of Wilmington are left to worry about their investments. "After six months my house had minor moisture problems, which my builder repaired," she says. "But the truth is, I couldn't give this house away now if I wanted to." EIMA insists this is a local problem. "EIFS have been used successfully for decades in this country," says EIMA spokesman Keith Hayes. "This is a first. There are no other cities with comparable problems." But as reports on the Carolina experience proliferate, calls are coming in from builders throughout the country on NAHB's HomeBase hot line, according to Research Center analyst Ed Hudson. "I've talked with hundreds of industry people," he says, "and problems are happening everywhere there's moisture and EIFS are being used, coast to coast." Hudson also says he's heard from builders with moisture problems in dry climates like Austin, Texas. What's the Problem? Anyone who's ever tried tracing water leakage back to its source knows how hard it can be. Using electronic moisture meters, investigators report finding high meter readings some distance from the actual leak, as water breaches seals and travels away. Some investigators are also pointing at windows -- especially wood ones -- as a possible source of water intrusion. Their theory: Even the small amount of moisture that gets in through gaps in window frames -- when trapped -- will do damage. "Based on the local AIA chapter's testing," says Tom Kenney of the Research Center, "68 percent of the 205 houses they inspected had improper caulking details around windows." But AIA tests also revealed that even where proper caulking details existed, 15 percent of the houses had high readings near windows, indicating window -frame leaks. That may not matter in wall systems that can breathe, but EIFS walls are called barrier systems because the finish is impermeable. And if moisture gets into the wall system, it can't escape easily, especially if there's an interior vapor barrier. So why Wilmington? Hudson speculates that the worst problems are occurring in active markets where the EIFS products are gaining popularity the fastest -- like the Carolinas. He says problems appear to be rare in more established EIFS markets where applicators have experienced, and worked out, the problems. But there is one building condition that may be contributing to the dilemma in Wilmington: state codes require interior polyethylene vapors. These aren't causing the trouble, but they may make things worse once water gets into the walls. • To test that theory, the Research Center computer- modeled EIFS wall sections with 50 percent moisture 2 of 10 1/9/2001 9:42 PM L Lr VIVWS ruucICs content. http: / /www.eifsinfo.netJeifs- news.htm "We looked at a full year's performance," says Kenney, "and the tests showed EIFS walls without vapor • barriers dry out in five weeks, but the walls with vapor barriers take eight times as long." That makes it even more important to keep water out. • What's the Fix? So how is all this likely to turn out? Look for changes in several areas. • Better details. Would you stake your reputation on a caulk joint? That's basically what EIFS detailing requires around windows and doors, and even some caulk joints installed to spec are failing. • Part of the problem, researchers say, may be that EIFS companies have adapted commercial details for residential installations. Look for companies to respond with new generations of details designed for home building. EIMA is revising its generic construction details publication. • Applicator training. To the extent that unskilled applicators caused some problems, applicator certification and training by manufacturers may not be stringent or broad enough. There are reports that applicators mixed components from different companies, which puts warranties at risk. Also, applicators moving from dry regions (like California) to do work in moist climates (like the Pacific Northwest) may not be aware of moisture problems. Look for training and certification to improve, perhaps conducted by a third party like the NAHB Research Center. • Full accountability. The word from many of the builders and inspectors BUILDER talked to is that applicators aren't, but should be, responsible for the performance of the entire system: surfaces, caulking, fleshings, and all. EIFS contractors commonly come in after fleshings are in place, and may not even do the caulking now. • Tougher warranties. Warranties serve two purposes: they cover repair costs for eligible claims, and they build buyer confidence in products. In this case it may prove easier to cover the claims than to rebuild confidence. Technical warranty settlements will take a long time to resolve. EIMA is negotiating with builders and owners to solve the Wilmington problems. And homeowners filed class action lawsuits against manufacturers last December that will take time to settle. But in many ways builders and owners are more worried about lost value than wet walls. What do builders want? Besides taking care of damages, they want EIFS companies to give long -term, transferable, insured, total system performance warranties, says builder Dean Potter, who's also former president of the Wilmington/Cape Fear HBA. "If you can't repair the value of the homes," he says, "it won't matter whether you come up with physical repairs." The irony is that even as problems with EIFS persist, Wilmington builders would still like to use the product. That's because they, and their buyers, like the systems' energy performance, architectural flexibility, and appearance. • And if they can improve the details, EIFS can even live up to its low- maintenance claims. "None of the 3 of 10 1/9/2001 9:42 PM Llt'S News Articles httpi /www.eifsinfo.net/eifs- news.htm intrusion damage. •"Of the nearly 120 homes barrier synthetic stucco homes I've inspected, approximately 60% have tested positive for high levels of water intrusion, several already to the point of having serious structural damage," Bilbrey said. "Every barrier EIFS home in Nashville is susceptible to the kind of moisture damage I have been seeing over the past few months." "Because of the problems I've seen with barrier systems, we only use water - managed systems for new construction," said Nashville builder Stan Pope, president of Pope Properties. "I've personally seen the damage and destruction of barrier homes first hand and will not go that route again." Glen Cruzen, president of Nashville -based Master Stucco, an application and repair services company, also has seen the damages associated with barrier EIFS. Cruzen no longer will work on barrier systems without legal documentation that waives his liability for barrier systems he installs. "I have done enough barrier applications in the past to get a good understanding of the disproportionate numbers of these systems that are failing," Cruzen stated. Likewise, in New Orleans, William Locke, of Wet Check, a local home inspection service, recently told a reporter from WDSU -TV News (the New Orleans NBC affiliate) that the majority of barrier EIFS homes he's inspected have some degree of moisture damage. "I have a couple hundred inspections under my belt and I'm still surprised everyday at what I'm finding," Locke stated. "Probably between 80 and 90 percent of the homes I test have water somewhere that needs to be addressed." • In Greensboro, homeowners are tearing off old barrier EIFS exteriors and replacing them with water - managed stucco -look systems so quickly that local exteriors contracting company, Future Plastering, Inc., is working overtime to keep up with demand. "Tearing off damaged barrier EIFS and replacing it with USG's water - managed systems has become our primary source of business," explained Russ Minkovich, president of Future Plastering. "We've torn off old systems and installed new water - managed exteriors on 24 homes over the past 1 to 1 -1/2 years. The amount of damage on some of those homes was incredible." Minkovich adds that his company is booked in advance throughout 1998 on tear-off projects in and around Greensboro. (For more information on the Greensboro barrier EIFS situation, go to Russ T\iinkovich's EIFS Interview.) Barrier EIFS damage is not confined to residential construction. Jerome P. O'Connor, P.E., C.S.I., principal of Building Consultants Ltd., in Arlington Heights, Ill. is currently working on a 900 -room hotel in San Francisco with millions of dollars in extensive water damage inside the walls of at least 200 rooms. The damage is due to failed joint sealants and other faults in the system's installation. "There is so much water in the walls that the face paper on the gypsum board sheathing is coming off. Nothing is holding the EIFS on," O'Connor stated. • NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDERS 5of10 1/9/2001 9:42 PM EDS News Articles httpi /www.eifsinfo.net/eifs- news.htm • • • Nation's Building News, November 30, 1998 Volume 14, Number 14 Caution Advised in Using EIFS Systems Members who are installing barrier EIFS products in their homes are being strongly cautioned by NAHB that the design of the EIFS systems, unlike other cladding, does not allow water penetrating the external surface of the system to drain. NAHB believes that homes with barrier EIFS can develop moisture intrusion problems even when properly constructed according to industry standards. Also, home owners who do not diligently ensure that all openings in the house remain properly sealed and caulked over the life of the structure may be more likely to encounter water intrusion problems than with other types of cladding systems. NAHB agrees with liability insurance carriers, relocation services, mortgage lenders, building code officials in North Carolina and Georgia, and others who say that barrier EIFS systems make homes more susceptible to moisture intrusion problems. Some builders who have excellent records for quality in construction when building homes with other cladding systems have experienced problems with homes they built with barrier EIFS. There are two types of Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems, or synthetic stucco, in use. In a barrier EIFS system, if water gets behind the foam insulating board by passing through penetrations in the EIFS — such as those for doors, windows, leakage through window frames, foot /wall intersections, chimneys and deck attachments — then it can become trapped and soak into the sheathing and other building components. It is for this reason that "drainable" EIFS systems are now being marketed. These new systems attempt to correct the drainage problems by providing a way for intruding water to escape. However, test results on the long -term effectiveness of these new systems are not yet available, and it remains to be seen whether the drainable systems are less problematic than barrier EIFS. Water damage to homes with barrier EIFS has resulted in numerous lawsuits, including a pending class action suit in North Carolina. The EIFS industry has blamed the problem on inadequate installation by builders. However, NAHB believes that these accusations are distracting attention from a more important issue: that barrier EIFS systems don't provide a back -up system for protection against the water intrusion that occurs in most residential construction. All exterior finishes — vinyl, wood siding, brick, etc. — can, and do, experience occasional water intrusion problems such as when sealants crack or break down. However, these cladding systems allow the moisture to escape, unlike barrier EIFS systems, which trap the moisture — a point that some EIFS manufacturers ignore when claiming that the EIFS products are not the source of the moisture entry. Barrier EIFS were originally designed for masonry construction and typically used in the commercial sector. Integration of building components tended to be oriented toward commercial construction. In NAHB's opinion, the barrier EIFS systems have proven to be incompatible with the existing wood frame construction methods typically used in residential construction in the United States, and that has resulted in significant problems. Determining the scope of the problem is difficult, because the damage usually occurs between the interior and exterior walls, which cannot be visually inspected. Although NAHB does not have an estimate of the number of EIFS homes with moisture intrusion problems, the problem is believed to be national in scope and not confined to states in the Southeast. NAHB examinations have determined that the level of 6 of 10 1/9/2001 9:42 PM EIFS News Articles • • • 7of10 http://www.eifsinfomet/eifs-news.htm damage is usually confined to less than 5% of the sheathing, which means that the large majority of moisture problems are manageable and can be repaired at a reasonable cost. During the past two years, NAHB has been working with consumers, manufacturers, insurers and other interested parties to try to negotiate a settlement so that most of the monies expended would be devoted to fixing houses for home owners rather than paying legal fees. Also, HAHB and the NAHB Research Center have been working with EIFS manufacturers (such as Dryvit Systems, Inc. and Sto Corp.), Zurich Insurance (formerly known as "The Maryland ") and building code officials to develop repair methods that cost effectively retrofit barrier -EIFS so that water entering behind exterior cladding does not become trapped and has an avenue of escape. These methods are currently being field tested and are expected to be available in the marketplace some time next year. Anyone with technical questions about EIFS should contact the NAHB Research Center. The Research Center offers the following publications about EIFS: "Moisture Testing Guide for Wood Frame Construction Clad with Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems "; "Quality Control Considerations for the Installation of Drainable EIFS "; and "Water Intrusion and Remediation of Wood Frame Houses with EIFS." EIFSIDEFS News, Sprint: 1999 Building Industry Reacts To Barrier EIFS Moisture Intrusion Issues Amid growing concern over the barrier EIFS problems, building code bodies, insurance companies and building material manufacturers have all taken action. In response to the growing number of reports of barrier EIFS moisture intrusion damage, a number of developments have occurred within the building industry over the past 18 months. Class action lawsuits, filed against EIFS manufacturers, are currently in litigation; two of the three major code bodies in the U.S. have revised their EIFS acceptance criteria; Maryland Casualty, a leading home building insurance firm, no longer insures barrier EIFS -clad homes; Marvin Windows no longer offers warranties for any of its products when installed on barrier EIFS walls; and a growing number of builders, specifiers and home and building owners are opting for water - managed stucco -look exteriors over barrier systems. Legal Action Class action lawsuits are currently in litigation against barrier EIFS manufacturers. Plaintiffs and defendants in the suits are working on a settlement. If no settlement is reached, the case is scheduled to go to trial in July, 1998. Building Code Revisions Two of the three major code bodies in the U.S. are revising their EIFS acceptance criteria and the third is reviewing the situation. The International Congress of Building Code Officials (ICBO), which primarily covers the Western U.S., now requires that all EIFS construction must include a water barrier applied behind the system to provide a drainage plane for intruding moisture. The Building Officials and Code Adminstrators (BOCA), which covers primarily the Midwest and Northeast, is also requiring a water barrier behind all EIFS construction, unless specific testing is conducted or that details and penetration be drawn by a registered design professional. The third major U.S. code body, Southern Building Code Congress International (SBCCI), is currently 1/9/2001 9:42 PM EIFS News Articles httpJ /www.eifsinfo.net/eifs- news.htm • studying the issues surrounding EIFS for revisions to its code in the year 2000 (its next issuance). The changes in BOCA and ICBO code language do not make it mandatory for local builders or contractors to use water - managed EIF systems. Rather, the codes serve as a reference guide for local building professionals. None- the -less, the code changes are good news for home and building owners as they will encourage changes in local building codes and are expected to improve current stucco -look construction practices. Two states -- North Carolina and Georgia -- have already effectively banned barrier EIFS construction on the local level. Both states now allow only water - managed stucco -look exteriors. Other jurisdictions are also currently considering restricting the use of barrier EIFS construction in favor of water - managed systems. For more information on the status of EIFS code revisions, go to Code Revisions. Insurance and Window Warranties In other developments, Maryland Casualty, a leading home building insurer no longer offers insurance on EIFS -clad homes. Marvin Windows, a leading window manufacturer no longer warranties its products when installed on barrier EIFS homes and buildings. Marvin does extend its full product warranty on water - managed systems. The Water - Managed Solution As a result of these developments, nearly all EIFS manufacturers are now offering water - managed or "drainage" stucco -look systems. However to date, United States Gypsum Company (USG), is the only manufacturer to completely abandon the barrier concept over frame construction. While other EIFS 40 manufacturers claim that barrier systems are still viable, USG maintains that barrier EIFS is neither practical nor reliable and is currently manufacturing and marketing only water - managed systems. "We've been the industry's leading proponent of water - managed stucco -look systems," explained Jim Reicherts, product manager, exterior systems for USG. 8of10 "There is definitely a problem with the barrier concept," Reicherts said, citing the hundreds of documented cases of barrier EIFS problems and failures in communities across the country. "It's pretty hard to ignore the fact that moisture intrusion does occur on barrier systems. Whether that intrusion occurs because of defects within the system itself, faulty sealants around windows, poor window construction or improper maintenance, the end result is the same. No matter where or how water enters behind a barrier EIF system, there's no way for it to get out. It remains trapped inside the system, where it can eventually damage and rot framing, sheathing, windows and other moisture - sensitive building components." For a further discussion of the problems with barrier EIFS, go to Situation Analysis. To learn more about the philosophy behind USG's Water - Managed systems, go to Water- \[anaged Solution. Copyright 1998, USG Corporation. All rights reserved. 1/9/2001 9:42 PM EIFS News Articles httpJ /www.eifsinfo.net/eifs- news.htm Real Times April 2, 1999 Crumbling Walls Creating A Stir by Dena Amoruso 46 If you were among the thousands who watched a recent Sunday night episode of "Dateline NBC ", you may have caught an eye - opening report called "Is your home crumbling around you ?" I can see how this report can create quite a stir in both new home buyers as well as new home builder's minds. It will, no doubt, prompt buyers to ask questions about the type of stucco being used on homes they may be interested in, and builders to re- examine some of their building products' representations from the manufacturer. The stucco referred to in this program is a synthetic type with the trade name of "EIFS ", or Exterior Insulating and Finish Systems. Although EIFS costs about the same as brick or wood sidings (no reference was made to its price comparison with real, or cement stucco), the manufacturer touts it as a 'lightweight, low maintenance exterior that provides an easy insulation system for a home." It is this easy insulation system, however, that seems to be at the root of this investigation. Brought to the attention of "Dateline" by homeowners in a traditionally wet geographical area (Vancouver, and Wilmington, N.C.), the complaint was that their synthetic stucco -faced exterior walls apparently contained rotting wood from the material's inability to drain moisture. The program then decided to test homes in areas of traditionally more moderate rainfall, to see if the same testing results would occur. A special probe was used to penetrate the wall of a three - year -old synthetic stucco home in the Washington, D.C. suburb of Great Falls, VA. Evidently the same rotten results were determined. •The manufacturer was clearly in denial throughout the entire program, blaming the rotted timbers on improperly installed windows, leaky roofs, and shoddy construction practices. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), representing over 60,000 home builders nation wide, told Dateline that synthetic stucco, even if it meticulously applied and maintained, "Isn't compatible with the existing wood frame construction methods in the United States." They went on to say that homes with synthetic stucco "develops moisture intrusion problems even when properly constructed according to industry standards" • If you are a recent buyer of a home with a stucco exterior and are not sure what type was used, call your new home builder for clarification. If you decide to get the house inspected or tested for moisture within the walls as this program demonstrated , and the results are positive, you may have a structural warranty issue with your builder. (Many states require a 10 -year warranty on structure for their newly built homes) If you are shopping for a new home, ask questions about the type of stucco being used and how it is "wrapped ". Some builders go the extra mile (beyond industry standards and exceeding pre -set codes) to ensure their new homes' structural integrity. This lessens their likelihood of structural defect litigation, and creates "raving fans" by constantly trying to "raise the bar" by which new homes are being built. Programs such as this "Dateline" report can bring apparent deficiencies such as those mentioned with synthetic stucco to light, and may effect needed change. Dena Amorosa is a 13 year veteran in residential builder - developer sales and marketing in both Northern and Southern California. She currently writes a weekly column and feature stories on new home construction and sales issues for the Sacramento Bee, and is Marketing Services Director for The Advantage Group of Sacramento. She can be reached by e-mail at: 1 %I2rr ;rdl a0/.con, C Copyright 1999 by EIFSinfo.net All rights reserved. 9 of 10 1/9/2001 9:42 PM