Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/11/2001 P&Z Packet• AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD Tuesday, September 11, 2001 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 8, 2001 IV. OPEN MIKE V. ACTION ITEMS A. Steve Poser, 6180 Ware Road, Variance, Tanda Gretz B. Rick Piper, 6153 Oakwood Drive, Variance, Tanda Gretz C. Molin Concrete, Amend Conditional Use Permit, Amend Interim Use Permit, Site Plan Review, Jeff Smyser D. ATS &R/Centennial School District, New Elementary School, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review, NAC E. Heritage Development, Saddle Club, Preliminary Plat, NAC VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS - none VII. ADJOURN • Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 1 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT : August 8, 2001 : 6:40 P.M. . 8:42 P.M. : Corson, Hyden, Lane, Lyden, Rafferty, Schaps, and Zych : None. : City Planner Smyser; Community Development Director Michael Grochala; Assistant City Engineer Wedel I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:40 p.m., August 8, 2001.` II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — July I, 2001 • Mr. Lyden made a MOTION to approveihe minutes of the July 11, 2001, meeting of the Lino Lakes Planning and Zom oard, andFwas supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 6 -0. III. APPROVAL OF AGE The agenda was approved as presented. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared open mike open at 6:42 p.m. There being no comment made, Mr. Corson made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:42 p.m., and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 6 -0. VI. ACTION ITEMS A. Jon Crenshaw, 7080 Sunset Avenue, Minor Subdivision, Variance Staff presented the application by explaining applicant had applied for a minor subdivision to split the eastern portion of the property at 7080 Sunset Road. He indicated the property was owned by the current resident, Jon Crenshaw and applicant's intent was to create a new single- Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 2 family lot. A variance would be required because the new lot did not comply with the minimum lot depth of 135 feet. Staff presented its analysis of its request by explaining Lino Lakes had sewer and water two blocks to the east in Sunset Drive. Lots along Sunset Drive would connect. Utilities were not available to the rest of the neighborhood to the west of those lots. However, Blaine utilities were available to the lots on Sunset Road and several were connected to the Blaine utilities. The subject property was one of them. Utility service for the proposed new lot would need to connect to the Blaine system. The property was zoned R -1. The new lot would not meet the minimum lot depth requirement. A variance would be necessary. Staff reviewed the five findings for variance, as stated in the zoning ordinance that the City shall make in considering all requests for variance in taking subsequent action. Staff pointed out that the existing use of the lot as a single - family residence was not threatened by the status quo. There were no unique physical circumstances. The sole purpose of the variance was to allow an additional lot to be created to provide economic gain. Granting an unjustified variance would be conferring a special privilege and would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Staff indicated whether it was advisable to allow for the creattoraf additional lots in this neighborhood by splitting the existing lots was a policy question that might merit consideration by the City. However, the application under considefatiori ould create a lot that did not meet current requirements and there was no justification for' he requested variance. Without the variance, the minor subdivision could not occur. Staff recommended denying the variance basedon.Iackpl'justification and denying the minor subdivision because the lot did not meet the mini` um lot depth. Mr. Lyden stated as he drove doWnlairriteiktrappeared there were many lots that were split, as this applicant wanted his lot tobe,s lit 4� le asked why some lots were split and some were not. Mr. Smyser replied those *l6ts were many years ago and under the existing guidelines, those lots would not have been ai wed to be split today. Mr. Lyden noted he understood fie variance, but for practical purposes, he did not understand why the lot could not be split. Mr. Smyser replied making a profit on the lot was not a condition for a variance. Mr. Lyden stated it was a variance of less than 10 feet and while he understood the variance, he had a difficult decision about not splitting this lot. Mr. Corson asked if the lots were serviced by City sewer and water. Mr. Smyser replied they were not. Mr. Corson asked if applicant was requesting Parcel B be served by City sewer and water. Mr. Smyser replied it was being requested to have service by the City of Blaine, which would need the City of Blaine's approval as well. He expressed concern about opening up this type of a situation. However, it was technically feasible to have the sewer and water serviced by the City of Blaine. • • Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 3 Mr. Corson asked if the City of Blaine, under the Joint Powers Agreement, could take away the sewer and water services. Mr. Smyser replied it would be difficult for the City of Blaine to do that, but it was feasible. Mr. Corson inquired about the MUSA requirements and the possibility of a septic system. Mr. Smyser replied a septic system was not a good solution and he was not sure about the MUSA requirements. Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Mr. Joel Voelker, 7273 Stagecoach Trail, stated the whole purpose of subdividing lot was for economic reasons, and if the home proposed was of modest means that met the criteria of the neighborhood and was not obtrusive, then a variance should be allowed. He stated he understood there were a lot of non - conforming lots in that area and he did not understand why the policy was not set a long time ago. He asked when the area would be served by MUSA. He stated as far as he could tell, this area would always be served by the City of Blaine. He asked about the history of the lots being split. Chair Schaps replied that many years ago, the standards for lots were not the same and this had been changed over the years. He stated the reason they had Ordinances was to enforce them. Mr. Voelker stated he understood the need for following the Ordinances, but when he originally thought about splitting the lot, he did not realize the lot depth was short by less than 10 feet, and he did not realize it was short until the survey was prepared. He stated for him to put in a septic system on the property, would not be a sellable item as a builder. He stated he would have to find a way to finance the sewer and water. . Mr. Smyser stated this area was zonedR1 and inR -1, new lots could not be created, unless ref serviced by sewer and water. , Mr. Corson asked if this was,also -requirement for MUSA. Mr. Smyser stated he was not sure about the MUSA requirements, but the Cdy Ordinance did not allow this area to be built without sewer and water hook -up' Ms. Lane stated she did not have a problem with this variance, if utilities were available. Mr. Corson stated he did not have a problem with the variances, but did have a problem with the City of Blaine servicing the utilities. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to approve the variance for 7080 Sunset Avenue Minor Subdivision contingent on the assurance there would be utility services available, and was supported by Mr. Lyden. MOTION FAILED. 3 -4 (Corson, Hyden, Schaps, and Zych). Mr. Corson made a MOTION for denying the variance based on the fact that they were not following the procedure in the MUSA requirements, and there would be no utility service by the City of Lino Lakes. Motion failed for lack of a second. Mr. Rafferty expressed concern that there was a similar situation addressed a couple of months ago and that request was granted and therefore, he was uncomfortable with denying this request. • Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 4 The Planning and Zoning Commission could not reach a consensus on this issue and it was decided after discussion to bring this to the City Council for their decision. B. Gerald Ramsay, 1168 Ruffed Grouse Court, Variance Staff presented the application by explaining this item involved two variances: a pool setback from a road and the height of a fence along a neighbor's front yard. At the July P & Z meeting, this item was tabled and directed back to staff to communicate the applicants to determine the potential to move the pool and have the City bear the cost. Staff presented a brief summary of the facts presented at the July P & Z meeting. Staff presented its analysis of the variance by explaining City staff and the applicants had been in communication about the costs of the suggested action. Applicant had sent a draft of proposed costs. The total cost estimate was $9,154.00. Due to this being a draft estimate, it was subject to change. Staff indicated the largest single line item was the pool itself. Applicant noted that disassembling the pool would void the lifetime warranty, so a completely new pool was necessary if it was to be moved. Staff stated they would need to confirm the cost estimates as wel1as determining if anything would be re -used without affecting applicant's warranty. In addit ©. to the pool itself, there were other costs such as earthmoving and landscaping that woulddhave to be considered and compared. Staff originally recommended to grant the vanattde for surrounding the pool.' e pool, but not for the six -foot fence P &Z recommended moving the pop , giving the particular situation they had in this instance. Chair Schaps asked if the City'Concill given any recommendation regarding the assistance with the funding for the moving of 1re po� Ms. Smyser replied this had not yet been brought to the Council for their thong Mr. Corson asked if the fence issue was primarily a visibility issue. Mr. Smyser replied it was an aesthetics issue, and it was the City's policy to not fence in front yards with six -foot fences. Mr. Corson asked if there was a safety issue. Mr. Smyser replied he did not know if this would be a safety issue or not. There was a potential safety issue, but not a serious one. Mr. Corson asked about safety regarding access into the pool. Mr. Smyser replied the City Ordinances did not require a six -foot fence around a pool. The Ordinance only required a four - foot fence around a pool. • Mr. Rafferty indicated he still did not like this situation. He stated the Planning and Zoning Board had asked for recommendations and he did not see the recommendations. He indicated there was no reason a pool should be in a front yard. He stated if the City made a mistake, the pool should be moved. He stated the fence was not the main issue. He noted the best solution Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 5 was to send this forward to the City Council. He indicated he wanted the pool to be moved • farther than just the minimum distance in order to be in compliance with the City Ordinances. • Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Gerald Ramsay, 1168 Ruffed Grouse Court, stated the pool was erected in a location that was approved by the City and they had followed all of the City's Ordinances as it had been told to them. Mr. Schaps asked if they had investigated the Ordinances regarding the location of the pool and fence. Mr. Ramsay replied they had not investigated this and they had assumed a six -foot fence was okay. Mr. Ramsay stated the estimates he had received were verbal estimates, but if necessary, he would get formal, written estimates. Chair Schaps asked who had informed him that his lifetime warranty would be voided if the pool was moved. Mr. Ramsay replied he believed the lifetime warranty would be voided, but he had not actually received verification from the dealer regarding this,-'5-However, as he understood it, the pool liner would have to be replaced. Mr. Ramsay replied the reason they wanted a six -foot fence was for additional safety around the pool. He stated most residents of the Quail Rid a devrn elo ent did not have a problem with a six -foot fence. He indicated he did not care where the pertool was located as long as it did not cost him more money to move it, when this had originally be,approved by the City in the first place. He indicated if he had been informed b�y4t he qty of the Ordinance, they pool would not have been located where it was. Mr. Zych asked why they had originally cated the "pool where it presently was Mr. Ramsay stated this was a relatively level are fth lttand they had always intended on putting a six - foot fence around the pool. , x Mr. Zych asked if he had thought about his neighbor having to look out of his front window and seeing his pool. Mr. Ramsay stated., there was a crab apple tree that blocked the neighbor's view. Mr. Zych asked if it was appropriate for his neighbors to have to look at a six -foot fence in their front yard. Mr. Ramsay stated the six -foot fence would be in his back yard and he had received all of the appropriate approval to put the pool at the location where it was from the City. He stated he believed he had been following all of the rules of the City by obtaining the appropriate permit and permission. He indicated it was not up to him to decide if the location of the pool was an appropriate location because the City would not let him put the pool where he had originally wanted to put it. Mr. Lyden stated the City had made a mistake and the answer was to move the pool. The cost of moving the pool was a secondary issue with the main issue being to do the right thing, and the right thing was to move the pool. He stated he had a concern regarding the pool and its impact on the neighborhood. He indicated the most important thing about the neighborhood was the neighbors. He asked that applicant allow the City to rectify the issue. He apologized for all of the problems the City had caused. or • Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 6 Chair Schaps asked if any portion of the fence could be six foot. Mr. Smyser replied it could be six -foot up until the 30 foot set -back line, and then it had to drop down to 4 feet. Chair Schaps asked why a six -foot fence was so much better than a four -foot fence. Mr. Ramsay stated children could more easily climb a four -foot fence, and a six -foot fence would be more protection. Chair Schaps replied that the main issue was that the pool had to be well supervised, and it did not matter what type of fence was placed around it. Mr. Corson asked about placing a net over the pool to keep children out. Mr. Smyser replied that would be less obstructive. Mr. Ramsey replied they had not considered that option, but he did not have any objection to it. Ms. Lane stated she would like to see the pool moved to the opposite corner of the lot. Mr. Smyser replied the problem was the grading if it was moved to the other comer. He stated this would have to be something the City Engineer would have to look ;,at. He indicated he could not make a recommendation to spend the City's money to mov;4e_pool and this would have to be a Council decision. Bob Ranallo, 6643 Ruffed Grouse Road, agreed that4is was an unfortunate situation. He indicated the first concern was the placement of the pool He presented pictures of where the pool presently sits with respect to his property , F He asked ie pool was in an appropriate location for a pool. Chair Schaps asked if he understood that,Mr. Ramsay had a right to have a pool in his backyard. Mr. Ranallo indicated he did have, that understanding, and did not have an issue with a pool in the Ramsay's back yard, but he did not like°the" location of where the pool was. Ken , 6654 Ruffed "Grouse Roadstated his home was across the street and indicated the pool was literally in the 'Rarallo's front yard and while he realized Mr. Ramsay had the right to a pool in his backyard, it should be moved. If an error was made by the City, the error had to be corrected. The bottom line wastliat the pool was in the wrong spot. He asked if the City had any strict requirements for pools, as they had for decks. Mr. Smyser clarified building permit applications for decks did require drawings because that was part of the State Building Code, but there was no such requirement for pools, so the City did not require the same level of detail as would be required for decks, but this would not be a bad idea to consider. Mr. Rafferty stated this was a difficult situation and he did not believe there was enough information to even go forward to the City Council, and he requested that all of the information be verified in writing. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to deny the 1168 Ruffed Grouse Court request for variance, and was supported by Mr. Lyden. Motion carried 6 -0. • • Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 7 Mr. Lyden made a MOTION to deny the variance to put a six -foot fence in the rear yard within the set -back, and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 6 -0. Mr. Rafferty expressed concern that the recommendations were not clear and the costs had not been verified. Mr. Lyden made a MOTION that the pool be moved and the City pay the reasonable cost of moving the pool, and was supported by Mr. Corson. Ms. Lane stated she would not support this if the pool was only moved a short distance. Mr. Zych agreed and stated the pool should not be visible from the street and not be located in the neighbor's front yard. Chair Schaps asked that in the future, applicants be made aware of the City Ordinances, so errors are not made like this again. Mr. Ramsay asked what the permit fee was for, if the applicant had to investigate the Ordinances themselves. Chair Schaps stated the fee was simply an administrative fee. Mr. Corson stated the City might want to consider putting apamphlet together to hand out with permits outlining the Ordinances. Mr. Lyden suggested a fi-Oort fety article be placed in a newsletter distributed to the citizens. the Motion made by Mr. Lyden and seconded by Mr. Corson above was withdrawn and the following recommendation was made: The pool be moved „and the City pay the reasonable and verifiable cost of moving the pool, with the po91 preferablyYbe moved to the farthest corner of the lot. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. September Meeting Dit Cha iike Staff stated the date of the *September Planning and Zoning Board Meeting had been changed from Wednesday, September 12„ to Tuesday, September 11, 2001 due to various staff members attending annual conferences that week and their unavailability to attend a September 12, 2001 meeting. The meeting date change would be posted on the front door of City Hall, in the Quad Community Press, and on local government cable channel 16. B. Recommendation from Environmental Board for moratorium on new development Staff presented the Lino Lakes Environmental Board's recommendation to establish a moratorium (interim ordinance) on all residential development and possibly all development for a period of one year. This was in response to the recent approval of the Comprehensive Plan by the City Council. The Environmental Board adopted the recommendation to allow time for the development of official controls to implement the goals and policies of the plan. Staff indicated they were not recommending the adoption of such an Ordinance at this time. While an interim Ordinance was an effective tool granted to municipalities for the purpose of protecting the planning process, the implications of such an Ordinance would need to be fully Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 8 identified. An all- encompassing prohibition of development as proposed, could generate many unintended consequences. Staff reviewed the steps that should be undertaken prior to consideration of an interim Ordinance. By addressing such steps, the City would be able to better ascertain the need for an interim ordinance and, if warranted, the appropriate scope it should have. Staff also presented the 2001 Environmental Board goals and stated the City Council would be reviewing the proposed goals with the Environmental Board at an upcoming joint meeting. They would also use the meeting as an opportunity to review the ordinance establishing the board, the expectations of the City Council and the Environmental Board and the relationship of the Environmental Board to other City boards. Mr. Lyden asked how many homes had been built this year. Mr. Grochala replied he was not sure, but they would check that out and have that information available at a future discussion. C. Packet Delivery Mr. Rafferty stated he had brought this issue up previously andihad made a previous recommendation about the packets being delivered in a more.trmely fashion. He stated the current deadline of Friday did not give the P & Z Board memb4adequate time to review the information. He stated he believed part of his job of berng a board= 'kember was having adequate time to review the packet thoroughly. He recommended haying a mrmmum of 168 hours to review the packet of information, which would give th �B and members one week to review everything and make informed decision. He stated he did snot believe this was an impossible request. Mr. Grochala replied at this point he was odt prep red to make a recommendation for a change. He stated the City staff was continually sending out`- packets for various meetings. He stated one of the things they were working on 'vas..thhrit aU of the information was complete in the packets. He stated by the time the packets "got to the P & Z Board, most of the developments had already been through the other Boatels and`Ceuntyand State Agencies, and what frequently happened was that all of that inform Lion did not get back to the City in a timely fashion. He indicated a large range of issues needed to the addressed for each packet. He stated this did not mean things could not be modified, but at thetesent time, he could not recommend any change. Mr. Zych asked what the time -frame was in the city that Mr. Grochala was previously at. Mr. Grochala stated it was pretty much the same time -frame as the City of Lino Lakes had. Mr. Zych asked if the information could be e- mailed. Mr. Smyser stated the problem was that the drawings /diagrams could not be sent by e -mail. Mr. Rafferty stated the client in this case was the taxpayers and it was not acceptable that they could not get the packet done sooner. He stated he understood there was a lot of work to get the packets done, and a lot of paper pushing, but these were important issues and he needed to be adequately informed to make intelligent decisions. He stated he owed it to the citizens to be adequately informed. • Planning & Zoning Board August 8, 2001 Page 9 Mr. Grochala indicated he agreed these were important issues, and the City wanted to make sure the packets went out accurately with all of the available information in them and not be rushed to send out inaccurate packets. Mr. Rafferty stated he was not asking for a complete packet, but he was requesting some brief information about what was coming up for future meetings. Mr. Zych requested an abbreviated agenda be sent by e-mail that would give information on what was going through so the Board members could review the site, if necessary. Mr. Grochala stated if that was the issue, a brief summary of the agenda could be sent to the members. Chair Schaps suggested Mr. Rafferty and Mr. Grochala come up with a one -page agenda sheet that could adequately address Mr. Rafferty's concern and e-mail it to the Board members. Mr. Lyden stated he understood Mr. Rafferty's concerns and any advance notice they could receive would be very helpful. He stated he would like to see having a contact phone number of the applicant or other involved parties on those agenda items also'... VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Zych made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at;$ 42a.m., and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 6 -0. Respectfully submitted, Kathleen Altman, Recording Secret' TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: AGENDA ITEM 5A Tanda Gretz September 11, 2001 Resolution 01 -153 Approving a Variance To Allow: Accessory Building In Excess Of Maximum Allowable Square Footage. Steve Poser, 6180 Ware Road ACTION REQUIRED: 3/5 vote BACKGROUND The subject property is a 1.2 acre parcel zoned Rural. Mr. Poser has applied for a variance from the prohibition of accessory buildings in excess of 1,120 square feet on a lot of less than one and one - quarter acres in order to construct a 1060 square foot detached garage on the northern part of his property. A second variance from the prohibition of building a second detached accessory building in excess of the allowed one attached garage and one detached accessory building would also be required, as there is a 160 square foot shed already existing on the property. This shed is sited closer to Ware Road than the house, and so is currently in violation of City ordinance Section 3, Subd. 4.D.1.c, which prohibits detached accessory structures from being placed closer to the front lot line than the principal building. This report is based on information from standard plat files and also plans and narrative submitted by Mr. Poser. The City's zoning ordinance states: • The combination of accessory buildings and garages for a property 32,671 square feet to less than one and one - quarter acres in a Rural zone shall not exceed 1,120 square feet (Section 3, Subd. 4.D.8.g.1). • The combination of accessory buildings and garages for a property of one and `/4 acres to two and %z acres in a Rural zone shall not exceed 2,020 square feet (Section 3, Subd. 4.D.8.e.1). • • • • The total allowable accessory building space for a property 32,671 square feet to less than one and 1/4 acres in a Rural zone shall be limited to a) one attached garage and one detached structure, OR b) two detached accessory structures (Section 3, Subd. 4.D.8.g.2). • The total allowable accessory building space for a property one and 1/4 acres to two and '/2 acres shall be limited to a) one attached garage AND B) two detached accessory structures (Section 3, Subd. 4.D.8.e.2) • No detached accessory structure shall be closer to the front lot line than the principal building or its attached garage (Section 3, Subd. 4.D.1.c). ANALYSIS Mr. Poser wants to build a 1080 square foot detached garage on the northern part of his property, with access via 62nd Street, for storage of recreational vehicles and trailers. The current garage is attached to the house, which exists on the western part of the property with access via Ware Road. There is a 10' X 16' shed located to the north of the house on the northwest portion of the property. It should be noted that this shed is currently in non - compliance with City Code Section 3, Subd. 4.D.1.c, as it is placed closer to the front lot line than the house, and the City would expect that the shed be moved to a location which meets City Code. The septic system is located to the south of the house. The lot is wooded, with no apparent wetlands. The property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Ware Road and 62nd Street and zoned Rural. Miller's South Glen subdivision is located to the north of the property and zoned Residential Single Family Executive. Fox Trace subdivision is located to the northwest and zoned Residential Single Family. Property to the west, south and east are similar in size zone to that of the subject property. Mr. Poser has support for his variance from his three immediate neighbors to the north, east and south. The property is 348 X 150 feet, or 52,200 square feet. This puts the acreage at 1.2 acres, or just under the 1.25 -acre lot size required for the construction of an accessory buildings of the size and number desired by Mr. Poser. In other words, City Code allows an accessory building of 2,020 square feet on a lot of 1-1/4 to 2-1/2 acres, but only allows an accessory building of 1,120 square feet on a lot of less than 1 -1/4 acres. In addition, City Code allows EITHER one attached garage and one detached structure, OR two detached structures on a lot of less than 1.25 acres, but allows one attached garage AND two detached accessory buildings on a lot in excess of 1.25 acres. Mr. Poser already has a detached structure in the 10' X 16' shed located in his front yard (non- conforming). Thus, adding a second accessory building would also require a variance for a lot with his square footage. Existing accessory square footage is 820 square feet: a 660 square foot attached garage and a 160 square foot detached shed. Addition of the proposed detached garage would result in 1,880 square feet of total accessory building footage, 780 square feet over what • • • is allowed under City ordinance. If the current non - conforming shed were eliminated from the total accessory square footage, the proposed garage would still be 620 square feet over what is allowed under City ordinance. Construction of the proposed garage in the area desired by Mr. Poser would require a separate, second driveway with access via 62 "d street. City Code does not preclude construction of such a second driveway. There are, however, easement issues. There is an eighty -five foot United Power Association easement along the southern side of 62 "d Street. The proposed garage does not impact this easement, but the driveway would cross the easement. Similarly, construction of the proposed garage does not appear to impact the current road right -of -way, however the driveway would be affected by any future improvements to 62nd Street. Overall, Mr. Poser states that he wants to locate the garage on the northern part of the property with access via 62nd street for two reasons: 1) the septic system is located on the southern part of the property and precludes siting there, and 2) there is less traffic on 62" Street. FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE In considering all requests for variance and in taking subsequent action, the City shall make a finding of fact: 1. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. Additional accessory building space is possible under City ordinance, although at a smaller size. Two hundred eighty (280) additional square feet is allowed as an addition onto the current non - conforming shed or attached garage; four hundred forty (440) additional square feet is allowed if the existing shed were to be eliminated. 2. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. There are no unique physical circumstances to the property that require accessory building square footage in the number and location proposed. 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. Hardship has not been demonstrated. In addition, City ordinance does not preclude reasonable use of the property: additional accessory building space is allowed, although not in the size and configuration proposed by the applicant. • • 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. Granting the Variance would confer special privilege, as the additional accessory building and square footage is prohibited by City ordinance. 5. That the proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. The number of detached accessory buildings and square footage of allowable accessory building space requested is prohibited by City ordinance. Although Mr. Poser is very close to the 1.25 acre threshold which would allow him 2,020 square feet in accessory building footage and two detached accessory buildings under City Code, "hardship" has not been demonstrated as evidenced by the above five criteria. OPTIONS 1. Approve the Variance. 2. Deny the Variance. 3. Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option 2. "y4go��. emomm eeA 5.1:7 n . 7 1005 LANE RI 910 0 `BpLDW IN LAKE BIRCH STREET ANOKA COUNTY m® enee ®© EgER i 12 11 A Q�'q ®1� �p0 Q� viii a 9 IIIIKIMIE 9 aL ,� . ,. ra.ie m::::......INISAo °l oaf ,� m �ce�i�2s �' °iii 1L1 Q e ,. Aammenalimmo / 9 N► T .. 7 ° 9, •12. 191917yIS 4 I 4 l/ 24 23 4 - �►� e� �1. w /1 QA m�- x� \ \5 �a© 9 s4 �:�m1 M© �mt1. LINDA sue= •4' r/J . , .!1 ; , 2 3,.����8��0 �iiD11 �� ©a I ®'I7 6 spip WOOO i2 OF �© . Q. 15�14I13I `2 BALOI� /N 9 LAK£ I0 �� ©�© 4�i2 n©oo61ooenE 0© ©Q® m: 0 'manna iodinv6 i w°R $ 4how Li • I if 5 4 3 2 I NDA AYE 4 2 7 8 10 NO. 1' 107 13 COUNTY 14 / MIF 16 18 ...HIGHWAY R/W PLAT NO. 4B.. ...................... ............ ............................ 17 DRAWN REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. SEP. 1974 NOV. 1978 MAR.1980 SEP. 1981 DEC .1982 JULY 1985 DEC. 1985 REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. - —ASH ST. JAN. 1987 MAY 1988 AUG. 1989 FEB. 1991 FEB. 1992 FEB. 1993 MAY 1994 SCALE III= 1500' DITC NO 25 3Ti CORPORATE L111 REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. S OF CITY OF LINO LACES "WIT STATE — AID - HIGHWAY- NO.32 -- - NOV 1994 JAN. 1996 JULY '1997 JULY 1998 AUG. 1999 Sep-. 2000 ( ;ZIL M < ID o • ZIL m L6L s 4 N W - LL U. 0 0 • N 4 J W J • • Z N l0 FF' ££ EASE MEN T to ONO m a a 3 a z s 1 to • to. 7 co ; - LL 0 N88-02-53W 492.16 m 16.5,7::' 155 to V) or 150 150 150 UN I TED 'POWER • ASSOCIATION tJ ow to o 1\1 co Or (8) W In 3 0 2 - q cap / 6 . a - I- to z fz o w ? ... 7 o Al 300 N 88- 02-53Wco (10) 0 0 - 0 4 tn • ' ..". an _ co .s. 0 .• . .• 300 150 z... ( N88-02-53W 492.05 -. (4) : STEVEN C. WEISNER • '... w o- (6) oi HARRY 5 EVELYN NOREN X • • •••... .• ..-' . • • ■ .....•.---."'".1 . . .. 0 a. 0 . .. • i . • • JOSEPH a MARY ALT STATT -••........•• PON 0 165 4. O f co N 4 491.6. 0 • I on to — � I a. 00I z 90'96b 90'1££ 391 -OZ-1 N ,V, 1011(10 m M - 39 1-09-I N -7 V. 908 b£ lL▪ 1mN Z 90•9b9 90'1£9 3 Si- OZ iN on 0 - Z Z W "•�.. ▪ 6 w V) W 3 N 90'63 90'960 0 001 ID 0 0 9b'8b£ 9b'9 b£ ONOd a _ } w x ID X. a• W • N • O • to - - -ID JOSDl "O99'9b9Z--- • Steve & Gail Poser 6180 Ware Rd Proposed new garage. 30 x 36 Note: Siding & Shingles to match new remodeling of our house. Purpose. Storage of Boats, Snowmobile's and their trailers. Note: Trailers will not fit into existing garage City Ordinance 1.25 acres = 2020 sq ft. Garage, Outbuilding, & Sheds Property Size 150 x 348.06 approx. 1.2 acres = 1100 sq ft. Garage, Outbuilding, & Sheds • Existing 2 + Garage 22 x 30 = 660 Sq Feet Shed 10 x 16 = 160 Sq Feet Total Exist = 820 Sq Feet New garage 36 x 30 = 1060 Sq Feet Proposed New Total = 1880 Sq Feet The Proposed garage would be further from Ware Road but closer to 62nd Street. • We wanted to exit / enter from 62Nd street because there is less traffic &. Our septic system is on the south side of our property. • • City of Lino Lakes To whom it may Concern Aug 8 2001 We have no objection to Steve & Gail Poser (6180 Ware Rd) building a garage on the North end of their property, exiting on to 62 nd Street. Bob & Liz Stokes 6150 Ware Rd i i; 4 .(' ;1 v : 2? / ‘A Bill & Sandy Trudeau 410 62 nd Street 'lf Nick & Esther Mangelsen 6202 Ware Rd �L ` te114 • C with- 1 �3 /-/Yor ffi /ii?e of N W .4 of S YV % Section 32 7.3/, R22 �! S 88' 02' 5.8"E 492.16 M 33 f ft) co R1 c;cl) 4C ckl `\ 62 " /.50.00 85 fool //r> / fed 'co' STREET /x"0.00 Power Assoc/a//on Doc. No.38424/ 1.oe09/, 30 34 riV Q sLo G rt ttA -C„ae 5-reQe,?cistz (o 1 ibp c.,Jtkttt ZO 0 /,5"0.00 L 300.00 4 2 /SO. 0 /50.00. .EasBrr,Fnf 3 7Uf;1E:e:r7f co O or n Uc.+� - - - • /r! w /1i7ess wAere ,oresenfs to 6 5/a fe of /ti9/n r, e Coun ly of./qg D9 t0 \• \ t y • Stale of Minne. Counfy of// 4'NZ • `+. to • C ti N LA4 • .,� /, F. R. lfvidera d ,o /a/ as SCHEUNE� /ha/ a// disfance: monurrren/s /vale show; or! /he ,W74. There are no 1t�e • L L L u' -&' 10 'O ' 1 t 21'd' i 3c�/— ©► 3 c> 3 c, i " 1 u ILt =1 -d \) 6-13 "7-EQ ?0Se. Z. • • • • AGENDA ITEM 5B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Tanda Gretz P & Z MEETING DATE: September 11, 2001 TOPIC: Resolution 01 -152 Approving a Variance To Allow A Zero Side Yard Setback For An Accessory Building Rick Piper, 6153 Oakwood Drive ACTION REQUIRED: 3/5 vote BACKGROUND The subject property is a 44,280 square foot parcel located in a Rural zone. Mr. Piper has applied for a variance from the required 5 -foot side yard setback for accessory buildings in order to construct a 465 square foot addition on to his existing 624 square foot attached garage. The proposed addition would be used primarily to house a third car, and secondarily for storage. In addition, Mr. Piper argues that several homes in the neighborhood have three -stall garages, and that such an addition would add value and marketability to the subject property. This report is based on information from standard plat files and plans provided by Mr. Piper. The City's zoning ordinance states that the side yard setback for an accessory building in a Rural zone is 5 feet (Section 5, subdivision 1.B.3.d.2). ANALYSIS Mr. Piper wants to build a 31' X 15' addition onto his existing attached garage. The current garage is located in the northeast corner of the lot, 15 feet from the northern property line. A water well is located in the front yard, with the septic drainfield in the rear yard approximately 40 feet from the house. There is a ten -foot drainage easement along the western property line. The subject property is zoned Rural, with lot coverage of 44,280 square feet. Under City Code, the property is allowed 1,120 square feet for accessory buildings. The existing attached garage measures 26' X 24', or 624 square feet. The addition of the proposed • 15' X 31' garage would bring total accessory square footage to 1,089. Construction of the proposed addition would result in a side yard setback of zero. The affected neighboring property has street access on the Oakwood Drive cul -de -sac and is heavily wooded along the southern property line. It is currently vacant, with the owner residing in California. Further implications to a zero side yard setback include City Code Section 3, Subd. 5.F.2, which requires curb cut openings and driveways be a minimum of five feet from the side yard property lines. Additionally, Minnesota Building Code requires construction of a one -hour firewall with no openings on buildings constructed less than 3 feet from a neighboring property. FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE In considering all requests for variance and in taking subsequent action, the City shall make a finding of fact: 1. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. • Maintaining the required five-foot side yard setback still allows for the construction of a garage addition, although at a smaller size. 2. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to his property and not created by the landowner. The existing 15 foot side yard setback is not unique or unusual, and was created with the construction of the current home. 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. Reasonable additional accessory building space can still be created while maintaining the required five-foot setback. 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. Granting the variance would confer special privilege, and would negatively impact the neighboring property owner. • • 5. That the proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. • • The Variance requested would completely eliminate a setback, resulting in a zero side yard setback. In order to meet the required City Code side yard setback of five feet, a garage on the proposed site would be limited to a width of 10 feet. This may or may not meet the needs of the applicant. Construction of the proposed garage addition would result in a sideyard setback of zero, and would be an imposition on the current and future owners of the neighboring property to the north. For this reason a variance is not recommended. OPTIONS 1. Approve the Variance. 2. Deny the Variance. 3. Return to staff with direction RECOMMENDATION Option 2. a ► ®o®® - -- r,.. i (014\/ BALDWIN 3 3 ® 12 6m le Hill rill' I? liar ® °°iii EN 1 9 134 4; © p a m®m© m © om ®�� 1 pIN Ib�E i ©©o©oenep MEMO 2 . I� ©i .191617 �Q.pgRKsm�RI ■ 4,440 © ©4 PINE itm° ANOKA COUNTY 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 2 3 4 5 6 +7 8 3 4 17 16 1 1 55 54 40 41 53 52 51 42 43 MEC 50 49 18 // 1ii 73 a /O 50/1 7 861,0 0 7 60F 8 2 9 LAKEI 6 7 B 9I 1 2 3 4 2 _ W .ODRI. =mji_MREE1251WIE �iiie ® ® 5 4 3 2 14 20 19 21 ST. - - I ....HIGHWAY R/W PLAT NO. 6,8 . LO. AQ 1 T ri +•a;s DRAWN REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. SEP. 1974 NOV. 1978 MAR.1980 SEP. 1981 DEC .1982 JULY 1985 DEC. 1985 REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. JAN. 1987 MAY 1988 AUG. 1989 FEB. 1991 FEB. 1992 FEB. 1993 MAY 1994 SCALE In= 1 500' COUNTY DITC N0. 25 arm CORPORATE L AMTS OF CITY OF LINO LACES -° - STATE— AIO-NIONWAY -N0.32 — - - REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. NOV. 1994 JAN. 1996 JULY 1997 JULY 1998 AUG. 1999 SEPT. 2000 a 88 at 00 0 Li 1 Ns • / /tiJJ. /44.01 IN3 3 q Ot I•r/r/ % `- ° Z ti ^a * 111.1 , is �� ✓ `1 r N x lrtt•1W t N ` JW2 •M L' 1 O \ } /1./ r. 11.01 { 1� q .11/- Ei w . w 1 G) ? o f a " WHITE • CIRCLE - N �1 ./0 Mille*: //. /wr ; •+ + \4.. 141.78 10 COg ''''.4;'4.‘ G; AI•sr'" ., ,{� tV 0 iiiiiiT tMAi :P 11/ n I". M 41. 07'1'1 y � ^ ! 74.3....t.. I88 °N ul V pi/- 1.446 S \. Q >: I4. 00 a " t.s:ro. 4.101: C' S t... it i 101.04 O r.� t OA �i Nosy.. l °�a a 141 111.1 7'44,1 : ; d 00 00 44 a a 0,/'as,I 220 rpi, /1. g !/' • I.I/ it. 1 � N .. a /Ze.I7 z O a t DAtCW6OD DRIVE n 1/: n :10'0 4.. 3< 1b 222.00 „:,,,LAURENE ZS. a. t 11 .w .. �. -- Al. .\ O 0 r:C J � o�. J r-.j /..0.,,,,, fr'A • . 1 C' n1a '. /. AVENUE ti ti r Z m Co /I/.as a 0 :w C� /Zf. fJ .u.:4:,,,,, r 8 `. V A a! m 8 ..- o1 4/ / =y.! f it ....1.1%.1... 4.s... N b tl' 8 E i 1i • i / ' ‘, A /- �i,:13 it ..'' , 27.1;b"0- . -• 1.1•.0 C.S. A H. %/.0• I 4j al MT 49 ti) /rr.ar 117.70 (4 • • • m m T1 _J V • • • • _ - J O 0 v m • • • a m o W J P 0 V1 CJ V 0 i klad.0 .Q) c 7 DC2 / L (mot • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM V. C Jeff Smyser September 11, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING - Amendments To Conditional Use Permit - Amendments to Interim Use Permit -Site and Building Plan Review Molin Concrete, 415 Lilac St. Molin Concrete Products Company has submitted applications for amendments to the existing conditional use permit (CUP), amendments to the existing interim use permit, and for a site plan review. The requested amendments would change several of the conditions that were adopted with previous approvals. The site plan review application is for a new manufacturing building on the site. The new building in and of itself requires an amendment to the conditional use permit because it differs from what was previously approved. The earliest action in the City's address file is a rezoning in December 1968 and special use permit issued to Molin in January 1969 to construct a concrete plant. The Sherwood Green residential plat was approved in 1978. Amendments to the Molin special use permit were approved for expansions in 1978, 1981, and 1983. In 1984 neighborhood complaints resulted in a task force to study concerns regarding noise, blowing sand, and visual impact. A storage building was approved in 1991, and another building addition approved in 1993. All the expansions included approvals of amendments to the special/conditional use permit. On October 27, 1997 the City took several actions relevant to the site. These included: 1. Approval of a CUP to allow expansion of the concrete plant. This referred to additional structures on the southern portion of the site. 2. Amending the zoning ordianance to include outdoor storage as an interim use in the LI zoning district 3. Approval of an interim use permit to allow outdoor storage on Molin's northern 20 acres. 4. Vacating the portion of 77th Street that separated the two areas. Another building addition was approved in 1999. • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 2 The City has received complaints from residents near the Molin site, especially from the Sherwood Green area to the north. The primary concern has been noise. This has included both noise from back -up beepers on equipment and the noise of the equipment itself. Others complaints have included concerns about landscaping and dust. The City Council discussed these issues at several work sessions in 2001. This report is based on the following submittals received August 13, 2001 or as noted: Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan Plowe Engineering Utility Plan Plowe Engineering Wetland Mitigation Plan Plowe Engineering Set of Architectural, Structural, Mechanical Professional Design Group includes Site Plan, Floor Plan, Building Elevations, mechanical, electrical, etc. Letter from Randy Molin dated August 7, received August 8 ANALYSIS The Molin site includes approximately 55 acres. The entire site is guided for industrial use by the new comprehensive plan. The north 20 acres of the site is zoned LI, the southern 35 acres is zoned GI. Surrounding land use and zoning is shown in the table: Site and Building Plan Review Structure: The proposed new structure is a building for extruded precast manufacturing. The building is approximately 600 feet long and 66' wide. It will have precast concrete walls 36' high for the majority of the building. There will be a smooth band with windows four feet wide at the 25' height. Near the south end the building itself will increase to 45' high, then decrease to 11'. • At the south end there will be two cement silos rising to approximately 85' in height. Near the silos are below -grade material bins for aggregate and sand. Existing Land Use Comp. Plan Land Use Map Zoning site industrial Industrial GI and LI north residential Low Density Unsewer. Resid. Rural east residential, cemetery Low Density Unsewer. Resid. Industrial Commercial Rural GI (cemetery) south industrial Industrial GI west residential Lino Air Park Low Density Unsewer. Resid. Rural R -1 Site and Building Plan Review Structure: The proposed new structure is a building for extruded precast manufacturing. The building is approximately 600 feet long and 66' wide. It will have precast concrete walls 36' high for the majority of the building. There will be a smooth band with windows four feet wide at the 25' height. Near the south end the building itself will increase to 45' high, then decrease to 11'. • At the south end there will be two cement silos rising to approximately 85' in height. Near the silos are below -grade material bins for aggregate and sand. • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 3 The building will cover approximately 38,000 sf. The silos and material bins will use additional area. Height: As stated above, the proposed new production facility includes two cement silos rising to approximately 85' in height. The height maximum in the GI zone is 45'. Under Section 3 Subd. 4.C.3. of the zoning ordinance, building heights in excess of the standards of the districts may be allowed through a conditional use permit, provided that: a. Demonstrated need is established for the increase in height and said increase will not violate the intent and character of the zoning district in which the structure is located. comment: The production facility requires the cement silos. The GI zoning district is the City's most intense industrial zone. The GI zone, as stated in the purpose paragraph of the ordinance, is for "areas which, because of availability to thoroughfares, suitable topography, and isolation, are appropriate for industrial uses of a more intense nature and ones which may have certain nuisance characteristics." b. The site is capable of accommodating the increased structure size. comment: A 55 -acre site is large enough for such a structure. Soils in this area of the City typically can support buildings. Soil analyses are a normal requirement for building permits. c. The potential increased intensity and size of use does not cause an increase in traffic volumes beyond the capacity of the surrounding streets. comment: The silos will not increase traffic. d. Public utilities and services are adequate. comment: The silos will not increase the need for public services. e. For each additional story over the district limitation or for each additional ten (10) feet above the maximum allowed per district, front and side yard setback requirements shall be increased by ten (10) percent. comment: The 85' silos are 40' higher than the 45' limit. Therefore, the front and side setbacks must increase 40 %. The minimum front setback is 50', the minimum side setback is 10'. The increased front setback must be 70', the side must be 14'. The minimum setback from a residential property increases from • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 4 100' to 140'. The silos are over 300' from the road in front, and about 200' from the nearest side lot line. f. The construction does not limit solar access to abutting and/or neighboring properties. comment: The Molin property continues for 200' east of the proposed silos. Property to the east of Molin is owned by the Twitchell Cemetary. It is possible that the silos will cast shadows on neighboring property during certain times of the year. Staff is recommending that Molin have an analysis prepared to determine the length of the shadow of the silos to determine if there will be a solar access issue. This analysis should be prepared and submitted prior to City Council review. This is included as a condition of approval. g. The provisions of Section 2, Subd. 2. of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. comment: This is the section of required standards for CUP. There are nine findings, and they are addressed below in the section of this report on CUPs. However, one provision is of particular interest to the 85' height issue. The first provision requires that the use "will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City." The Lino Air Park is just west of the northern portion of the Molin site. A private air park is not governed by the typical regulations of the Federal Aviation Adminstration or MnDOT. However, safety issues should be considered by the City. The 85' silos are not in the direct line of the Lino Air Park runway. The "horizontal zone" is an area 150' high extending a specified distance from the runway. No structure should reach above this zone. The 85' silo is below that zone. Lighting: When an earlier building was constructed, the exterior lighting caused some concerns among nearby residents. It is unlikely that the exterior lighting will exceed the City's ordinance restrictions. However, it has been the City's practice to require photometric plans for new commercial/industrial buildings. In addition, we have required pictures of the fixtures themselves to ensure lighting is directed down rather than horizontally or upward. The City allows a maximum of 0.4 foot candles at the residential property lines and 1.0 foot candles at the centerline of a street. No photometric plans were submitted. We do . not have cut sheets of the exterior lighting fixtures. It is City policy to require a fully shielded design such as a shoebox fixture. • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 5 A condition of approval listed in this report is that these would be submitted and reviewed before City Council consideration of the applications. Landscaping Plan: No landscaping around the new building is planned. The section of this report on the conditional use permit discusses landscaping for the larger site. Green space: A maximum of 90% of the site can be impervious surface in the General Industrial and Light Industrial zones. The proposal will not exceed this. Traffic, Circulation: The proposed new building will not interfere with or impact traffic on surrounding roads. Internal circulation is governed by the manufacturing process and storage needs. Truck parking on the roads is governed by the CUP. Parking: There is no parking requirement listed in the ordinance for heavy manufacturing. An analysis in 1997 of previous action on the site included a parking needs calculation using as a basis the parking requirement for a light manufacturing facility. The standard for a light manufacturing facility is one parking space for each employee or one space for each 2000 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. For the sake of consistency, it is useful to compare the new application with that 1997 analysis. The total square footage was 110,200 sf for existing and, at the time, future anticipated buildings. The analysis resulted in a requirement of 55 off - street parking spaces. A "future" manufacturing building of 35,000 sf on the old plan is the comparable to this new building, which is about 38,000 sf. The office building that was built is 6511 sf rather than the 4800 sf anticipated in 1997. There are 76 existing parking spaces now. If off - street parking causes a problem in the future, the City can re- examine the site to determine means of eliminating any safety concerns. Stormwater Management: The grading and drainage plan was reviewed by the Rice Creek Watershed District and received preliminary approval. The proposed plan includes enlarging and existing pond in the northwest corner of the site, creating a new pond in the interior of the site, and an infiltration area between the two. The drainage plan is subject to the review of the City Engineer. Wetlands: The proposed project will require filling of an existing wetland in the southeast corner of the site. Molin has received preliminary approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District for the wetland impacts. Additional wetland will be created in the northwest corner of the site by enlarging the pond there. Sign: Molin has not proposed new signage. • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 6 1997 Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Interim Use Permit Molin has an existing conditional use permit for the concrete plant that covers the entire site. They also have an interim use permit for outdoor storage that covers the northern 20 acres. In 1997 the City approved an amendment to the CUP as well as the interim use permit. The CUP amendment did include an expansion of the production building and included the batch plant that is 80' high. The conditions attached to the 1997 approvals did not specifically distinguish between the two permits —the conditional use permit and the interim use permit. The interim use permit only covers the northern 20 acres which is zoned LI. The conditional use permit covers the entire property. One can infer that conditions related to storage were intended to apply to the northern area. However, there have been differing interpretations voiced regarding which conditions apply where. It will be useful to clarify this, and the recommendations in this report do so. The conditions approved in 1997 follow, accompanied by brief comments on each. Molin is now requesting that conditions 11a, 13c, and 13e be eliminated. 1. The City approve the requested zoning ordinance text amendment establishing open and outdoor storage as an interim use in the LI Zoning District comment: Ordinance 31 -97, adopted 10 /27/97, fulfilled this condition. 2. The City approve the requested vacation of 77th Street comment: Resolution 97 -156, approved 10- 27 -97, fulfilled this condition. 3. The City Council specifically approves an outdoor storage area surfacing material other than blacktop or concrete. comment: The site plan for the CUP /interim use permit does indicate bituminous in limited areas, gravel over large areas, and no paving on much of the site. This is the plan that was approved, so these surfacing materials are approved. 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. comment: There is no outdoor lighting in the yards on the northern portion of the site. The "permissible exterior lighting" refers to the southern portion. Light • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 7 fixtures exist on the buildings. Molin added extra hoods to the lights on the buildings to provide shielding. 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. comment: The driveway onto 4th Ave. has been aligned with Thomas Ave. (77th St.). Molin has or will soon pave the driveway. 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. comment: A high berm begins approximately 100 feet from the northern property line. The berm is at least 40 feet wide at its base. This fulfills this condition. 7. The City shall prohibit on- street truck parking along Lilac Street. comment: The site was designed to provide stacking space on the site rather than on the street. There have been some trucks parked on Lilac St. but no complaints. Only when a truck is parked in the traffic lane is it a problem. The Molins stated that their dispatcher is located on Lilac across from the Molin plant. Drivers occasionally park on Lilac and walk into the dispatch office for instructions. 8. All additional site signage shall comply with applicable City sign requirements. comment: Sign permit reviews are designed to assure this. The Building Official has no outstanding signage issues. 9. All applicable MPCA requirements are satisfactorily met. comment: MPCA has rules regarding underground fuel tanks and stormwater management for water quality. Molin states that there are regular inspections of the tanks by an outside firm, which submits reports to MPCA. A new stormwater plan for the site is pending. The noise issue is the greatest concern. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) does have noise standards. This issue is discussed in greater detail below. 10. All proposed structures comply with applicable City building material requirements. comment: Building permit review has assured this. The Building Official has no outstanding building material issues. • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 8 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. comment: Molin is requesting that this condition be deleted (see Molin letter). Not all products stored in the northern area are wall panels. Molin typically stores wall panels both laying flat and stacked. The berm is a better insulator than the wall panels. Storing panels parallel to the berm will increase the amount of time the equipment would need to move them. This could increase the noise level for the neighbors. Storage of product is not a reliable means of mitigating noise. Staff recommends deleting this condition. b. The outdoor storage yard is arranged such that truck backing maneuvers toward residential properties are minimized. comment: It may be difficult to ensure this can occur, depending on product mix and volume. However, Molin has stated that they attempt to do this and they have not requested the removal of this condition. c. Molin equipment and trucks shall be outfitted with strobe lights to replace backup beepers during nighttime hours (6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.). comment: The use of beepers versus strobe lights has been the topic of much discussion. Molin recently received a letter from Minnesota OSHA stating that training and strobe lights proposed to them by Molin is acceptable under the law. Staff is recommending that this condition remain in effect, and that it apply to the entire site, not only the northern storage area. 12. Comments by other City Staff. comment: A report on traffic implications from SEH suggests a condition of approval to prevent truck parking on Lilac St., which was included as condition 7. 13. The landscape plan shall be amended to show the following: a. Berm location • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 9 comment: The berm exists and is shown on the old and new landscaping plans. The new grading plan shows it as well. b. Berm height of not less than 7 feet. comment: The existing berm meets this height condition. 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. comment: Molin is requesting that this condition be deleted (see letter). The trees originally were part of a design for a lower (5') berm closer to the northern property line. The two rows of trees would provide additional screening. The berm is 7' to 8' high and setback 100+ feet, creating the setback and buffer area referred to in condition 6. Molin believes that the taller berm and the large setback area provide an adequate buffer and screen for the neighbors. Molin estimates the cost of the two solid rows of trees at $22,000. 110 The berm is at the end of the runway for the Lino Air Park. The additional height of the trees may create a safety issue. Staff recommends eliminating the requirement for the trees along the berm. d. Landscaping along 4th Avenue comment: The plans include landscaping alon&, 4th Ave. The new landscaping plan includes some changes in species along 4` Ave. The new plantings are more drought tolerant. Quantities are similar. e. Irrigation for buffer area. comment: Molin is requesting that this condition be deleted (see letter). The "buffer area" is the berm. The revised landscaping plan submitted with the current application includes species that are more drought tolerant than the previous plan. Molin's landscaping consultant recommended these plants. Quantities are similar to the original plan. The irrigation system would be expensive: Molin estimates $18,000. Staff recommends eliminating the requirement for an irrigation system on the berm. • • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 10 14. The Interim Use Permit will expire if there is a change in the land use in the LI District. comment: This is not an issue to date. The approved storage activities continue. Noise Excerpts from MPCA rules are listed below with comments following them. MN Rules 7030.0020 DEFINITIONS Subp. 7. L10. "L10' means the sound level, expressed in dB(A), which is exceeded ten percent of the time for a one hour survey, as measured by test procedures approved by the commissioner. Subp. 8. L50. "L50" means the sound level, expressed in dB(A), which is exceeded 50 percent of the time for a one hour survey, as measured by test procedures approved by the commissioner. MN Rules 7030.0040 NOISE STANDARDS. Subpart 1. Scope. These standards describe the limiting levels of sound established on the basis of present knowledge for the preservation of public health and welfare. These standards are consistent with speech, sleep, annoyance, and hearing conservation requirements for receivers within areas grouped according to land activities by the noise area classification (NAC) system established in part 7030.0050. However, these standards do not, by themselves, identify the limiting levels of impulsive noise needed for the preservation of public health and welfare. Noise standards in subpart 2 apply to all sources. Subp. 2. Noise standards. Noise Area Classification Daytime Nighttime L50 L10 L50 L10 1 60 65 50 55 2 65 70 65 70 3 75 80 75 80 Residential land use is in Noise Area Classification 1. The measurements are to be taken at the location of the receiving use: in this case, the property line of the residential property. That is, noise generated by one use should not exceed the limits when measured from the other use. Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 11 • As can be seen from these definitions, a test must be able to determine if the specified decibel level is exceeded for 10% of the time for one hour, or for 50% of the time for one hour. Daytime in defined as 7:00 am to 10:00 pm, night time as 10:00 pm to 7:00 am. Molin had a noise measurement analysis performed in October 2000 by Wenck Associates. On October 24, the firm took readings from 4:30 am to 5:30 am and from 5:30 am to 6:30 am. On October 25, the firm took readings from 4:30 am to 5:30 am. The readings indicated no violation of MPCA noise rules during those times. MPCA did state in a conversation with City staff that if a test is conducted by established methods, MPCA typically accepts the results of the test. Neighbors are not satisfied by the Wenck analysis. It is possible to arrange another analysis. Staff contacted the MPCA to see if MPCA could conduct the analysis. This is possible, but there is a waiting period of several months. Staff is recommending a condition that requires a noise analysis by another consultant to be arranged for the near future. This analysis should be conducted during a typical working day at the plant. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD COMMENTS As noted in the attached memo from the Environmental Specialist, on August 29 the Environmental Board tabled the project pending; submission of landscape plan, tree inventory, Rice Creek Watershed's TWAFFA requirement information, lighting plan, an understanding of chemical use on the site, use of well heads on site as indicated by the County Well Point Index. The landscape plan should show the use of native groundcover plants and trees, the berm area on the north should be looked at for effectiveness and the use of irrigation, and the City should re -focus on the priorities set forth in the current Surface Water management Plan review process so that the surface water issues are better understood in plan review sites such as Molin Concrete. It is not clear why the Environmental Board did not receive the submitted landscape plan. No tree loss will occur from the proposed new building. The Rice Creek Watershed has granted its preliminary approval. A lighting plan will be a condition of approval before City Council review. Chemical use on the site is not changing, nor are any new wells being proposed. The landscaping plan was approved in 1997. The new plan is a revision of the previously approved plan, and the drought- resistant species have already been planted. The City's surface water plan must be consistent with the Watershed plan. Both the Watershed and the City include surface water plan requirements in the review all projects. • • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 12 FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT As stated in Section 2 Subd. 2.B.7. of the zoning ordinance, The Planning and Zoning Board shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall order the issuance of such permit only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: a. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. b. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific plans and policies of the comprehensive plan of the City and this ordinance. c. Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and/or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. d. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. e. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. f. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. g. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are so designed as not to create traffic congestion or an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. h. Will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. i. Will conform to specific standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular use. Staff recommends finding that the project meets these requirements. • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 13 In addition to those general findings, a CUP for a concrete product plant must include the following provisions (Sec. 8 Subd. 2.I.9): a. All applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements are satisfactorily met. b. A drainage system subject to the approval of the City Engineer shall be installed. c. Storage areas are landscaped, fenced and screened from view of neighboring uses, abutting residential zoning districts and public rights -of -way in compliance with Section 3, Subd. 4.S. d. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement and shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer. e. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be compliance with the applicable provisions of Appendix C of the City Code. f. Provisions shall be made to control and minimize noise, air and water pollution. g. All conditions pertaining to a specific site are subject to change when the Council, upon investigation in relation to a formal request, finds that the general welfare or public betterment can be served as well or better by modifying the conditions. These provisions are addressed in the recommended conditions of approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Site Plan, Amended Conditional Use Permit, Amended Interim Use Permit The many individual elements of the facility are interdependent. The following list includes specific conditions and then specifies which permit and/or approval it applies to. The "entire site" is the entire 55 acres, which is covered by the conditional use permit. The northern portion is the 20 -acre area zoned LI and covered by the interim use permit. The southern portion of the site is 35 acres and is zoned GI. Staff recommends approval of the applications with the following conditions: 1. All permits /approval required by the Rice Creek Watershed District, including drainage and grading and wetland delineation, shall be obtained prior to any site grading. The Watershed permit applies to the overall conditional use permit for the concrete plant, covering the entire site, as well as the site plan review for the new building. • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 14 2. Final utility, grading, and drainage plans must obtain approval from the City Engineer prior to site grading or building permit. This condition applies to the overall conditional use permit for the concrete plant, covering the entire site, as well as the site plan review for the new building. 3. If off - street parking creates safety concerns in the future, the City shall re- examine the parking needs and may require additional parking spaces. This condition applies to the overall conditional use permit for the concrete plant, covering the entire site. 4. Proper building permits must be obtained prior to any construction of the new building. All proposed structures shall comply with applicable City building material requirements. An escrow shall be established according to City policy as part of the building permit to insure completion of all site improvements. This condition applies to the site and building plan review. 5. The approval of the site plan and amended conditional use permit includes the 85± foot height of the cement silos, as provided by Sec. 3. Subd 4.C.3. of the zoning ordinance, which allows a building height to exceed the zoning district standard with a conditional use permit. 6. The surfacing material of the site as shown on the submitted site plan and grading plan is acceptable. Additional bituminous areas may be paved without additional review by the City. This condition applies to the overall conditional use permit for the concrete plant, covering the entire site. 7. Outdoor lighting is prohibited in the site's outdoor storage area (north of 77th St./Thomas St.). Permissible exterior lighting on the southern portion of the property shall be hooded and directed to reflect light away from neighboring residential properties and rights -of -way. This condition applies to the overall conditional use permit for the concrete plant, covering the entire site, as well as the interim use permit on the northern portion. 8. A photometric lighting plan for the new building and structures shall be submitted to ensure compliance with City lighting requirements. Cut sheets or photos of exterior lighting fixtures shall be submitted. The photometric plan and cut sheets shall be submitted and reviewed prior to City Council consideration of the applications. This applies to the site plan review. 9. The site's western access point (from 4th Avenue) shall remain at the 77th St./Thomas St. alignment. Access to Lilac St. shall be maintained as on the plans received by the City August 13, 2001. This condition applies to the overall conditional use permit for the concrete plant, covering the entire site, as well as the interim use permit on the northern portion. • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 15 10. A minimum 150 -foot setback shall be maintained along the site's northern boundary. The buffer yard consisting of a berm with plantings shall extend 40 feet north into this 150 -foot setback line (i.e., the berm shall be maintained in the southern part of the 150 -foot setback). The berm shall be maintained at an eight foot height. This condition shall apply to both the overall conditional use permit on the entire site for the concrete plant as well as the interim use permit in the northern portion. 11. The City shall prohibit on- street truck parking along Lilac Street. Molin shall inform drivers of this prohibition. This condition shall apply to the overall conditional use permit on the entire site for the concrete plant. 12. All applicable MPCA requirements shall be satisfactorily met. This condition shall apply to the overall conditional use permit on the entire site for the concrete plant. 13. The following noise mitigation efforts shall be utilized: a. The outdoor storage yard on the northern portion shall be arranged such that truck backing maneuvers toward residential properties are minimized. This condition applies to the interim use permit. b. Molin equipment and trucks shall be outfitted with strobe lights to replace backup beepers during nighttime hours (6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.). Because use of strobes over beepers has been approved by the Minnesota Dept. of Labor and Industry, OSHA, this condition shall apply to both the overall conditional use permit on the entire site for the concrete plant as well as the interim use permit in the northern portion. If, in the future, there is some reason under law why the strobes are not sufficient, Molin shall be required to apply for an amendment to the conditional use permit and interim use permit. 14. The new landscaping plan dated 8/1/01 and received by the City August 13, 2001 shall be the approved plan. All plantings shall be in place by June 2002. Plantings shall be maintained in a healthy state. Dead plantings shall be replaced in a timely manner. This condition applies to the overall conditional use permit on the entire site for the concrete plant as well as the interim use permit for storage in the northern portion of the site. 15. The interim use permit on the northern portion, zoned LI, allows for storage, not production. No production or finishing activities shall be conducted in this area. This includes cutting, grinding, and other such work. • • • Molin Concrete September 11, 2001 page 16 16. The interim use permit will expire if there is a change in the land use in the LI District on the northern portion of the site. 17. The following conditions that were approved on October 27, 1997 shall no longer apply: - condition 11 a. requiring storing wall panels parallel to the buffer yard (berm); - condition 13 c. requiring a solid row of coniferous trees on the north side of the berm and a row of deciduous trees on the south side of the berm; - condition 13 e. requiring irrigation for the berm. 18. Molin shall have an analysis prepared to determine the length of the shadow of the silos to determine if there will be a solar access issue on neighboring properties. This analysis should be prepared and submitted prior to City Council review of the current applications. This condition applies to the overall conditional use permit on the entire site for the concrete plant as well as the site plan review. 19. A noise analysis shall be performed to test compliance with MPCA noise standards. This analysis should be completed prior to City Council review of the current applications. OPTIONS 1. Approve the amendment of the conditional use permit, amendment of the interim use permit, and the site plan with the conditions listed in the report. 2. Deny the amendment of the conditional use permit, amendment of the interim use permit, and the site plan, and list reasons for the denial. 3. Continue the public hearing and return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option 1 • • Since 1897 CONCRETE PRODUCTS COMPANY August 7, 2001 Mr. Jeff Smyser City Planner City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN. 55014 Dear Jeff: RECEIVED AUG 0 8 2001 CITY OF LINO LAKES This letter is regarding the outstanding conditions of approval for our conditional use permit that was approved by the Lino Lakes City Council on October 27, 1997. Based on the responses I gave to your report at the June 6, 2001 City Council work session, we, Molin Concrete Products had completed all but four of the remaining conditions at that time. We have subsequently completed Condition 1 lc pertaining to the audible warning devices on our yard equipment as outlined here: • Condition 1lc: We have recently received permission from Minnesota OSHA to use strobe lights in place of the audible warning devices on our yard equipment between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. We are currently implementing this practice. On August 1, 2001, I spoke with Alan Brixius of Northwest Associated Consultants and we discussed the events from October 1997. He agrees that with the increased height of the berm, along with our proposed substitute plantings along the berm in conjunction with our intended efforts to assure their survival, that the three remaining conditions should be removed from our conditional use permit. These items could prove to be very costly and we see no significant benefits for the nearby neighbors in specific or for the community in general, by having them completed. Below you will find an explanation of why we feel each one should be removed: • Condition 1la: Storing our wall panels parallel to the berm in our northerly yard to act as a sound buffer was in the beginning, a very good idea. However, it was proposed before the berm height was increased. When our product is stacked, it is only five feet high, and with it stacked in close proximity to the berm, the direction of the stack will have no effect at all. With the way the panels are arranged in our north storage yard now, the shuttle lift that handles the panels travels into the storage yard, picks up or sets down a wall panel, and then drives south, out of the storage yard, to load or unload a truck. If we were to store the panels parallel to the berm, the shuttle lift could, at certain times, remain close to the northern edge of the storage yard for much longer periods of time, actually increasing the level of noise exposure to the neighbors. 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 Mr. Jeff Smyser August 7, 2001 Page 2 City Planner City of Lino Lakes • Condition 13c: The original planting plan was submitted along with our master plan in September 1997. The berm was only going to be five feet high along the north edge of our property with plants, shrubs, and trees to act as a visual screen. As the approval process moved along after the initial Planning & Zoning meeting, we had two meetings with the neighbors. During these meetings, the purpose of the berm changed. We subsequently agreed to increase the height of the berm to eight feet and move it in from the north property line by 150' to create a buffer area between the property line and our proposed storage area. We feel that the recommendation for two rows of trees was initially intended as a visual and sound screen based on the lower, five -foot high, berm design. As discussions with the neighbors progressed, it was determined that the trees would not do the job as either. We compromised by adding the 3' to the height of the berm and by changing its location. The increased height is a more substantial visual and sound screen than the rows of trees could have been. We cannot see any significant value in planting these rows of trees along the berm. • Condition 13e: The irrigation system was added as a condition for our permit because the neighbors were concerned that the plantings on the berm would be neglected. In the beginning, this condition made sense, but after meeting with Greg Buell from Buell Landscaping, who specializes in landscaping berms, he recommended substituting the originally proposed plantings with more drought resistant plants. He said that with the right plants in place, we would not need an irrigation system for the berm. The drought resistant plants are shown on the new planting plan that we are submitting to you at this time. Based on Greg Buell's recommendations, we planted these hardier plants last fall. They are almost one year old and have survived through a harsh winter, a very hot summer, and as of August 1, 2001 are doing very well. We have a water tank truck, which we use to help reduce the dust in our storage yard, and we are in the process of fitting it with a pump so we can water the plantings when necessary. I am respectfully submitting an application to have these last remaining conditions of approval removed from our conditional use permit. Sincerely, Randall r Molin Vice President / Facilities Manager MOLIN CONCRETE PRODUCTS CO 415 Lilac St. Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Enclosures: Letter from OSHA pertaining to Condition 11 c New planting plan Photographs taken August 1, 2001 of planting on the berm 443 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 irw.doli.state.mn.us • � &D Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry 651-296-6107 TTY: 651- 297 -4198 1- 800 - DIAL -DLI RECEIVED August 2, 2001 AUG 0 8 2001 OF LINO LAKES Randall G. Molin, Facilities Manager Molin Concrete Products Company 415 Lilac Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Mr. Molin: The purpose of this letter is to respond to your June 14, 2001, request for a variance concerning the audible warning devices on the material handling equipment used in your outdoor storage yards between the hours of 6 p.m. and 8 a.m. I asked James Krueger, OSHA Management Team Director /Metro Safety, to review your request. Following his review of the information you submitted, his review of the standard, and subsequent phone conversations with you, we have made the following determination: The MNOSHA Standard applicable to backup alarms is Minnesota Rule 5205.0750. This standard adopts 29 CFR 1926.602, a construction standard, by reference and makes it applicable to general industry workplaces. Section 1926.602 requires backup alarms on material handling equipment that has an obstructed driver's view when backing the equipment. The intent of this standard is to warn employees of the potential hazard from moving vehicles. MNOSHA has allowed employers the flexibility of determining the best method to warn employees of the dangers of a backing vehicle with an obstructed view. Typically, employers use either an automatic reverse - activated audible alarm or a signal person. These are the two most common methods used to meet the intent of the OSHA standard. While the OSHA Standards do not address the use of strobe lights as waming devices, the U. S. Department of Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), which governs the safety and health of mine workers, allows the use of strobe lights at night in lieu of an audible alarm. MSHA's decision to allow strobe lights in lieu of audible alarms can be construed as evidence that strobe lights are considered appropriate warning of backing vehicles. Based on the above information, and a review of the training program you submitted, we have determined that a variance is not required in this case. Employee training, as described in the program you submitted, along with the use of strobe lights in lieu of audible alarms between the hours of 6 p.m. and 8 a.m. will meet the intent of the OSHA Standard for adequate warning to workers of a backing vehicle. Thank you for your efforts in providing a safe and healthful work environment for your employees. Should you need additional information in this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Patricia Todd OSHA Management Team Director • PT/p1 This information can be provided to you in alternative formats (Braille, large print or audio tape) . An Equai Opportunity Employer (AFSCME) MOM LABEl Memo • • Environmental To: Jeff Smyser From: Marty Asleson CC: Michael Grochala Date: August 31, 2001 Re: Environmental Board Recommendations LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AUGUST 29, 2001 RECOMMENDATIONS The Lino Lakes Environmental Board made the following recommendations on August 29: 2. Molin Concrete Site Plan Review Motion made to table pending; submission of landscape plan, tree inventory, Rice Creek Watershed's TWAFFA requirement information, lighting plan, an understanding of chemical use on the site, use of well heads on site as indicated by the County Well Point Index. The Landscape Plan should show the use of native groundcover plants and trees, the berm area on the north should be looked at for effectiveness and the use of irrigation, and the that the City should re -focus on the priorities set forth in the current Surface Water management Plan review process so that the surface water issues are better understood in plan review sites such as Molin Concrete. Motion was made by Connie Grundhoffer, second by Amy Donlin, all approved. No. 294 _ rgrai�Q�� Miller-Davis Co.. Minneapolis 41! $ 25.00 plus costs 'tats of 11u 1 tnne5sota, County of Anoka REt:.:+�AVED Igo. 17 Pt N 2 C 1968 Village of Lino Lakes, Minn. (JLIN CONCRETE Pi O. UC" . bffice of Clerk- Treasurer SPECIAL USE 11ermit. IN CONSIDERATION OF The statements made by _lir . Wifliamt..1,_t aJ,in owner of Molin Concrete Products Company in_ his application therefor duly filed in this office, which application is her PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED To said Mr. William J. Molin as owner to construct, maintain and operate, according to law, a concrete products manufacturing operation. including all nece sari* ures and improv m n s in d n h e.o upon that tract of land described as follows: Lot Block`_______; plat or addition Address Located at the corner of Lilac and 4th Ave. (legal dew cription on•back) which tract is of the size and area specified in said application. This permit is granted upon the express conditions that said owner and his contractors, agents, workmen and employees, shall comply in all respects with the ordinances of the Village o f, Lino Lakes Given under the hand of the Clerk - Treasurer _of said _Village and its corporate seal and attested s Mayor _this 14th day of January i9 69 Attest: • LEGAL DESCRIPTION • Clerk-Treasurer • The South Half of Northwest Quarter of Southwest Quarter (S 1/2 of NW 1/4 of SW 1/4) of Section Eight (8), Township Thirty -one (31) North, Range Twenty -two (22) West; Anoka County, Minnesota, containing Twenty (20) acres, more or less, and subject to the existing Township Road along the south line and Fourth Ave. along the west line, also subject to easements, reservations of record. The Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of SW 1/4) of Section Eight (8), Township Thirty -one (31) North, Range Twenty -two (22) West, Anoka County, Minnesota, except the east 260 feet of south 832 feet thereof, the above described tract contains 35 acres, more or less excluding the above described exception and is subject to the existing Township Road along the North line, Fourth Ave. along the West line, and C.S.A.H.No. 12 (A.Ka. Lilac Lane) along the south line; also subject to easements, reservations of record. STIPULATIONS That adequate screening (to be worked out with the Village Engineer) be provided across the west and north sides of the Twitchell Cemetery. 11/03/2000 08:15 612 - 479 -4270 • TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Randy Molin Molin Concrete FROM: Tim Colliton, PE, CIH Todd Wenck Wenck Associates, Inc. RE: Noise Measurement Summary North Property Line — Lino Lakes Facility Wenck File #0889 -05 DATE: November 2, 2000 PAGE 02 CONFIDENTIAL This Technical Memorandum presents the summary of the community noise measurements at the Lino Lakes facility. The noise measurements were made in the early morning hours of October 24 and 25, 2000. The purpose of the measurements was to assess the effectiveness of relocating back -up alarms on the material handling equipment. MINNESOTA NOISE RULES These results are compared with the requirements of the Minnesota Rules pertaining to community noise. The regulations are contained in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7030 and are administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The noise rules are summarized below: • Noise area classifications (NAC's) are defined for various types of land uses in the state. The NAC's are numerically labeled from 1 through 4 and are described in Chapter 7030.0050. • The noise emanating from an NAC and impacting a neighboring NAC is limited by the rules. Different levels are specified for daytime (0700 -2200) and nighttime (2200 -0700) periods. The noise is (usually) evaluated at the property line of the receiving NAC. • NAC 1 generally includes land uses such as household units & other residential (including farmhouses), medical services, transient lodging (e.g., hotels) and other cultural, entertainment and recreational activities. • For NAC 2, transportation facilities, retail trade, service establishments, and some outdoor activities are included. • NAC 3 covers manufacturing, utilities, agricultural and "all other activities not otherwise listed ". • NAC 4 covers undeveloped and unused land and water areas. • The noise limits are listed below for NAC's 1, 2, &3: Receiver Noise • Area Classification Daytime Nighttime Lso Lio Lso Llo 60 65 50 55 2 65 70 65 70 3 75 80 75 80 11'03/2000 08:15 612- 479 -4270 • PAGE 03 The noise limits are in decibels, abbreviated dB, on the A scale, further abbreviated dBA. The L10 is the level exceeded for 10% of the time; the L,, is the level exceeded for 50% of the time and is considered the "average" sound level. The M[olin facility is an NAC 3. The receiving areas to the north (residential) are NAC 1. MEASUREMENT RESULTS The first round of measurements was made on October 24, 2000 during normal outdoor production operations. Two sets of readings were made; one from 0430 to 0530 and another from 0530 to 0630. The earlier measurement was expected to have lesser background contamination by traffic noise from nearby I -35W. The results are shown below: Parameter October 24; 0430 -0530 October 24; 0530 -0630 State Limit (Nighttime) L;( 50.2 dBA 51.1 dBA 55 dBA L;0 46.4 dBA 48.2 dBA 50 dBA Both sets of readings show compliance with the Minnesota Noise Rules for the nighttime period. The second set (0530 -0630) shows a slight increase as morning traffic builds. A second set of measurements was made on October 25, 2000 without outdoor production operations. Only one set of readings was made from 0430 to 0530, The results are shown below: Parameter October 25; 0430 -0530 State Limit (Nighttime) La) 47.4 dBA 55 dBA L50 44.5 dBA 50 dBA As expected. the results show compliance with the Minnesota Noise Rules for the nighttime period. A slight decrease was noted due to the absence production operations. Since the measurements indicate compliance with the Minnesota Noise Rules for the nighttime period. no recommendations are necessary at this time. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ?'vfecrsrrremenrt Instrumentation The sound level measurements were made using a Larson -Davis brand Model 812 (S/N 0265) sound level meter. The meter was used with a 1/2" diameter random incidence Larson -Davis Model 2560 (S/N 2156) microphone connected to a Larson -Davis Model PRM828 (S/N 1724) microphone preamplifier. The sound level meter was used in the data - logging mode to measure and store the sound level readings (in dBA. "fast" response) during the measurement period. The measurements were conducted with the foam windscreen covering the microphone. At the conclusion of the measurement period. the meter calculates and displays various statistical measures (including the LID & L;,,) regarding the sound level distribution. • • • The meter /preamplifier /microphone system was calibrated before and after the measurements. A Larson -Davis Model CA250 (S/N 2162) acoustic calibrator was used according to the manufacturer's instructions. The acoustic calibrator used produces a 114 decibel tone at 250 Hz. The manufacturer checked the accuracy of the calibrator on October 18, 2000. Measurement Location The measurements were made about ten feet inside of the north property line of the facility and approximately 35 feet west of the clearing at the nearby resident's bridge. The distance to the outdoor production operations was about 1,200 feet. The distance to the north berm on the facility property was about 135 feet. The sound level meter was attached to a tripod approx. 4.5 feet above the ground with the microphone pointed towards the outdoor production operation. Weather Conditions During the measurements on October 24th, the temperature was 59°F with a relative humidity of 92 %. No precipitation occurred during the measurement period. No significant wind was noted. During the measurements on October 25th, the temperature was 63°F with a relative humidity of 89 %. Drizzle/light rain occurred for about 15 minutes during the measurement period. A slight breeze was noted during the precipitation event. No Atm r� aim •1 -.. Pt00 NNMBfM -!! - �- flH Y- N /BNFO! Briallir iiimmimplgogg !IM iNI grairt, -imp himur : 1 iii t3 MENIMI ��� ®^ Itai AMIE _ -- III mu Ea PcNTURY„�''m� ii- ■������� ��� ' wr-- Pw-Nrtor r-PL. nr - QBONW-II J z - v. '�� dr Eiia -w 4 �� moo o I 1 III P . �uIIoo 1 ■�r��w�����oPP�3► /O��dia�00 "i t 1 viiVe. 0 rat, A kib T ii iivooioimoimiemi= Iv Am'irm MENISILE ai MMEMELY1,4' /9 :' 4,-•r N7u r D cu -T. im 1 v0�� o�..erin oi�, n CFAR© ©BDs. O�Qn �no'amtu n �u�io� 0 od o - - - ,,. .R '6^tµ 11111' 111111, In MEM la n 0000 0 o Q PI/ 66' El Iiiralai . mim 0 LINO LAKES ���5��� 114 el ICI dl °a ° lliii ©i 4 5 6 7 6 j 2 3 4 8 SUB. 134 GEORGE MEM 113 no= i� 0 6o v Q_ : ©MY-© ° 'm0'11 ©I omoo mall NMI ir urn ma mil In= WM =ANT werIMMIII MOM sip ENO AMP AT NO 50 M* -N STREET 611400* —HW -Pieter- [•7.1U i'9C -.iv, • •/ OUTLOT B • S 9 6 7 r� : "its .8r 14; 117 111111111 10 PS LINO • 1:AKES • • R EHABILITATION . :.CENTER O.l. A. wow �i' rss TEA MARSHAN LAKE 1 • • • 110-0. SMACK r 0 "Cr .1. L SITS PLAN 0-0 SEM= L . •„, •• • PlIr6Mir UW EMI Q SAS MST% CCM SIAS CASTING QV L _ _ _ _ J CEMETERT L. tIL rt1: (110 aV-4. MIS DIEWMIMN02"• MIL17115--4. MOM " NEAT) FIRIFY L7 s. COM QM Pa E. MC 111111M. s. • I-001C. COSMOS 1 117M RUM TO Mt FLANS FM MANN, TOD =ATMS, 'awry PAVING t MERANO NOLVICATOM COMA MAIM ClIGULATION MA MOO= STOWS k 41 TO 100 MD INTOSTATE MONTT Q NT 00 EULESS MICIPMMY UNE PICIPAIII TAMS Cut:, (Jut tata;uWcatu"t9uudc301300000er 1M, - - •IM MI6 627/0621 - - MMUS NAIL SIM IMAVID OPEMATMI II•LIMIG 0,1w Professional 12s_dgn Group 1011 East Fourth Street Sults 200 Its. (.507) 143-22fre PO Box HI SIX. 00n 1145-2303 Northfield, MN SSOV www.prefdwigndont Project Thin COICIETE nweven COMPANY Extruded Precast Manufacturing Building Lino Lakes, Minnesota Key Plea RevWorm 2 I 7-15-01 CM ISSUED 000 000,10 1 I 7-10-01 OtE 03000 000 COMMISSION KONG 5-211-01 REVIEW PWT UNE 1SSUEI) rOft MINER SCAM r • CO-Cr 4Tn.r. L'` • AUG 1 3 2001 Gin, OF ij10 LAKES Raw.I I 510. DmarMllen Nate D antrIngs sot 50 1. scoisd to obtain deneadowo. Contact Professional Design Group foe emitted or edadenof dInwriens, or thew In mac' with actual add mewarements. 1 Mr1My certify that this plan, specification. or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision end that I ars 0 duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the Mote of Minnesota. 5- Typed or Ptintsd Rant C. Richard Elias Oslo 7-16-01 Reg. No. 13046 Project fasnisan D ow Drawn Ily• Chocked Ilys Copyright Prefenional Design 01W 9712L07 741-01 RAWTIDI 2001 Sheet kits Plan Sheen A1.0 ?'? MAIM FM w eeu& .toe. a^ SU ..e - n YMOMST TAM apes Tarr sax .lac W PUCK O10 S DOTS 1.016 PUN 11117141111 NUNN* ■ 44P EITADYLL -- irrtr.,• - ea 11./C. 2 Cerro —rnT IIM RO.K wP •.1Ito 1 w reel 15 T .MOIST MM O0*5. —uarr mat - VOW S U. LOC. S! we. W tsol IlafT I.RIK - Yt 0K 11111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111 M 1 1111111111111111111111111111111111.1111111111111111111111111111111111111.1 1•1111111N1N1N11N N■ ■N' ®sN11O1111tY INN laNlrt■1N■ 1N ■■1111 111N■ ®111N N■■®■ N IIIIiIIIL:. rw411 yam w WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION was LW • re r[MMAT MM RIM 11#t - 1 VONT Sel I LW. -1 o.1LUST NM pp ®1 IMMSNt.. MaRT.Y.taL� W .rye I4 . 4-0 KAMM. • • MAIL NAM (TOT.) PUN • DAM (M.) 0 1111111111111111111111101111111•11111111111111111 t1NN■■NfaiNNN1■tt11111 ■Ui■MN IUD. P.C. ION. PUNS U WNMN (11T.) ffi. FOCRUM - ljtlI A.m.' Wait- WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION CONT'D N SA- P.C. / HMI PANELS W AVY WM (r?J ■ 0U m. . SEE MX. I`r o•Ml1n1.OINT 1___1 L__1 EDIT! 1OOIONFOCr- , •1, I/ D0. WM I'. SUIT- , - w role r, I !1 TUM ITT MACH s rPANT IATt,T 7o MLO+ PIPE BOLLARD EMI. T.II -/ t PIPE BOLLARD PLAN STxr r • rr TA $TA= OEM' DIAL. ►G WU PANELS ;WAVY scan r.I.t UM) • SW (TM) 0 UNIT 00! MC. c. SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALD NV • re MIT FIXTURE - S! n.c Professional Design Orono Anneens / rVn.o. IOS Fast Feertb Ste.. Suite 200 Om (707) 044-27/0 PO Box 041 m.K. (SW) 043.2302 Nmdlflid, INN SS0.S7 .Twwpr.Idsapna ll Colds P OCUCIS COMPANY Extruded Precast Manufacturing Building Lino late., Minne.ra Key Pim . a. a t- .` :: `i .k• per., i AUG 1 3 2001 CITY OF LINO LA.+ -F 4 I 7 -27 -01 OE 100. 11 1 11000 PUMA L WHOOPS 0 000010 MVO 3 7 -11-01 ISSUED rat Iowa 21 7 -10-01 ISSUED T0S COORD.raI011 MUNN 1-3-01 =MO FOR 0.110. IRUCte 0 1 0-23-01 ISSUED Mt 0t•IER 000011 30..1 1 Oele I Applied y DeeolLece 341336 Dwwtip we set to be scaled to Minh a...N.l.. Canal rtJ/.wiwd Dear G.q for •.IM.d ..dau..d animism, . dl... I. cake was SCOW (1-M I Hereby eat*, Owl this pin, .pecSIodIon, or remit .roe proposed by ms or under my direct .lopeniebn .red Cwt 1 an M duly Mowed Architect under the lkw of the state of Minnesota. Typed or prided Ib.n. 0.1. 7- 113-01 C. Richard Vim W 13045 Projsct Weber: 0.tee Draws ys Olean( Op C.pT.id5 Pre(.ai..d D. Grow 1171.107 727-01 RAM/7104 CMI 2001 Sheet 71the Exterior Elevations s4 A2.0 • • • or. grz m mm r119rf 12.2O. .X. - SU 1P 21 O I9 18 17 Ib O O ® 13 12 II 1 MO J rw1E1 0 WM %TV Mom mai P c�a�1�CnP.) rev.' as 110c. k 1 i 54 LX illu n ur i . u i Inn u u a 1 . 1611 a I i mn a 110 it i i n 11 n I mum 1n n nn I i i n w n 1 i 101 . u n n ui i ni wu i m n n II i i �ViIIiII ii I1 i i�iiil BEE iiii i iiiiiiiI IIIiIII, i iii mi Ili l,i iili�Viii iIiVl� !IlilViilli it IT i Ii �lii Iiiiii II 11111 i MI III III iii miiii ®rii iiIi iiiii�i1111 111111111®.w111•®111111■ ■. t.®■ a�®■ �w11■ I�■w■®11■a11■ol�11®11�.w■Me�8wIl�w■ ®® 1 iii 1i i 1 I PIM CO 1 S L. V NT 0122 6 LOG w trot RAW exTIIRIOR ELEVATION ,-� 6!C - fw w e INN MK) A Loam For8wr - eeI SSC. L2 prim .Mm WU. NV •re rZI Tr' WPM FM OPOM1 MIT 6110 1 tQ Wt Sg4r611 ooellFaa iv. lam soli O !,0114 TIlO6 61e241 10100311ND011 11 iiii'ii "iiiii1iiiii•i i 111111111 1111 R'i'IiI iiiIiil111i ■ MI . ■I®■■i* 1 ■ ®.uI uI ■ '-11011, VKTt - la CIL EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION CONT'D N OWT ▪ P.C. IF= 191021,1 f.) ,-uan n77 SU FIS. SOLI. VIP • wa $TD !L 0 1 1110101 01 n01 MINIM I1 1n::: 1 ,1I 1 11 111111o11111111d IU ;III RE BIC. 111E P.C. Iwl PAWLS YAW OFT= 8471 '7147) .�( ^W 1 NORTH EXTERIOR ELIYAT I ON SOW VIP • 8-0 Professional Design Group 145 face fowth law Ms 200 PO 10 441 Nordsffeld, Aw 33037 Du1. (307) 143d23S Eau. (707) 442303 ■wr. refaMpcaw ProMa ?Ida concurs PICID ___ COMPANY Extruded Precast Manufacturing Lino Lam Minnesota AUG 1 3 2001 CITY OF L!NO LAKES 4 7 -27-01 A66. It MOND RILNW. IMMO a 7400711 MID 2 7 -10-01 CE MS= FOR Omer 2 7 -10-01 010 ISSUED FOR 000FONO1 l 1EE1000 1 4-6-01 6 6-50-0, 13570 FOR O■41R RENEW M.t of Approval . DeewVa.m Mote Dimming. we Net to M waled so a&Mk d1■■■M — COMM ►n/e..k_J Daly Gay ter e■Ibtd sr Ndi1loNJ Amwsiars. sr don l emend will said MU we■w4R1■Ea. I Mnby certify that this flan, .p.c64allon, or report ism prepared by we or under my direct ■sper.U1.n and that 1 an o duly licensed kcMt.ct under the lows of the state of Minnesota. Strohm iyp■d or Prided POMO C. Richard Etas ed 7 -10-01 R. , Ne. 17046 freJeCt Numbers Data Drawn Dp Uedad Dye Compri t frefewlad D.Jp Group 07101.07 7.77.01 17K 2001 Ewa nth. Exterior Mevations sh"ft A2.1 • • • t ui GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN MOLIN CONCRETE PRODUCTS Lino Lakes, Afinnesota � s H E R W P O D e/ N8s•0s'O2'W 11011110 M0•M0 A111. North line of the S 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1 \4 of Sec. 8, T31. R22. 1320.51 / 1, 1 ^ 1041.011.0 9F'01405 LINE •Re A { 4330 Cu.Yd. eB 083 Cu 75 South One of IM 4 1 of the NN 1/4 of the 11,4 ^" of SIC. Q. 131, RM, 1�1 S00 °44 '48 "X of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of E X 1ST 1 44 0 YEL. CIRC *710 f ID, STORAGE .A TyF I 4 I I F fee 1 S89.00'00"E `'' 260.00 North line of the South 832 ft of the SW 1/4 of the SW /4 N 02 C I I i I I • I I I I I w I :41; • M bE_ R THE 21 GRAMME' /1411 1•00) 14.00 S89 00 00 "E I REIM O�CNplm ST LMO LM ES W 51014 0,w) 70 -151 4040 ,40,) 10-0 J VICINITY MAP 3a 1 /4 of SMO. L 1* 34. no. 01 ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EROSION CONTROL NOTES M1 05 tp ] 4.1 t ROAM rIIR lCM fOb1..! 1.1101 m MAYOR 11110 1101. Oft 1 4. • m wA Mew ) wow 14 orriLLO6 (4)h Mp yI11Q1 0461.01 M *4VU4 O AI'NWRI PSEIREPL. r41wr l X11 0400.. ~ ...4 E1gdeA4•' 40--..- SLT SOILS LEGEND: 1)..- 0.04.. [AIM Ca* Z) -r- Oa..Hw [4M. 1Aew A - .I• - 0.044* LMM4y [4.44 - � DOM. P.0..4 fen. e) 0 0004.. tle,. d4. 0.0.4. N Dees 4.0.4 1M 0.40 >1# ✓CI ^ ts.0e4. h0.4 1.1 0.4. ∎Ow4. 0 4 1 4 4 , 0- 4 ) "f »04.4404 S1/4 Cor. R22, Foun. Cost Iron 1 Andy 0,•A* 414 M• A1w - 40- 304,.0,+ M w e •..4, •**O.wf4/ M I.. r• Mot *es sit S0,`, 1..w444 nry 0100 6 3./04040 OVL _COL_ A• 40 4)}01 143044 MIMS 1 The 0a4M - r lee . Ir•e. ..•1... I9.. weeNen M 4•4.I .1040 • ..1 500 *W 4.M *304,0 • 4.b.1.. 1A. -1044.* • AMWA. • .401.1 M ... MWw•44n w M M 11. N.44..n 44MWw 4. M O.M4. 44f 4, 414 44 lg ) .!. -1 4 bell. 4. lei• 110114 40.. 1 .100 0 4 ,I. IM 1..M.y4404 of Mew. 40A11 44010 4 ewes M M 1.10410. wee ..K4e1 40p4 ▪ ebe 1) ..r .104. 44. On.. M0 ..-r. 4 404 • M.111w40 1.... 7) 040 .40 04. 1047.4. M0 . IM 444 040* 14 4440 10710 1) See el 0.3 OW.. C.O.M. M 1. 0,040. >) Ae..• N 410440 • 0,.144 4M Mel.....04 1 le C0444.4440 4 1.40. 00111100701I MALL 1170 10121100101.1 0M 0[4•004 00400 1101.53 MO 40104 01011171 a 444 0000 .AWC[1 IMP 10 •R 11110 M13MVCIIr. A 400 0700MC104 ACC) SOO SHALL 41 WAWA AM 044144400 AT 7/744.101 10 [•111.0 14400 141A01 00001 MOCK [41044,.[ SAL i 40 USD 0LM SO 141114 1144014 MO AS 910[ AS 14015S AT 400 4INn0 u= 1• N r *4910 7041. 901 111010..1 90111 SW 9NY4g4 00 0.A411 044401 00 OUTER LHR MIN 011040 40171 100 01 *MM. 04W00 141A1MUM* 1•113 100110 100 0101 04100 00 1101.0 ALo en 110[1 CA104 won. 914 404440, Na Nor my MAMMY NNW XL COW MOM /41-.416 o, ,0-mo mu /MIO HMO? Od1C eh/b4 c1 • • LEGEND: 1) — > — Denotes 2) — > — Denotes 3) — 1 — Denotes ) — i — Denotes - oho - Denotes 6) —) — Denotes 7) 0 Denotes 8) Q Denotes • Proposed Sanitary Sewer Existing Sanitary Sewer Proposed Watermoin Existing Watermoin Existing Electric Proposed Storm Storm Drain Manhole Sanitary Sewer Manhole EXISTING UTILITIES 1) The information shown on these drawings concerning twse and location 01 existing utilities is not guaranteed to be accurate or oil inclusive. The contractor is responsbie for making his own determination as to the type and locution of utilities os may be necessary to ovoid damage to these utilities. a2) The Contractor shot! be responsible for existing Witty locations. Cog Gopher State One at (651) 454 -0002 for locations. !TARS SEWER 1) Sonifary Sewer Service shall be r PVC SOR 35 unless otherwise noted. 2) Sewer Service boatians and eerotians shill be verified In the field prior to construction. WATERMAIN 1) Water Service y,o6 be 8- DIP. r � 15' RC 896.0 0 Vd North line of the SW • UTIL1TY PLAN MOLIN CONCRETE PRODUCTS Lino Lakes, Minnesota EX. 15' RC STORM SEWER 5 -12' RCp l.E. 899.31 cRAss 870 so. ft Edge of 'Water �� ■11. f the South 412 ft 4ofthe SW 1/4 NG et 1•0 e 0' 33 /— 33 2' Conc. V Curb 236.3 4 Propone Tanks Teie. Box Sign EX. MI R.E. 903.57 LE. 893.51 893.90 N 34.6 EX. CB lexR.E. 901.80 LE. 899.30 11 N EX..- LE. ... 57 36.1 FUTURE BLDG1 FFE 905.5 EX. 8" PVC SAN. SEW. GRAPHIC SCALE Ale 141 1591 L 999 10o r. EX. UI R.E. 1.E. 604,41 CUT INTO SEWER SANITARY 8'XBeR><tE LE 893.85 VERIFY) ONAL epee TRENCH Re 104 AND MR CONCRETE 81' PVC SAKI Y SEWER 0 1. . 804.65 ( at riff 1 1 9se8 . 60 n. EXTEND SERVICES INTO BUILDING AT LOCATION DESIGNATED BY OWNER Conc. Enclosure /39),7 74,972 sq.ft. EXISTING BUILDING (F.F.E. 905.5 + / -) CONNECT TO EX. 8' DIP WATERMMN W/ TAPPING SLEEVE AND VALVE 0 28. �� .0 93 {)% 36.0 ; 4.57: Conc. o o/ /o with or:, �ci ransformer. '� /"/T DING SETBACK LINE � �5.3, Conc. Bidg rt Roods � �+e G __ _fir :;;" • ✓ r--: - C Wall & Sig_ - - IS) BUILDING Ret -Walls Dirt M n EXISTING BITUMINOU 1058.90 / Eexxu A.C. RIWWLWIS cwaN A.G. C.G.S. t oFP -2� LILAC 673.00 N • /N �,2<04/2 �; o ao SJ a o 1= 16.00o /to 'D'.8 EX. MN R.E. 903.50 I.E. 893.38 0a 37.4 1,870 PATCH AND REPAIR EX. 91UINVOUS AS R K 8' -45' p4 thwestern Easement HYDRANT Belt Telephone Co. Per Doc. 705603 FIR+ MOLJN CONCRETE 415 LILAC ST UNO LAKES MN 55014 (651) 786 -7772 FAX (051) 788 -0229 l G ARE Curb Cut 8'-90' BEND 8'-45' BEND 1 -story conc. office bldg. 1 of the SW 1/4 10 -�- //89 /3/9/ -/ 6.511 sq.ft. 30.00'°o // ioi 10 00 /m Conc. ......:..o% OTrans. Pad *x,49.50 0T N00 °44'48 E OD C3 OD Q. co N 0) 01L O c East 26 O Ci • =_ I hereby ceetey that this plan was prepared by me or under my ,Peet supervision and that 1 on, o ally Licensed Pro- fessional Engineer under the lows of the Sate of Nennosota. CRAIG C SCJ+'UCNTINC 047E 8 /10/01 REC. 9.b 41295 Sift PLAAINRC f.ALIRE RING PLOW SWINS9iNti ANC. 91817 LEXl1G7 ? AVENGE' ALL Mai PNES MN SS014 -3685 (71S3) NZ-10 3 FAX (783) 786- 6O07 • DATE: 8/9/01 C2 PRO LEGEND: 1) Denotes Existing Contour 2) Denotes Proposed Countour • Proposed Storm 4) - 5- Denotes Silt Fence 5) -•- Denotes Silt Fence vet ,d Mnlmelim( in nn mad Seeli,., Native Want Community Plating Plan Seeding and Early Management Wxpe 1. Prior to site grading tin entire ago to be seeded should be treated lath o non- ssiecUve mama tabloid.. This Mil effectively eliminate the roots of the ubiquitous involve exotic pant a6 ss. nodding reed eatery yeas, quack gran, smooth brane grass. and Canada tined If U. area le not treated adequetely pier to sal disturbance. Tong -term naNbnanee and the integrity of the native plant community may be questionable. 2. Ober the site to pepse tin seedbed for nMirg. 3. Karroo and pock the area to be seeded. Thb ea mate an adequate seedbed for Anal seeding. Packing .e be aerheidered adequate Man only a slag footprint b left N the sot after walking arose the area 4. Proceed rah seeding N Ws May 10 mid June stir the "Mooted native seed mature and appropriate aver crop. A N the area to be needed le small a irregular N Maps, broodoarnng aged with hand broadcasting equipment is adequate. Equament must be capable of broadoastNg Moffy and light seed without plugging or settling N the having chamber. B. 11 the area to be wad is1orqe and regular N cape. needing should be cemplMW with o specialty designed native seed Wel. C. Seeding rotes for broadcast seeding ore 14-15 pounds per own for crows and 2-3 pounds per ecru for wldaoaers Seeding rota far dread seedkge am 11 -12 pounds per awe for gross and 1.6-2 ponds per oar for ,Wforers. 5. If the seed is broadcast, the area shoed be hammed and pocked again. This al provide the best to sad contact and moaMizs the certainty of seeding establbMant. 6. Clean rate gross mulch snood b. applied N moderate thickness. Mulch is adequately oppa.d Mean appradnat.y 505 of the sea b vbble after opploolion. 7. The seeding site Mould be mowed M least ens time during the seeding. semen yea and 2 times in the first year after be Mowing should completed Man weds on no more then t het tars. Morning height should be opprodmotely six inches if the mowed mulch is heavy It load be removed to prevent "smothering' the nee stings. a Spot treatment Minn a herbal: k to UMNot. undesirable seeds ratan the established stand may be required 10 a.gatelY .knirats a timiffbls plant species. Said 111Oursa far Mist Areas 1St fins m6 =Vases"' Canada wad rye Care grass Satoh gross Giant Manna gross SofMam bulrush Dale r Du4uM m rin„ Rum Blue joint gram Bottlebrush sedge Stay Buwum that Barad Mud Plantain Water Hemlock Sormat Bla ed aanal d an t e Culver* root Mid bergamot Flatiaped aster Toll a rover alto prairie clover Sneetwe Joe onosed teats kk Purple prairie clover Golden aaander Faun suwower Ma d mlaa+ ernAaser Paine blazing star Great Blue Leak Marsh manned Bea nag Ira Grey-Healed Conellowor Maintain tarn PanbW near bead /adrapogar amnia srgostrum atone 19.115 lamas car ,0.0 25.0% *whoa pectinate 3.05 Punlewn *gotum 5.05 Gyowb grads 5.05 Sciput wain 2.0% Scapa 0100.0 sea 2.0% Co6.nagrwtb mnodensis 2.05 Cares comma 1.05 Serous cannons • nUr .,w n 44..35 Alaimo wubcordotum 3.00 Clams m aaoloto mos E upatarlun per/oaaum 6.005 Rumeckb hHo 10.00% Kraft rotate 0.000 Wradea*t.n vk#daum 0.50% Maeda fistulae 5.005 Aster umbellate* 1.50% Mta nova. -apace 300% Thaotr,m data:rpum 3.00% D ata caadiuknn 5.00% Madan outunna. 1.00% Eupeterrrm maaubtum 6.000 twmado da4adoto S.005 Oda purareo ,5.00% Zino aura 3.001 Ndpab 6saaatlafdn 5.005 Wiantlws manintlloN 2.00% %JMr1e p alostocrya 4.005 Labatt aphati o 1.005 AWSpion imamate 3.001 nib vwsiada z00% RotbIdo pirate 7.005 Pyanal,.n rn vi aniano 1.00% inter L.anoseatue Lin'i 100.00% WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN MOLIN CONCRETE PRODUCTS Lino Lakes, Minnesota Se*I Ylahrrr fa Rimer Area Mot Indian Orals ads Sig bhiestem Lea bluest.m edema pprramno Canada Sid rye Satoh pros Ellecaryed arson Papa merle ad 1 beramon1 MINIrt palrte clover Common Yarrow Hoory vervain Prd'N sakersat�6ower Stiff Ookerr.d lama Goldenrod gadoxed rote sunikarer Smooth Mite Mir heartbeat' wader armada MadmIIen turban. Partridge Pea tick tread Prairie 6rzi gstar SorgoMrum ratans Andropagen antra Shisochryka a.r an Elyria amodensie Pu am virgatum Rudbeokb hirto Dad papaw Monardo D oha caadidurn Adrian m/Ifelian Verbena aricta Rata& pinnate Trodescaatb brocade Santiago Pdaa.e Mama halontholdes Pater Lewis Lbaa ebtero Nelentlsn medalled Calla fasiaubto Desmodurn co adaa re Lida pycaQOMyo ellEratt 15.05 30.001 10.0% 15.0% oa 0% 10.0% 15.05 4.05 5.011 1.0% 5.05 13.0% 1.05 2.0% 5.0% 0.510 12.0% 1.0% 2.m[ 7.95 7.0% LOS SOS 100.05 uxxY A.G. A.G. afroco C.G.S. J CO l )0 °44'48 "E to GRAPHIC SCALE as s M VI ( 8f lea! ) 1 loch - 60 ft. • WETLAND FILL AREA (11,466 SQ. FT.) MITIGATION AREA (13,201 SQ. FT.) A - 5 :1 (9,963 SQ. FT.) BUFFER ARE I N89°09' 02"W 900 1898 i 897 1TLAND TYPICAL S CTION SAD WETLAND EDGE 097 /- PROPOSED WirLAND J9OUNDA Y 896 PROPOSED N'ETLANP SURFACE (M NIA(UJI AO" HYDRIC SOILS) .IIS 4' SEED 441.7 I!T_URE -J.OR BUFFER 4RE1 20:1 BENCH (MINIMUM) BUFFER AREA (5:1 SLOPE FOR N. 16.5) • AIT_..._ ................. ..............».».... ......._.... ».. »............. ». USE .BOTlVif (895) 898 SEED 47XTUR/ FOR WET AREA I 897 PREPARED Fit, MOUN CONCRETE 415 ULAC ST LINO LAKES MN 55014 (691) 766 -7772 FAX (651) 7136 --0225 / hereby coley thou this pion was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that / am o duty Licensed Pro- fessional Fng e , undo, the laws of the Stott of annesoto. LY W G SCAIL/CN7 C DATE: 8/4/D1 REC. NO 41295 PLANAWAt PLOWER 9'1 NI NC. 41A� L EVNG1CW AMC ALE CIRCLE APES 1N .5074- .31x25 97E ENalNlarRINC OW) 765 -1943 FAX (7•3) 7116-6007 DATE: 8/9/01 C3 • • • AGENDA ITEM V. D. STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND Bob Kirmis /Alan Brixius September 11, 2001 Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit Amendment Centennial School District is requesting site and building plan and conditional use permit amendment approval to allow the construction of an elementary school upon the 79 acre Centennial Middle School site located south of I 35E and west of Lake Drive. Earlier this year, the City approved a rezoning of the 15 acres of land located north of the Middle School site from L -1, Limited Industrial to PSP, Public and a minor subdivision to allow the conveyance of the 15 acre parcel to the School District. Because the 15 acre elementary school parcel is to be combined with the adjacent 64 acre middle school site, the processing of a conditional use permit amendment is necessary. Resultantly, the middle school and proposed elementary school would be governed by a single conditional use permit. This review is based on the following plan submittals: Site Location Site Survey Overall Site Layout dated 8/13/01 Landscape Plan dated 8/13/01 Grading and Erosion Control Plan dated 8/13/01 Utility Plan dated 8/13/01 Floor Plans dated 8/13/01 Building Elevations dated 8/13/01 Rice Creek Watershed Correspondence dated 8/23/01 Environmental Board Comments dated (8/31/01) ANALYSIS CUP Evaluation Criteria: Because schools are listed as "conditional uses" within the PSP zoning district, the processing of a conditional use permit is necessary. The Ordinance states that the Planning and Zoning Board may recommend approval of and Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review /Conditional Use Permit September 11, 2001 Page 2 the City Council may order a conditional use permit only if it finds that the proposed use at the proposed location: A. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. B. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific plans and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinance. C. Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and/or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of the area. D. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. E. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. F. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. G. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are so designed as not to create congestion or an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. H. Will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. I. Will conform to specific standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular use. Land Use and Zoning: The City's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for industrial use. As part of the City's recent rezoning of the property from L -I, Light Industrial to PSP, Public /Semi - Public, a determination was made that the proposed use is consistent with industrial land use designation (Ord. 14 -1). • The following is a listing of existing land uses, guided land uses and zoning designations that surround the middle school /elementary school site. • • Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review /Conditional Use Permit September 11, 2001 Page 3 Lot Requirements: Previous approval of the minor subdivision (to create the subject parcel) was conditioned upon the combination of the 15 acre parcel with the adjacent Middle School parcel. Such condition was imposed to address lot width and setbacks concerns that would have resulted from the creation of an independent Elementary School parcel. The PSP District makes a specific allowance for campus type development and the existence of multiple buildings upon a single lot of record. In addition to the required lot combination, it was also required that a portion of Fourth Avenue which bisects the property to be vacated. Based on the premise that the 15 acre elementary school property will be combined with the adjacent middle school lot and that the segment of Fourth Avenue which bisects the property will be vacated, the proposed elementary school meets applicable PSP District lot and setback requirements as shown below Existing Land Use Guided Land Use Zoning North I -35W /Industrial Industrial L -I, Light Industrial South Single Family Residential Low Density Residential R -1, Single Family East Industrial and vacant Industrial L -I, Light Industrial West Institutional Industrial PSP, Public /Semi- Public Lot Requirements: Previous approval of the minor subdivision (to create the subject parcel) was conditioned upon the combination of the 15 acre parcel with the adjacent Middle School parcel. Such condition was imposed to address lot width and setbacks concerns that would have resulted from the creation of an independent Elementary School parcel. The PSP District makes a specific allowance for campus type development and the existence of multiple buildings upon a single lot of record. In addition to the required lot combination, it was also required that a portion of Fourth Avenue which bisects the property to be vacated. Based on the premise that the 15 acre elementary school property will be combined with the adjacent middle school lot and that the segment of Fourth Avenue which bisects the property will be vacated, the proposed elementary school meets applicable PSP District lot and setback requirements as shown below * Frontage along Elm Street Vehicular Traffic: As part of the recent rezoning of the property, findings were made that traffic generated by the proposed use will be within the capabilities of streets serving the property. Elm Street is scheduled for reconstruction in the Spring of 2002. The City Engineer has stated that the project would be substantially completed by Fall of 2002. As such, traffic generated by the proposed use will not exceed the capabilities of streets serving the property. Required Proposed Lot size minimum 1 acre 79 acres Lot width minimum 150 feet 682 feet* Setbacks: Buildings from collector /arterial street rear lot line side lot line Parking from street rear lot line side lot line 50 feet 30 feet 20 feet 15 feet 5 feet 10 Feet 120 feet 120 feet 560 feet 20 Feet 20 Feet 20 Feet * Frontage along Elm Street Vehicular Traffic: As part of the recent rezoning of the property, findings were made that traffic generated by the proposed use will be within the capabilities of streets serving the property. Elm Street is scheduled for reconstruction in the Spring of 2002. The City Engineer has stated that the project would be substantially completed by Fall of 2002. As such, traffic generated by the proposed use will not exceed the capabilities of streets serving the property. • • Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review /Conditional Use Permit September 11, 2001 Page 4 In regard to vehicular circulation, some concerns exist regarding the necessary backing maneuvers of buses in the designated bus parking lot. Such maneuvering creates a conflicting traffic pattern and raises safety concerns. Pedestrian and Bicycle Traffic: Pedestrian access to the school will be provided via an extension of the Middle School trailway /sidewalk system and is separated from bus traffic. The submitted site plan does not illustrate bicycle rack locations. It is recommended that bicycle racks be provided which allow students safe lockage of bicycles within convenient distance of the school's entries. As a condition of site and building plan/conditional use permit approval, the site plan should be revised to illustrate bicycle rack locations. Building Height: The two story elementary school measures 30' -5" in height and complies with the maximum 45 foot height requirement imposed in the PSP District. Building Materials: As shown on the submitted building elevations, the school will be finished in materials and colors that will match the nearby middle school. The base of the building will be finished in red face brick with textured EFIS (tan) being provided on the upper half of the structure. Smooth EIFS (tan) has been provided as an accent to the upper half of the gymnasium portion of the building. The proposed building materials meet the requirements of Section 3 Subd. 4.B of the ordinance and complement the materials and colors of the adjacent middle school. Phasing: The school has indicated that no future expansion of the school is anticipated. Parking: The standards for calculating the off - street parking requirements for elementary schools are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the Ordinance. As calculated below, a total of 147 off - street parking stalls are required of the proposed school. With a total of 173 stalls being provided on site, the minimum off - street parking supply requirements of the Ordinance have been satisfied. Code Requirement Required Spaces 34 classrooms 1 space per classroom 34 750 students 1 space for every 300 students 3 110 employees 1 space for each employee 110 No auditorium seats 1 space for every 4 auditorium seats 0 Total 147 With a total of 173 stalls being provided on site, the minimum off - street parking supply requirements of the Ordinance have been satisfied. Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review /Conditional Use Permit September 11, 2001 Page 5 Access /Circulation/Parking Stall Dimensions: The elementary school is to be accessed via a northerly extension of the middle school access drive from Elm Street. The standards for access and traffic circulation are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code and illustrated below. As shown above, the subject property meets all of the requirements of the referenced section. Green Area: The Ordinance requires that a minimum of 35 percent of the subject site be devoted to open space, yard and/or landscaped area. The combined middle school /elementary school site significantly exceeds the minimum green area requirement. Trash Enclosure: Trash and recycling handling activities are to occur on the east side of the school (alongside the gymnasium). As a condition of site and building plan/conditional use permit approval, all trash handling equipment must be screened from view of adjacent properties by a fence of wall at least six feet in height with a minimum opaqueness of 80 percent. Lighting: The applicant's submission did not include a photometric lighting plan nor does the site plan illustrate exterior lighting locations. According to Section 3 Subd. 4.H of the Ordinance, any lighting used to illuminate an off - street parking area must be hooded and arranged to deflect light away public streets and adjacent properties. As a condition of site and building plan/conditional use permit approval, a photometric plan and light fixture details should be submitted subject to review and approval by the City Council. It has been indicated that the proposed ball fields will not be illuminated. It should be noted that if the school district does decide to illuminate the field at some future point, it would be necessary to process a conditional use permit amendment. Signage: Institutional signage associated with the elementary school is governed by the City's sign ordinance and will be subject to a separate permit. All signs will be reviewed with the sign permit applications. Landscaping: Generally speaking, the submitted landscape plan is well conceived. The plan calls for a mixture of coniferous and deciduous plants, trees, and shrubs throughout the site. More specifically, a row of spruce trees (Black Hills or Colorado) have been Required Proposed Status Curbing Perimeter curbing Perimeter curbing Compliant Access Drive 24 feet 24 and 30 feet Compliant Stall Width 9 feet 9 feet Compliant Stall Depth 18 feet 20 feet Compliant As shown above, the subject property meets all of the requirements of the referenced section. Green Area: The Ordinance requires that a minimum of 35 percent of the subject site be devoted to open space, yard and/or landscaped area. The combined middle school /elementary school site significantly exceeds the minimum green area requirement. Trash Enclosure: Trash and recycling handling activities are to occur on the east side of the school (alongside the gymnasium). As a condition of site and building plan/conditional use permit approval, all trash handling equipment must be screened from view of adjacent properties by a fence of wall at least six feet in height with a minimum opaqueness of 80 percent. Lighting: The applicant's submission did not include a photometric lighting plan nor does the site plan illustrate exterior lighting locations. According to Section 3 Subd. 4.H of the Ordinance, any lighting used to illuminate an off - street parking area must be hooded and arranged to deflect light away public streets and adjacent properties. As a condition of site and building plan/conditional use permit approval, a photometric plan and light fixture details should be submitted subject to review and approval by the City Council. It has been indicated that the proposed ball fields will not be illuminated. It should be noted that if the school district does decide to illuminate the field at some future point, it would be necessary to process a conditional use permit amendment. Signage: Institutional signage associated with the elementary school is governed by the City's sign ordinance and will be subject to a separate permit. All signs will be reviewed with the sign permit applications. Landscaping: Generally speaking, the submitted landscape plan is well conceived. The plan calls for a mixture of coniferous and deciduous plants, trees, and shrubs throughout the site. More specifically, a row of spruce trees (Black Hills or Colorado) have been • • Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review /Conditional Use Permit September 11, 2001 Page 6 proposed along I -35W and canopy trees (Sugar Maple, Red Maple and White Ash) have been proposed along the periphery of the building. Sod has been proposed in along the perimeter of the school while the outlying areas (play fields etc) are to be seeded. The landscape plan specifies planting varieties only in a general sense (i.e. evergreen, canopy and understory trees). As a condition of site and building plan and conditional use permit approval, the variety of each individual planting should be specified. In addition, the Environmental Board has recommended that planting varieties be evaluated in terms of salt tolerance, particularly those plantings proposed along I -35W. Tree Preservation: As a condition of site and building plan and conditional use permit approval, a tree preservation plan should be submitted. Trees considered worthy of preservation by the Environmental Board include some Eastern Red Cedars and a row of Pines on the south side of the proposed building. Fencing: While the site plan illustrates an existing fence along I -35W, it does not indicate whether or not any new fencing is to be provided on site. In review of the site plan, it is suggested that fencing be provided in the following areas: • Along the east side of the play fields to prevent stray balls from entering the adjacent wetland. • Along the sides of the play areas (north and west of the school) which border the bus parking lot. Play Fields: As shown on the submitted site plan, two play fields have been proposed east of the elementary school. The southerly play field is also to be utilized as softball field. As mentioned previously, the softball field is not to be illuminated. Loading: Loading activities are to occur on the east side of the building. The area is provided ample area for service vehicle maneuvering and will be screened via evergreen plantings (proposed to the north and south of the drive lane). Wetland: As depicted on the site plan, a wetland exists in the eastern area of the site. The Rice Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plan submission and has recommended to table with authorization for administrative action (TWAFAA) subject to the receipt of information identified in the attached correspondence. Grading, Drainage and Utilities: A grading/drainage plan and utility plan have been submitted for review. As noted on the utility plan, the proposed building encroaches on an existing utility easement. The acceptability of this condition as well as the grading/drainage plan and utility plan should be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. • Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review /Conditional Use Permit September 11, 2001 Page 7 It also should be noted that the Environmental Board has recommended that the area on the western side of the bus parking lot be considered for infiltration purposes. Environmental Board Action: Comments of the Environmental Board dated 8/31/01) are attached. OPTIONS 1. Recommend approval of the site and building plan/conditional use permit amendment request (to allow the construction of an elementary school within a PSP, Public /Semi- Public District) based on the findings outlined in the September 11, 2001 planning report and subject to the conditions outlined by staff. 2. Recommend denial of the site and building plan/conditional use permit amendment request (to allow the construction of an elementary school within a PSP, Public /Semi- Public District) based on findings of fact from the Planning Commission. 3. Table the application and request more information. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the site and building plan/conditional use permit to allow the construction an elementary school in a PSP, Public /Semi - Public zoning District. This recommendation is based on the findings contained in this report and subject to the conditions listed below. 1. The elementary school site is combined with the middle school site to create a single lot. 2. A site plan is submitted which encompasses the entire middle school /elementary school. 3. The area on the western side of the bus parking lot be considered for infiltration purposes. 4. The landscape plan is revised to specify the variety of each individual planting. 5. Planting varieties indicated on the landscape plan shall be evaluated in terms of salt tolerance, particularly those plantings proposed along the I -35W. 6. A tree preservation plan is submitted subject to City approval. • 7. The site plan is revised to illustrate bicycle rack locations. Centennial School District - Elementary School Site and Building Plan Review /Conditional Use Permit September 11, 2001 Page 8 8. All trash handling equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties by a fence of wall at least six feet in height with a minimum opaqueness of 80 percent. 9. A photometric lighting plan and light fixture details are submitted subject to review and approval by the City Council. All lighting used to illuminate off - street parking areas shall be hooded (i.e. shoe box fixtures) and arranged to deflect light away public streets and adjacent properties. 10. All site signage comply with the applicable requirements of the sign ordinance. 11. Fencing shall be provided along the east side of the play fields (to prevent stray balls from entering the adjacent wetland) and along the sides of the play areas (north and west of the school) that border the bus parking lot. • • 5. I5 15 0 9 !maw miff EsElr 11Elaqm011111 FOOMMI.E. 4154 OUTLOT 8. PARK 1 NORTH 3 5.0. -56 GEORGE 2 24 5 10 i 4 5 12 LS A 10 stJ NO. 17 • 0 ,..K9 015 1,011.21 ,§? w -441 '8AerKNTY 110'E SbRVEYOB • SCALE I" = 1 500' RESHANAU [/4 1/2 MILE 3/4 , LAKE SITE LOCATION RUG -23 -2001 15:53 CITY OF LINO LAKES TRANSMISSION RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT 3585 Lexington Ave. N, Suite 330 Arden Hills, MN 55126 J - Message 651 382 24ee P.02 /05 FROM Rice Creek Watershed District Janell Miersch, Program Coord. oVall TO Lino Lakes Page(s) 4 / 8/23/01 12:37 PM NOTICE OF PERMIT APPLICATION STATUS At their meeting held August 22, 2001, the Board of Managers of the Rice Creek Watershed District took action on your Permit Application as shown on the attached document. The following definitions may be helpful to acquaint you with our procedure and effect timely permit issuance: TWAFAA (Tabled with Authorization for Administrative Action) = The District has nearly all exhibits required for adequate review and issuance of a permit; you have 90 days to submit the required item(s) without going back before the Board of Managers, but this action reverts to a TABLE if the 90 days elapse. Please submit additional exhibits with your application number affixed in triplicate. Failure to identify your exhibits by Permit Application number could mean a delay in issuing your permit. If your project requires a cash surety, the surety will be kept through final inspection to assure erosion control measures remain current as shown in plan and also for compliance with other permit requirements. The first $5,000 must be cash - a check from the applicant is acceptable. Amounts over $5,000 are accepted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or an insurance company bond. Since your project requires an easement, this can be submitted either drawn on the preliminary plat or as a separate legal document. Guidelines for a separate legal document are available upon request. After receipt and review of additional exhibits, more information may be required for clarification to ensure that District's requirements have been met. If you have any questions, please call the District Office at (651)766 -4191, c: City of Lino Lakes Applicant's Agent John Krausert, Rehder & Assoc. Inc. fax: 651 -452 -9797 Correspondence RCWD File #01 -96 JM TiUU GJ- ..VV_ C.: J. G477 r . ✓JJi �J • Rice Creek Watershed District Permit Application Number 01 -96 • • Applicant: Independent School District 12 Agent: 4070 North Road Circle Pines, MN 55014 Ph: 763- 792 -6000 Fx: 763 - 792 -6050 Purpose: Locati on: T -R -S: John Krausert Rehder & Associates, Inc. 3440 Federal. Drive, Ste. 240 Eagan, MN 55112 Ph: 651- 452 -5051 Fx: 651- 452 -9797 Final Site Drainage Plan and Wetland Alteration Plan for the Centennial Elementary School, 17± acres. One -half mile north of 109th Avenue and southeast of I -35 W, Lino lakes. 31 -22 -18 dad 31 -22 -17 cbc Recommendation: Table with authorization for administrative action pending receipt of: 1. Soil Boring Log. 2. Additional incorporation of infiltration practices. 3. Pond skimmer and emergency overflow details. 4, Revised Erosion Control Plans specifying silt fence around excavated pond, disturbed area and pond revegetation specifications, and excavation of infiltration/ponding area to final grade after site stabilization. 5. Legal document with satisfactory form and description granting ponding and flowage easements over all onsite hydrologic features. 6. Copy of MPCA NPDES Permit Application. 7. Cash surety in the amount of 55,000. Exhibits: 1, Permit Application dated August 8, 2001, received August 9, 2001. 2. Agent Authorization Letter prepared by Centennial Schools, dated August 9, 2001, received August 9, 2001. Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. 8/17/01 • nu U' -G- G�'JGJl 1J • JJ l.1 ur L11YU Lt'1ttCJ Permit Aoolication No. 01 -96 Independent School District 12 OJ 1 7LG 64477 r . L'1µ / cD 3. Grading and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Rehder & Associates, Inc., dated August 13, 2001, received August 13, 2001. 4. Infiltration worksheet prepared by Rehder & Associates, Inc., undated, received August 13, 2001. 5. Hydrologic calculations prepared by Rehder & Associates, Inc., dated August 13, 2001, received August 13, 2001. 6. Existing and proposed Subwatershed Boundary Maps prepared by Rehder & Associates, Inc., undated, received August 13, 2001. 7. Wetland Delineation Report prepared by Aquatic EcoSolutions, Inc., dated May 7, 2001, received August 16, 2001. 8. RCWD Permit Files 96 -39, 96 -20 and 96 -18. Findings: 1. Proposed project entails construction of the Centennial Elementary School which will result in approximately 5.7± acres of new impervious area. This site is located directly north of the existing Centennial Middle School (RCWD Permit 96 -18). RCWD Permit 96 -39 was issued for street and utilities and a Wetland Alteration Plan for roadway to serve the Centennial Middle School. RCWD Permit 96 -20 was reviewed but never issued for a 23± acre industrial site north of Centennial Middle School. 2. Proposed stormwater management for this site entails excavation of a long linear ponding system with two NURP cells and a downstream shallower area intended to serve as an infiltration area. This pond would in turn discharge to downstream wetlands tributary to Anoka County Ditch 10 -22 -32 which is ultimately tributary to Marshan Lake. The proposed ponding system is designed in accordance with District rate control and water quality treatment requirements. Additional details are required to verify compliance with the District infiltration standard. 3. The Wetland Delineation Report identifies two wetland basins (Type 1 and 2) onsite. Proposed impact to these wetlands includes 4,760 sq. ft. of fill. This may qualifies for the WCA deminimis exemption. Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. 8/17/01 • • HUU- 23 -2UU1 15 54 L i I Y OF L 1 NU LHK�5 b51 ,b2 J4 . l�5�1�5 Permit Application No. 01 -96 Independent School District 4.412 4. The 100 -year elevation of the proposed pond is lower than the 100 - year elevation for the pond/wetland on the Middle School grounds (902.3). The proposed first floor elevation of 907.0 satisfies the Districts first floor freeboard requirements. 5. An Erosion Control Plan has been submitted specifying silt fence downstream of all graded areas and riprap at all stormsewer outfalls. A revised Erosion Control Plan is required specifying disturbed area and pond revegetation specifications, silt fence around excavated ponding area, and excavation of ponding areas to final grade after substantial site stabilization. 6. A legal document with satisfactory form and description granting ponding and flowage easements over all onsite hydrologic features is required. Board Action: Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. 8/17/01 TOTAL P.05 • • • Environmental Memo To: Jeff Smyser From: Marty Asleson CC: Michael Grochala Date: August 31, 2001 Re: Environmental Board Recommendations LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AUGUST 29, 2001 RECOMMENDATIONS The Lino Lakes Environmental Board made the following recommendations on August 29: 1. Centennial School District/New Elementary School Site Plan Review. • Page 1 Motion to approve with conditions made by Mike Trehaus, second by Tere O'Connel; all approved. Conditions • Recommend that the City re -focus on the priorities set forth in the current Surface Water Management Plan in the new Surface Water Plan review process, so that surface water issues are better understood in developments such as the Centennial School District Site. • Investigate all Surface Water Treatment Train© possibilities on the site, including the idea of the use of the area on the western side of the bus parking lot for infiltration purposes. • • Use the Surface Water Treatment Train@ design on this site as an educational opportunity in the schools. • • • Move the existing Eastern Red Cedars on the site to a protected location. Use in the design if possible. • Save end portions of the Pine row on the south side of the project if possible. • Use native plants in the ground covers for all surface water treatment areas and other areas where possible. • Submit an Operation and Maintenance Plan for surface water issues, including a plan for native plant maintenance. • Preliminary landscape design plants should be evaluated for site appropriateness, and in particular the plants designed along the highway should be salt - tolerant. • Use "shoe -box' or low- impact, no -spill lighting on the site. 2. Molin Concrete Site Plan Review Motion made to table pending; submission of landscape plan, tree inventory, Rice Creek Watershed's TWAFFA requirement information, lighting plan, an understanding of chemical use on the site, use of well heads on site as indicated by the County Well Point Index. The Landscape Plan should show the use of native groundcover plants and trees, the berm area on the north should be looked at for effectiveness and the use of irrigation, and the that the City should re -focus on the priorities set forth in the current Surface Water management Plan review process so that the surface water issues are better understood in plan review sites such as Molin Concrete. Motion was made by Connie Grundhoffer, second by Amy Donlin, all approved. 3. Saddle Club /Preliminary Plat Review • Page 2 • • Motion to approve with conditions made by Tere O'Connel, Second By Connie Grundhoffer. 3 voted Yes/1 vote for no by Mike Trehaus /1 abstain by Amy Donlin. Conditions • All former recommendations made at the March 25th Environmental Board Meeting still apply. May 30th Environmental Board Meeting • The Tree Preservation needs to be better well defined. Species were not indicated, just numbers. Note —The Environmental Coordinator has an electronic copy of the Tree Inventory with species indicated. • Special concern for another 70 houses platted, with reference to the "147" units per year figure, and the number of units approved in the last year. • Shrink lots down if possible, in particular lots in Block 2 so that this area can be included in the greenway. Vote 5 to 1 in favor of approval, Mike Trehus voting against. • Use native vegetation in all surface water treatment areas • Buffer areas should be sign posted • Page 3 • • • % �o 63g �1 G '` 639 ' d DAP '/ 9w 18155. saa ear; I 22 yam:; --- I�.�n .9{ . /,•.'.__ ,. . ..+.a_aT ten' �J' - - - -- I ' 7 589'4,4'30'W .n ! —" 538.57 i PONQ Woter env. 3 896.0 As f 6 -8 -01 1 :I •I MIDWEST Land Surveyors & Civil Engineers. Inc. ft.. 7erstanse ° reassassal as emelatas .. ten area, .Dent tone.., aa.*a l t......a le y'u N005( '44 "£ TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY for CENTENNIAL INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #12 Put edenttia, of We beats :rate., lf based uom gm anent .,mate Canty Sabo. GRAPHIC SCALE m ¢❑ Dew.. Ere. Csfa ern •.•p 1oau Eaety oast 801 p Dena, Ealan awed End Ca, Rene, E,sen, D, veer amen CAW/ Man, Dew, EsLLt, L*8 Pa. • Duet, Ewfe, Seat, 5.w W,ara 0YI.wa 8 Savlary Sm., ® ante. Elba, Stew 5... t — a — D.ra, t it^9 stall, S..r ant, &Wt, T.iaPtat tae a1 D.wes Exi tip 08947 Pet - — Dena, Earn, Mann. `nn Devotes Emit, SPef Ce.etien trio Denotes Too of Cob • Dar,.. 00009 aetr rare -_4Ta— Daenefa Ewan, i foot Centaur t4wwl -sa— D.reea Erdaet, 5 root Contour tell — — Donal. Ettt9 Itaw9rewd Ca — aorta 6 /teas Dw.ad Electric — ur — Dower area E0MM* Sete flea *a Gaf09 A.C. Ten Laafa E.t.a Tres u_w Dome— GMte CO, or Tama NO S - IA. Vocation er eta Avenue Pee bewuOan fro ,7-4.2 and Document Mo. 11791..s ambiguous ft d.lennund *Char , not me antic react , nob wen mead was moot.. - Utily taco.. and ea.a,ats ws per swum., pans end or. • - Ste Naet• of T far avow., aw e0frt.. boundary 8Tavn9tkn Asa as° hatady artng that Ors +V+,. -teen - t,wt ., a.waaer as mat 1 as WY Lams. ad Save, great as ben el rat State of Pants Mooney M. 8amrmn -Minnesota .«,.: Land Staab, 9r be f0Saf Date P-S-01 SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS • vns.is: • lrmstronQ Turcie'k i S'14.-old and 1 v'deen I.IAi' 1 \ OVERALL LAYOUT PLAN L1.0 / Se a,l.E: ;✓ 1000' Architect ur, 9501 Enutnoerni., (Golden Il nnina Ilev hrl. Interior D i' nt '1(10 Minneapolis Minnesota 55427 Tei 63 540 3731 F..v• (31 !, 1289 PFROJECT INIFO1:MATIONI: OWNER: INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 12 4107 NORTH ROAD CIRCLE PINES, MINNESOTA 53014 PHONE: 163.192.6010 FA /: 1631316.25o 4TY JOHN CNRISTIGN5EN SURVEYOR: MIDWEST LAND SURVEYING INC. 110 E. RIVER ROAD ANOKA, MINNESOTA 35303 PHONE: 133112.9099 ARCHITECT/ L4N00 A. Av _ ARCHITECT: 630+R J 6501 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 300 MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 33421 PHONE: 133.5453131 FA4: 1535253255 ATT: KEVIN TEPPEN- LANDSCAPE 4RCHITEO. ._ ... .. ATT: NANCY LABISSONIERE- ARCHITECT CL✓IL ENGINEER- RENDER + ASSOCIATES 3440 FEDERAL DRIVE SUITE 240 SAGAN, MINNESOTA 35122 PHONE: 6511523031 F 3/ 631.452.131 47T: JOHN KR4U8ERT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE: BIDDING: SEPTEMBER 2001 START CCN5151.01ICN: OCTOBER 2001 SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION) JULY :002 SITE STATISTICS: • ACRES_ 130 •+- • PONDING 4RE45: SEE CIVIL PLANS • WETLAND IMPACT AREA: SEE CIVIL PLANS • W'ET4LND REPLACEMENT AREA: SEE CIVIL PLANS • DRIVE LANES ARE 21' WIDE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PARKING STALLS ARE 9'::20' • DRIVE LANES AND DRIVEWAYS WILL BE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT • SIDEWALKS WILL BE CONCRETE • 3' 54TI4)1415 WILL BE BITUMINOUS ALL O✓RIVELANES AND PARKING ISLANDS WILL HAVE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER PARKING STATISTICS: 1 SPACE FOR EACH CLASSROOM: 34 (34 CLASSROOMS) 1 SPACE FOR EVERY 3O0 STUDENTS: 3 (150 STUDENTS! 1 554CE FOR EACH EMPLOYEE: 110 (110 EMPLOYEES' 1 SPAGE FO R EVERT 4 FEAT. 11,4 AUD130)51 31 0 (1,10 AUDITORIUM) TOTAL REQUIRED: 131 TOTAL TOTAL PROVIDED: 113 TOTAL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR BUILDING 'ELEVATIONS. EEVTEERIOR .'E41URE5, AUG z, 2001 E ( 3..'433 :� a , b 1 NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE LINO LAKES, MN 55014 L- 1�-cill PLAN I, i 720.12 PYFDPERB: :1 PL-1.1r FIELD „I .PDPERTY LIRE r----N...__-------2' ‘.., • . I , ,I;i•-:71..-:4,17.• :::•-• .),. / - - -.• 7------.1-7-: . „----7-1 1 '''' ,,,-.._..:1/ E• L 4 t.' ° 5 ' 1 ------ . • /..----- ,:•• ,--, -- . • ,--..., ---,......._- / 1. —. • •• ' P ■ I ,--, .,, L 9 ER:REE: ,„ i,,...,c.,. , '"...: Pt-4.0 FIELZ--• I.' i 1 / ;EEC 1 / 220' I EXISTING 35 5T4-1..... BUS LOT GATE • • • • • PR3.7ER77 LiPF ,•.. 1 , SITE LAYOUT & LANDSCAPE PLAN L1.1 Annstrona Toretli (:.1c.old and Rvdeen Arc0210et;11, 5501 E2(111111,142E GOidc'll HI1111111112 alio,. Rd . Inters er 0311E,, -'.■)I.. 3iil; 1:111,131,ipi -11C11 r I - Min neapcii,: au!,sot., 55427 Tel 7E3-545-3731 Fr:x Wi3-525-2289 NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE LINO LAKES, MN 55014 PROJECT INFORMATION: OLNER: INDEPENDENT DISTRICT 12 4101 NORTH 12040 CW-LE PINES, MINNESOTA 55014 PHONE: 163.132.6010 16515.2.6050 ATT: .10149 CHRISTIANSEN SURVPYOR- MIDUEST LAND SURvEllt‹.-. INC. 110 E. RIVER ROAD ANOKA. MINNESOTA 55303 PHONE: 153.112:5059 ARCHITECT: LANDAP. ARCHITECT: ATSIR 9501 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 300 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOT.4.` 55421 P14ONE: 193.545313I FAX: 195525,3229 ATT: KEVIN TEPPEN- LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ATT: NANCY LABISSONIERE- ARCHITECT CIVIL ENGINEER: RE140ER 45.5CCI4TE5 3440 FEDERAL DRIVE SUITE 240 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: 651.4525051 FAx: e61.452.9191 ATT: KRAUSERT CONSTRUCTION 34H001&54 BIDDING: SEPTEMBER 2001 S TART CONSTRUCTION: OCTOBER 200! SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION: JULT :002 S ITE STATISTICS: • 4CF-5: 15.0 • PONDING ARMAS: SEE CP/IL P21.1013 • WETLAND IMPACT AREA: 590 CIVIL. PLANS • WE_TALND IP-ACENIENT AREA: SEE CIVIL PLANS • DRIVE LANES ARE 24' WIDE Le4LEES NOTED OTHERWISE • PARKING STALLS ARE 9I::20 • DRIVE LANES AND DR1vEWA1S WILL 99 BITU11IN0u5 PAVEMENT • SIDEWALKS WILL BE CONCRETE. • E.• PATHWAYS WILL SE BITUMINOUS • ALL DRIVELANES AND PARKING ISLAM:* WILL HAVE CONCRETE cURS 4ND GUTTER PARKING STATISTIC-3: I SPACE FOR EACH CLAS3RO077: 34 (34 CLA9EIRO03151 I SPACE FOR EVERY 300 STUDENTS: 3 3150 979DENT3) 1 SPACE FOR EACH -EMPLOYEE: 110 010 EMPLOY9E51 I SPACE FOR EVERT 4 :SEATS IN AUDITCRILITI: 0 (NO A)JDTORIUM: TOTAL REQUIRED: 151 TOTAL ToTAL PROVIDED, 13 ToTAL. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLA140 FOR BUILDING ELEVATIONO. 9430711071 PLANT SCHEDULE EVEIRGIZEEN TREES e-,..eacAL BLACK HILLS SPRKE plaucu NEANta CDLORADO SPRUCE !Pc. pcnBenc CANOPY TREES REPARGE STR. LEADER NO V 000T317 B•9 3007 ESGAR MAPLE Acc, c.cc,-,..c. 30" NT. EZ 2- IDI STR LEADER NO VI CROTCH RED MAPLE Auer rubn.en se BLAcc 3.12 11 -SA 111111114. anevicann •Auturm 3132-4' T41NT014 YEW TIN-us , neata T.uoccan es COCT. LAVDERSTORY/ ACCENT TREES • rIA T 10107148.955 4144139070 Dr,teerocc cr.:clan! leAtnlic 30" NT. BB B. HT. CLI.PT PORI &PRP. 514DU:CRABAP1743 Hutu. Ben, No, ea AMR MAPLE - 01411P 4car curnale Name' T41NT014 YEW TIN-us , neata T.uoccan Be COCT. I 7014904 CT 4.9 111708 Ecieccee •-• 0332133 'AB' 30" NT. CONT. FULL 10771 TO 0314 KDR.E-41LIL.AD 30 3718 nleyeri 'Peleoi, 30. RT. GOB'. 01340e T41NT014 YEW TIN-us , neata T.uoccan 30. 14. COCT. .a.Amaataac 31B117041 YNurram c1041131 , 30" NT. DORT. PLANTING NOTES PRDVICE 500 N 19510 45 NIOIDATED EN PLAN ALL AREAS ROT DESIBRATED TO BE 500070. 0818.1. ME aaacaa A8.0 rULCIRD. 2.114. ERRE. 1E05 AND 1959 54)10995 4)114 5093,3090 1.54.44)1 UNLEEB 0,1ERIBBE NOTED. MULC1-11-1ATEPAL 700911ll5lPU14" DEP,. BrrE L4ND5r..4PE FF-DIB., • • t — • \ \ ,\ \ `, \ —CUe9 (00330 .,..., „ , _ __ __ it r =g . .. ,,, „: r -I ' , ' , , ,,, :„.-!,._,.., ;J....4 I ....,,...._ --- - , ,„. i ,r1 !f . , ___ —_ —_— -.—.L fir_ et tad Top selesa a�' 1 I/ 1 • /, _ - -i'. / .7i wRECr *Mt stame117 eitismnavr l Boundary & Topographical information was prepared by Midwest Land Surveyors & Civil Engineers, Inc. This information has not been verified as to its accuracy or completeness by Render & Associates, Inc. Armstrong Skold and Rydeen Inc. Architecture Engineering Interior Design Landscape Arch. 8501 Golden Valley Rd., Suite 300 Minneapolis Minnesota 55427 Tel: 763 -545 -3731 Fax: 763- 525 -3289 iI Y a 4, w,es I= Pi it X �N �y\ /I `I�IA 10 / �v.wes010(07 Vacated /7i AVENUE POND W rer Eiev. =896.0,6 As Of 6 -8 -01 Tar 30 Sa 7.- LS' 0ER 0003 ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE No SCALE 301■PAC3 n¢- FJtaAV.gEp 505 INLET PROTECTION NO SCALE 9R[ a5^ � Y A 3 2. RAO%aNNLY 2800 tffi) RIPRAP DETAIL NO SCALE EROSION CONTROL NOTES 0 - Contractor/owner are responsible for obtaining, if necessary, a Notional Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Stone Water Permit for Construction Activity before eonatruction begins. ® - Contractor is responsible for all notifications and inspections required by General Storm Water Permit. 0 - 28 erasion control measures shown shall be installed prior to grading operations and maintained until all areas disturbed have been restored. pi - Sweep paved Public streets as essary where 00nstru5Uan sediment hos been deposited. QS - Each area disturbed by construction shad be restored per the specifications within two weeks of substantial completion al 7a009 in Nat area. © - See landscape plans and specifications for turf establishment. REM CONTROL DEVICE OPERATION SCHEDULE INSTALLATION REMOVAL SILT FENCE ROCK ENTRANCE NURP POND INLET PROTECTION LEGEND • PROPOSED MANHOLE PROPOSED CATCH BASIN 1 PROPOSED HYDRANT PROPOSED GATE VALVE . 4 PROPOSED FLARED END - PROPOSED STORM SEWER se PROPOSED WORRY SEWER - PROPOSED WATERMA N PROPOSED CONCRETE M. PROPOSED STD. DUTY NUMINOUS fail PROPOSED HEAVY DU7Y acuminous -ow- PROPOSED CONTOUR • 01 PROPOSED ELEVATION --a-- SILT FENCE — • • • — CONSTRUCTION UMI75 PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION AFTER TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN RESTORED PART OF INIfAL GRADING WHEN ROAD3 /AY PAVING OPERATIONS BEGIN CONSTRUCT BEFORE MAIN GRADING N/A SAME DAY STRUCTURE WHEN TRIBUTARY AREA IS PAYED 15 CONSTRUCTED GRADING NOTES Qi - 50 elevations shown are to Fool surfaces. — • — BOUNDARY/ROW/BLOCK UNE EASEMENT LOT UNE BUILDING/PARKING SETBACK UNE 5 SOIL BORING —� DRAINAGE ARROW — w — EXISTING WATERMNN — 5— amino SANITARY SEWER —ST— EXISTING STORM SEWER —0— /LUSTING BURIED CAS UNE — E — EXISTING BURIED ELECTRIC UNE — r — COSTING BURIED TELEPHONE UNE — n— COSTING BURIED mansion UNE Asa— DIMING CONTOUR . IFS 00 020950 ELEVATION } 1 o 25 50 100 'SO Scale In Feet Reltde- .8t Associates -Inc Civil Bagmen; Manners and Lard Sermenrs sob Federal D Su Eagan NUmn seas 551-46¢.10. F � 99 a =al mkCsinthder.m. PROJECT NO.. 001-1278.020 DRAWNG FILE: 1278029.0450 REVISIONS _m sueumu a -ra-m 1 hereby certify that this Plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that a ably Licensed Professional Engineer der the laws of the Slate of Minnesota. Date Reg No Nome I NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE LINO LAKES MN 55014 IGRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN DRAWN BY PROJECT N0. SHEET NPA 00081 G CHECKED ell DATE 003 8 -13 -01 • • G _ r :i I .a 900.70 ie PEER aan. s OMIER J Al Nr 397.0 1 J OnwiNews Bouncy & Topogmpnical information was Prepared by Midwest Land Surveyors & Civil Engineers. Pc. This informoiion hoc not been verified as to its accuracy or completeness by Rehder & Associates. Inc. Armstrong Torseth Skold and Rydeen Inc. Architecture 8501 Engineering Golden Planning Valley Rd., Interior Design Suite 300 Landscape Arch. Minneapolis Minnesota 55427 Tel: 763- 545 -3731 Fax 763- 525 -3285 fel.Ga0 Ma�t�A eNt :?y uneesr'.. 10 II �I' iY I•_ Ner.,s /N7 -_:ed Vt%VtiE POND :Voter Ele,- 896.04 As of 5 -8 -01 LL 0 UTILITY NOTES - Al services to extend to 0 pant 11' from proposed building. - Veri(y a8 service locations and inverts with mechanics engineer before construction. - A8 wotmnoin to hove a minimum 'of 7.0' of cover. LEGEND • PROPOSED 5NHOLE - PROPOSED CATCH BASIN 4 PROPOSED HYDRA047 PROPOSED GATE VALVE 4 PROPOSED FLARED ENO PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED WATERMAN f-�.. PROPOSED CONCRETE _ 5 PROPOSED STD. our BITUMINOVS EM PROPOSED HEAVY DUTY BIIUIRNOUS =3PROPOSED CONTOUR • ® PROPOSED ELEVATION -■-••.0— SILT FENCE — .. • — CONSTRUCTION LIMPS — • — BOUNDARY /ROW /BLOCK LINE EASEMENT LOT LINE - — BUIURNG /PARKING SETBACK LINE e SOU BORING —� DRAINAGE ARROW — ,. — EXISTING WATERMAN — z — EXISTING SANITARY SEWER —Sr— EXISTING STORM SEWER — c — EXISTING BURIED GAS UNE — E — EX571N0 BURIED ELECTRIC 01NE — r — EXISTING BURIED TELEPHONE UNE — W— EXISTING BURIED 170590/ON UNE - -++e0— EX517NG CONTOUR . NS SO EXISTING ELEVATION REIlCIBT- CCSSOGZ!!S'BSIJEC Coal Engineers. Planners and L+ndS fro SeeoFed On Su Cavan Min -903, • F ai :6.53•435-9030 marl inrc4.4abier.com PROJECT NO.: 001- 1278.029 DRAWING FIE 1278029.000 REVISIONS 1 n reby certify that this plan was prepared by cm subNma g_p -0; ++* a arse: y 01 p[rvpAan aneerh00 L ar 0075 Li0 ed6 Proiesronol Engr der the noes f the State of AGnnesnta. Doss Name Reg No._ ARY SCHOOL NEW, ELEMENTARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE UNO LAKES, MN 55014 UTILITY PLAN 1 0 3 SO fco f9a Scofe In Feet DRAWN 07 P120.157i N0, SHEE 00091 DATE C2 BGF 8- 13-01 217-P PJ ii I P A mm IIIM MI 15 15' 15' 15' 15' �?J FIRST FLOOR REFERENCE PLAN NORTH 9101 KINDERGARTEN A102 TOILET ROOM A103 TOILET ROOM A104 EARLY CHILDHOOD 9105 NOT USED 9106 NOT USED A107 RESOURCE ROOM A108 STORAGE 9109 COMMONS A110 KINDERGARTEN 9111 TOILET ROOM A112 TOUT ROOM A113 KINDERGARTEN 9114 CORRIDOR A114ASTAIRWAY A115 VESTIBULE 9116 CLASSROOM 9117 CLASSROOM 9118 CLASSROOM 9119 CLASSROOM 9120 NOT USED 9121 COMMONS 9122 STAFF TOILET ROOM 9123 CUSTODIAN CLOSET 9124 BOYS' TOILET 90014 9125 GIRLS TOILET ROOM 9126 TOILET ROOM ENTRANCE A127 NOT USED 9128 CLASSROOM 9129 CLASSROOM A130 TITLE I 9131 TECHNOLOGY CLOSET 9132 CORRIDOR 9133 43511801E 9134 STAIRWAY 9135 VESTIBULE A136 ELEVATOR LOBBY A137 ELEVATOR EQUIP ROOM 9138 STORAGE 8101 KINDERGARTEN 8102 TOILET ROOM 8103 WORK / MAIL ROOM B103A CORRIDOR 8104 VESTI8UL 8105 GENERAL OFFICE 8106 STUDENT ADVOCATE 8107 PRINCIPAL 8108 PASSAGE 8109 STORAGE 8110 CONFERENCE ROOM 8111 MUM -USE ROOM 8112 CORRIDOR 8113 WOMEN'S TOILET ROOM 8114 MEWS TOILET ROOM 8115 CUSTODIAN CLOSET 8116 BG1S' TOILET ROOM 9117 HEAD END ROOM 8118 OFFICE / WORKROOM 8119 NOT USED 8120 MEDIA CENTER 8121 NOT USED B12 COMPUTER LAB 8123 STORAGE ROOM 8124 GIRLS TOILET ROOM 8125 NURSE / COT ROOM 8126 EXAMINATION ROOM 8127 NOT USED 8128 TOILET ROOM 8129 NOT USED 8130 CORRIDOR 8131 VESTIBULE 8132 STAIRWAY 8133 VESTIBULE 8134 STORAGE UNIT'D` SEE SHEET 9G 0101 ART 0102 KILN / STORAGE 0103 AUNTY ROOM C104 STUDIO 3105 CORRIDOR 0106 MSMI 0107 TOILET / SHOWER ROOM 0108 MUSIC 0109 PASSAGE 0110 MUSIC 0111 NOT USED 0112 NOT USED 2113 NOT USED 0114 CORRIDOR 0115 NOT USED C116 CLl.SR001.1 3117 CLASSROOM 0118 CLASSROOM 0119 CLASSROOM C120 NOT USED C121 COMMONS 0122 STAFF TOILET ROOM 0123 CUSTODIAN CLOSET 0124 BOYS' TOILET ROOM C125 GIRLS' TOILET ROOM 0126 TOILET ROOM ENTRANCE 2127 NOT USED 0128 CLASSROOM C129 CLASSROOM C130 GIRLS' TOILET ROOM 2131 CUSTODIAN CLOSET C132 TOILET ROOM ENTRANCE 0133 8015 TOILET ROOM C134 CORRIDOR 0135 VESTIBULE C136 STAIRWAY 3137 VESTIBULE C138 STORAGE UNIT '0' D101 YARD STORAGE 0102 NOT USED 0103 STAFF DINING 0104 KITCHEN OFFICE D105 SERVING AREA . D106 KITCHEN 0107 DRY FOOD STORAGE 0108 PASSAGE 0109 COOLER 0110 FREEZER 0111 NOT USED 0112 PASSAGE 0113 10931 ROOM 0114 CUSTODIAN OFFICE D115 CHEMICAL STORAGE 0116 RECEMNG AREA 0117 STORAGE 0118 BOILER ROOM 0119 MECH 816291. ROOM 0120 GYM 0121 GYM 0122 GOA / CAFETERIA 0123 MULTI - PURPOSE ROOM 0124 PASSAGE 0125 GYM ENTRANCE 0126 TABLE STORAGE 0127 GYM ENIRANC3 0128 GYM ENTRANCE 0129 PITY ED STORAGE 0130 GYM ENTRANCE 0131 G71 OFFICE 0132 VESTIBULE 0133 CORRIDOR 0134 VESTIBULE `3c1 .3 2G0 oft KEY PLAN �r_-nstrona Torsetn Skold and Rydeen inc. Architecture Engineering Planning Interior Design Landscape Arch. 8501 j Golden alley Rd.. Suite 300 Minneapolis Minnesota 55427 Tel: 763- 545 -3731 Fax: 763 -525 -3289 CET EE-r -SAT E. rE.C3FiCATON ... 16565 T ti_ 110 4.-1 INEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE LINO LAKES, MN 55014 FIRST FLOOR REFERENCE PLAN . SUSri ,4i . ..+_ e;,_ 140, F CS-13-9: 2A D27 Tr ='1S t'Oh Torsetl akoid and Rydeen Inc. ®.Y Architecture Engineering Planning Interior Design Landscape Arch. 0501 Golden Fahey Rd., Suite 300 A15 UNIT 'A' UNIT '8' UNIT 'C' A201 CLASSROOM A202 CONFERENCE ROOM 4203 CLASSROOM A204 CONFERENCE ROOM A205 CIA55ROOM A206 STAIRWAY A207 CLASSROOM 4208 SPECIAL ED A209 CLASSROOM A210 MECH / ELEC ROOM A211 STAFF TOILET ROOM A212 801S TOILET ROOM 4213 GIRLS' TOILET ROOM A214 TOILET ROOM EiIRANCE A215 CUSTODIAN CLOSET A216 COMMONS A217 STAIRWAY A218 CORRIDOR A219 00.D. A220 NOT USED A221 a0YATCR ALONE SECOND FLOOR REFERENCE PLAN 8201 CLASSROOM 8202 CONFERENCE ROOM 6203 CLASSROOM 8204 CONFERE6CE ROOM 8205 CLASSROOM 8206 NOT USED 8207 CLASSROOM 8208 SPECIAL E7 8209 CLASSROOM 8210 MECH / ELEC ROOM 8211 STAFF TOILET ROOM 8212 BOYS TOILET ROOM 8213 G1RLS' TOILET ROOM 8214 IOLLET ROOM ENTRANCE 8215 CUSTODIAN CLOSET 6216 COMMONS 8217 STAIRWAY 8218 CORRIDOR 8219 COMPUTER LAB 0201 CLASSROOM 0202 CONFERENCE ROOM C203 CLASSROOM C204 CONFERENCE ROOM 0205 CLASSROOM 0206 NOT USED 0207 CLASSROOM 0206 SPECIAL ED C209 CLASSROOM 0210 MECH / 0.00 ROOM 0211 STAFF TOILET ROOM 0212 BOYS' 10007 6006 0213 GODS 'TOILET ROOM 0214 10004 ROOM ENTRANCE 0215 CUSTODIAN CLOSET C216 COMMONS 0217 STAIRWAY 0218 CORRIDOR C219 TECHNOLOGY CLOSET UNIT 'D' SEE SHEET 3G X'SEE Si UNIT'A' SEE SHEEP 9A KEY PLAN Minneapolis Minnesota 55427 Tel: 763 -545 -3731 Fax' 763-525-3269 INEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBUC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE LINO LAKES, MN 55014 ISECOND FLOOR REFERENCE PLAN C' SU2M1 i ?._ 21104!1 EY PR1 C7 NC. K. N.. NA.L CcOC: CNEIXEC 5Y C.:r P.1.0. 00 -13-21 s,Ee'S LrlIT*--MXTMP40F. ML#N4°,T101-i .5FOGE 1 71,07.716n;.t n'lkwacesste -01.11-1'2-*'-exTmpwri .■ -O6'6041,,a 7 MODP IKAIKITAN 4-S GXTENol. Misao.Tric,F; 7E7 0- t2cmarsPat.._ . _ • 1S/-.7-EL -7222ttiP e-ft,F MEHM•41.4.----* i:essitezir.„4„L LEy2 440= I Lea. L.MV 1 VF 7 ,.1 ei 1j +—Roo& 1ae4 6104141s • 2121,4;_41. ,"••..,... ,..1.1Nr-i-5-...W.-.4..aRal27P,=L:.-a..V4, 1.4.c.,N. .. _. ,,irm.stronrk. Torsett. Architecture Skold and Engineering Planning Rydeen Interior Design . Inc. Landscape Arch. 8501 Golden Valley Rd.. Suite 300 Minneapolis Minnesota 55427 Tel: 763-545-3731 Fax: 763-525-3289 *as=hales. t 4> PR LIU OMillal=pleMirimmis, .11111MILI_,&_IMMI1.111= 11=111111EaMrlill Win iJrifl- =rriErtie,ra =L--N-"714,11 anamems . , municsemii . ,; -4iImmumsoluilem ... .• . .. 2----Mr.7111111M4)1111111k471111C=OMINEMB M INIEM11111111M411111111111111EIME ammuir ......_ -----limmEINIIIIIIGII- IMIIIIIII=- -z- IMO L. s'`A - MO :_.,•-- -1. . . • . 1180 r- ' RADIUS • ittOi • • • •, • • • • • • i I - • =--,111111111111111,11111111 urin"5' M11=7I0F2. Lev,4riori FXTERICR J. SCHEO ia i VA"- c>„ 7.1".72:2TW.n.M1:1_ 0100 WHM 211111MENIIIMINII I IM .En; 01111111Enil =MEI ga1111111 5000 E4I00 1••062•41`{ roe 210' 565 eezr F06.. •46.1ket.' +-OTIS . = $, 3 2001 1 umn- • mtraRpol. HERM CERTIFYINAT INS PLAN, VECIFICASON OR REPORT WAS PREPARED EIT ME LIR 05005 0001500005000- 0005 AND THAT 1 AM A 0500 5001010050 ARCHITECT UNOES STE LAWS OF TK STATE OF MIN50SO7A. • PAUL L SNYOM 00101 REG, Na 14103 ' NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE LINO LAKES, MN 55014 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS RATE •7v-LC/1 SIM 41i.1. — — fiz1—=—Az5—F --0 9 =5( • AUG 1 3 2001 • FA-7-4f, LFIVZ FE.ES - A le=0' b LAwitiXTuDE rigw4" 0-* 0 Ifs:5! ID us'-cr = Levi 11201,01.. J urtn. e)(11P-10g WLEVer1.611 • <>er661.4H II —4r " 166.30F094 .. MDCATI9Tiorg i L.MY2 Ksa I I .11 tX-7591=7!"- ELMVAITIc:41-., 6-1-A4F9-72,45=1'rnrITF4 81ZrAL Lk-trEr6 MI '1116 C.A6-rlri Fif,s1x6paaroctrICRS-TM. 15.C..T.Cr'enET6Lasim. TO lee FluSi LOritifT. 6.FG6FICRETE. • 1146 61C406 'TrA66 • FP.CMICK. 64.PC;6 4:ricrr.s. i=1.6vicsm. PiSf. le, (R,T.M.C..}140F,TWo re*,- Yy166L. tlAvAm • -MT-116.ESe==.7eN6 4,11. ,4,t1 •• -- • - • _ • 4.1-171511011i Arc hi Lecture 8501 Tor-seta Engineering Golden Skold and YlAnnics Valley Rd., Rvdeen Interior Design Suite 300 Inc. Landscape Arch. Minnesota 55427 Tel: 763-545-3731 Fax: 763-525-3259 ar4IT S?- EL.ffiv 6 1,2 Tos.) m5z 17,e: OW Si 1.I.PCMGoLDR6:, LVI Ik67 T .17gC±717:', • SicTS" Intr.r71ft. .=)CIc,F- a-La-VA-T-10N V- l' k 74E. PLA+.1 ut-trr ' errmrtio EA t • ES 9, • <11 MXTe-R4HR =L=VATION • Rttap:NO..C41 •Ea ES. • • • •=z2id-xareli /776P,17-1.a,t,_ 1-03.4216c02.01-40-in Bir'431111 1111-1WM111---Iiiiiiiffi M warai PI: EIMMIll 0.,42LQ, ---= 4- --±.---- --_±.— -p,"6,;; ct, LEV z Fssa 'f' 11(14, 11,6 ), EL=v,.6,Tiott 5' 4' 01/1-4MEWS, • C P Tsmils412. 114.110' LOUVER J-1b bRICK cAurr-r 4. ^Eg ,NS rafS-SEF_ 9 -ix 4" '4 'AT I/2". 11,6.. TYR 1-b212.. DECORAWE. EJFS 6RDOUE., 2" T szFFrr LccATIai.15 L0 CECOR.PtilttE OFS GitouE. IPS D.J.@ STUDS HEREBy'OERTNYIHAT-DIS PLAN, spEnFicknoN OR :Re.oRT WAS pREpARED.By ixix oR UNDER kly•DInCT 4.1PER- !visioN AND THAT j Au A Day REGISTERED ARCHITECT :UNDER 1HE LAWS OF THE STATE OF mINNEsoTA. :PAUL L soDER DAIS Rs... No. 14813 _I-EY I 176E ;-- 4,1( 1. 011 ,-micid6FE.'ELZV ye,11,_„1,..„z>n A 6.1S69.. POo co4r. War. S641..Asn srcur SAO FOR Silt 4F 56 SEE. PLAN rFt-Fts E.6.Lyst. ago scf-rz-, VER1 ST,FPENee, ok,S Flea-F.1,1 wiLiv4/mpt.ILL,t ?AkIG.,4 weers'.2 1.s. 9.c .14A4 P. KE0 o SoLID Ye= !Lc,. ;i6,1 ces. (176 LOJV.EK SILL' Q 2J0K CAVITY — Du0Er.. HEAO e›RICK, CAM 1Vz'' • 71',ZAIOR ELEVATIONS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE UNO LAKES, MN 55014 SHEET EIIISEMMIEUERISII• =ILIDNEMIN1112'0111i 511111111111011110171101 AIIIMIIMINIMINIIIIII IMMO <11 MXTe-R4HR =L=VATION • Rttap:NO..C41 •Ea ES. • • • •=z2id-xareli /776P,17-1.a,t,_ 1-03.4216c02.01-40-in Bir'431111 1111-1WM111---Iiiiiiiffi M warai PI: EIMMIll 0.,42LQ, ---= 4- --±.---- --_±.— -p,"6,;; ct, LEV z Fssa 'f' 11(14, 11,6 ), EL=v,.6,Tiott 5' 4' 01/1-4MEWS, • C P Tsmils412. 114.110' LOUVER J-1b bRICK cAurr-r 4. ^Eg ,NS rafS-SEF_ 9 -ix 4" '4 'AT I/2". 11,6.. TYR 1-b212.. DECORAWE. EJFS 6RDOUE., 2" T szFFrr LccATIai.15 L0 CECOR.PtilttE OFS GitouE. IPS D.J.@ STUDS HEREBy'OERTNYIHAT-DIS PLAN, spEnFicknoN OR :Re.oRT WAS pREpARED.By ixix oR UNDER kly•DInCT 4.1PER- !visioN AND THAT j Au A Day REGISTERED ARCHITECT :UNDER 1HE LAWS OF THE STATE OF mINNEsoTA. :PAUL L soDER DAIS Rs... No. 14813 _I-EY I 176E ;-- 4,1( 1. 011 ,-micid6FE.'ELZV ye,11,_„1,..„z>n A 6.1S69.. POo co4r. War. S641..Asn srcur SAO FOR Silt 4F 56 SEE. PLAN rFt-Fts E.6.Lyst. ago scf-rz-, VER1 ST,FPENee, ok,S Flea-F.1,1 wiLiv4/mpt.ILL,t ?AkIG.,4 weers'.2 1.s. 9.c .14A4 P. KE0 o SoLID Ye= !Lc,. ;i6,1 ces. (176 LOJV.EK SILL' Q 2J0K CAVITY — Du0Er.. HEAO e›RICK, CAM 1Vz'' • 71',ZAIOR ELEVATIONS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE UNO LAKES, MN 55014 SHEET • -• = �*1nitc .Q 1�® �e MEM • 23,4" ,C 101.16' r'••••11 111�� • PREra(_ O c :DSSh -. 9ETat, LW'*1.1 O SCUPPER 210" 0 I : '' 11.1 2' BX'fEva!a - — 1'7"Tlon E7 24=0' cgs 8 "57Pa58 duck LELY�F, --, rYocx - rm. t 6O' MERCK LERiE ■•d= 21Gx ... LEVI gr fiE MouNnoy S 9. STWic'. ■ - Tr6' =1.22s^ 120' MAILMEA 12,0' 11©71®13•7111•1 NEM 1 11111111a1=1111• ®a•111••111 111 0 xT. 1r*. Ll�a ■ ;i1‘.9 Pa: 2., 224 UNIT fl' EXTERIO? M.L.VA2,TIoIy 1s3_5./e i SCHO L NAM ' ry PA.-F,Ar T 1St" /8." is1' °ILd' 1RPE 1 = �1 moo ,J ; • grim TO ELEV. RiILTIEFt I /5C..11d1SABE . i V. ALTER44TE. 1 Par Ldcoer.. 1.1/PR7EECTIUE 9EE A 8.4 IN4 1_4 1191.1111/1 Effil NaLir==illallE•1•1110111E!! MEG merminimfai le 711111111■1111=1 _1ec HT I moo" 0 2-0 .. • 0 L =� L r 54' Tar- '�pp�R= U1lT 17' 1=X7 oR T,Lc lT F1 -Y o. PA.rw Per 1 210' 116'-01A /a" L°YI fR OCR Arrrmstron Torsetfl Skold and 0 Rydeen Inc. 2.XTerolloP-, L- 0.WlT.LON' Architecture E .8501 Engineering n . Golden Planning a 11alley Rd., Interior Desiggn Suite 300 Landscape Arch. Minneapolis Minnesota 55427 Tel: 763 -545 -3731 Fax: 763 -525 -3289 T. P: PAP.SPPT V I Io PIRA As LL-vi Fe,„e TW1 °O" 1 s i-V- WI- Nla-IOi. . c1fP'W MX -M1F1 ,'1 rt orii-T �r op- 1.fs•� =, .. �o I AUG ! 3 2001 W41-T Ip' 6E72 1T-a 115'_ - 01' 0F p .4 4.! V8-,'IL .-....-_,"44°717t," ." raf -oF. UHTGL-f'f- v��a. ;•••••••55 /AIM. EXT€RICR ELE11A7101-1 GEJ.IERpt. NOTES: • I 5101CATES 'SMOTH' 9JFS FJWS11/CD14Rx1 SEE SPEC. -25 N• • t.'• P'ea5s%te .2. <> ISOICATES "TEXTURED 9M12 FNISH /=02.52 SEE 5PEC. - 9M�- 115 ,51525E Sueoo, 2 8 IJINTS ARE 8 1 4 3 1 . 4 . $ AS TYPE O, ®i ®, ETC. ON EL.EUAT10N$. REFER 10 Er.TEREK Gd. 80149.AULE ' Foe DCOSILS. 4. ALL FIDE$ SFOWH 0I1 E1FS- SURr7'�'E. `�URf55 . WIm° As ..0157 TYPE. ®®,e,ETC) DEe.0RATIDE apcouf5: ;Sk TfPCAC; DETHFth, -uwr. ie m..• Moo.a weds ee ee�c,K INDICATES ri e.t4;4cr- c ...,04:2 'L•cacaTo � em',LH ,w,ao.e • HERESY CER11FY THAT THIS PLAN, SPMFICATDN CR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR 5HDER V DIRECT SUPER- MICR VC THAT I AMA oULr REGISTERED ARCHITECT UHOEL.Te LAWS Of TIE STATE 02 MIWESOTA. PAUL L SR19E1 REG. N0. 1451 NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CENTENNIAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I.S.D. NO. 12 ELM STREET AND 4TH AVENUE LINO LAKES, MN 55014 P45 Crym, --' EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM V -E Cindy Sherman (NAC) September 11, 2001 Preliminary Plat Saddle Club, Old Birch St. Heritage Development has submitted an application for preliminary plat for property commonly known as the Saddle Club. The City previously considered an application on the site that included a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning for a portion of the property. That area is now proposed to be platted as an outlot and is not proposed for development at this time. The property is located south and east of Old Birch Street. The review is based on plans received by the City on August 13, 2001. ANALYSIS Project Data: Site Total Number of Lots Upland Right -of -Way Wetlands Gross Density Net Density (Upland Only) 39.77 acres 28 lots 21.40 acres 3.54 acres 14.69 acres 0.70 units /ac 1.31 units /ac Land Use and Zoning: The northern 20 acres (approximately) is zoned R -1. The south 20 acres (approximately) is zoned rural. The 28 building sites are all located within the Single Family Land Use District and the R -1 zoning district. Surrounding Land Use: * Low Density = 1 -3 units per acre Comprehensive Plan (1990) Comprehensive Plan (2001) Zoning Site Single Family Residential/Rural Low Density* Sewered Residential with Growth Area 1 on south 1/2 R / R -1 North Single Family Residential Low Density * /Sewered & Unsewered Residential R -1 East Single Family Residential/Rural Low Density Sewered with Growth Area 1 on the southern portion R / R -1 South Rural Low Density Unsewered R West Single Family Residential Low Density - Growth Area 1 R -1 * Low Density = 1 -3 units per acre • • Greenway: The draft Comprehensive Plan identifies areas for greenways. The intent of the greenway designation is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. This was previously part of the original application for this area. However, because the area outside of the current MUSA is not being platted for development at this time the greenway area is not specifically addressed but could be required in the future. Lot Sizes and Layout: The R -1 District minimum lot size is 10,800 square feet of upland. All lots meet or exceed this provision with an average lot size of 17,551.4 square feet of upland. The minimum lot width is 80 feet at the 30 -foot front yard setback. All lots meet this requirement. The minimum lot depth is 135 feet. All of the lots meet or exceed this provision. Grading: Fill is proposed on the site to create the house pad areas and roadways. The grading plan submitted anticipates grading the site for future use_ The grading plan is subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Existing Structures: All existing structures shall be removed from the site. Transportation: Access to the property is proposed from Old Birch Street. This requires right - of -way acquisition from an adjacent parcel, which has been accomplished. A roadway connection is also proposed to Killdeer Drive. This right -of -way acquisition has been completed. Access and road connections have been an issue during discussions regarding the application. Staff has previously stated that neighborhood connections and multiple accesses are desirable and that Birch Street can accommodate traffic from this project. Additionally, the Police Department has reviewed the plat and they are recommending that both accesses be provided (please see attached memo). Utilities: Water and sanitary sewer are both proposed to be looped through the property along the proposed roadway alignments from Old Birch to Killdeer. A feasibility study has been completed and the results of the study will be incorporated into the construction plans for the development. Parks and Trails: There is a trail corridor proposed on Lots 18 and 19 Block 1 to provide access to the trail corridor platted in the Oaks of Lino. There is no parkland dedication proposed with the plat. All of the dedication will be cash in lieu of land. The amount to be paid will be based upon the rates in effect at the time of final plat. Wetlands: There are approximately 15 acres of wetland on the entire property. Some fill is proposed to accommodate roadway construction. The proposal is to mitigate the fill adjacent to other wetland areas. The wetland delineation and proposed fill are subject to the review and permitting of Rice Creek Watershed District, which oversees the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). It is the City staff's policy to require preliminary approval (tabled with approval for administration action or TWAFAA) from Rice Creek before the City staff recommends by the Planning and Zoning Board. This was completed as of April 25, 2001. Saddle Club Page 2 of 3 • • • Environmental Board: The Environmental Board reviewed the application and their comments are attached. Generally, the Board recommends approval subject to the use of native vegetation in all surface water treatment areas and that buffer areas should be sign posted. Tree Preservation: A complete tree inventory has been submitted and a tree preservation plan has been submitted. Recommendation: The Preliminary Plat as submitted is consistent with the zoning and land use designations on the site. Therefore staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 2. Park dedication shall be paid prior to recording the final plat at the rate in effect at the time of the final plat. 3. Right -of -way acquisition shall be completed prior to City Council review of the final plat. 4. Markers delineating the drainage, utility, and conservation easement shall be installed within platted lots by the developer. Saddle Club Page 3 of 3 • PUG -27 -2001 11:58 CITY OF LINO LAKES Department of Public Safety POLICE David 1, Pecchia Public Safety Director / Chief of Police Officer Mike Rumpsa Lino Lakes Police Department CPTED Review Saddle Club 08 -23 -01 CC: Dave Pecchia Jeff Smyser 651 982 2499 F.01/01 I have reviewed the plans for the Saddle Club Addition. 1 will only comment on the road design, as I have already submitted a review for the addition layout. The Saddle Club Addition will need to have two entrance/exits into the development. I noticed the development will be utilizing both Old Birch and Killdeer Dr to gain access into the development. Old Birch is a dangerous option. Both entrance /exits of Old Birch have blind approaches and poor lighting. Merging traffic has a limited area to accelerate up to speed on Birch St, and limited area to slow down, to make the turn onto Old Birch. Winter driving conditions will make this area even worse. The Blackduck Dr, (via Killdeer access) is a better choice, traffic is able to see oncoming traffic from both East and West Birch St. The Killdeer/Blackduck Drive access is a much safer alternative, as Birch Street has turn lanes installed for the traffic that wishes to enter /exit the Blackduck Drive development. I would strongly recommend using the Killdeer Drive option over the Old Birch option. The Killdeer Drive/Blackduck Drive entrance /exit will no doubt reduce the chances of a fatal accident by allowing the motorists time to merge onto Birth Street and the ability for motorists to judge distances of oncoming vehicles. Post-W° Fax Note 7671 640 Town Center Parkway • Lino Lakes, Minnesota • 55014 -1182 o..t.C� n ..... ,.,,JC.,,..._.J.. c:1 nom ^inn _ r -... i r•+ one. n�nn TOTAL P.01 • Environmental Memo To: Jeff Smyser From: Marty Asieson CC: Michael Grochala Date: August 31, 2001 Re: Environmental Board Recommendations LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AUGUST 29, 2001 RECOMMENDATIONS The Lino Lakes Environmental Board made the following recommendations on August 29: 1. Centennial School District/New Elementary School Site Plan Review. Motion to approve with conditions made by Mike Trehaus, second by Tere O'Connel; all approved. Conditions • Page 1 • Recommend that the City re -focus on the priorities set forth in the current Surface Water Management Plan in the new Surface Water Plan review process, so that surface water issues are better understood in developments such as the Centennial School District Site. Investigate all Surface Water Treatment Train© possibilities on the site, including the idea of the use of the area on the western side of the bus parking lot for infiltration purposes. • • Use the Surface Water Treatment Train© design on this site as an educational opportunity in the schools. • • Move the existing Eastern Red Cedars on the site to a protected location. Use in the design if possible. • Save end portions of the Pine row on the south side of the project if possible. • Use native plants in the ground covers for all surface water treatment areas and other areas where possible. • Submit an Operation and Maintenance Plan for surface water issues, including a plan for native plant maintenance. • Preliminary landscape design plants should be evaluated for site appropriateness, and in particular the plants designed along the highway should be salt - tolerant. • Use "shoe -box" or low- impact, no -spill lighting on the site. 2. Molin Concrete Site Plan Review Motion made to table pending; submission of landscape plan, tree inventory, Rice Creek Watershed's TWAFFA requirement information, lighting plan, an understanding of chemical use on the site, use of well heads on site as indicated by the County Well Point Index. The Landscape Plan should show the use of native groundcover plants and trees, the berm area on the north should be looked at for effectiveness and the use of irrigation, and the that the City should re -focus on the priorities set forth in the current Surface Water management Plan review process so that the surface water issues are better understood in plan review sites such as Molin Concrete. Motion was made by Connie Grundhoffer, second by Amy Donlin, all approved. • 3. Saddle Club /Preliminary Plat Review • Page 2 • • • Motion to approve with conditions made by Tere O'Connel, Second By Connie Grundhoffer. 3 voted Yes/1 vote for no by Mike Trehaus/1 abstain by Amy Donlin. Conditions • All former recommendations made at the March 25th Environmental Board Meeting still apply. May 30th Environmental Board Meeting • The Tree Preservation needs to be better well defined. Species were not indicated, just numbers. Note —The Environmental Coordinator has an electronic copy of the Tree Inventory with species indicated. • Special concern for another 70 houses platted, with reference to the "147" units per year figure, and the number of units approved in the last year. • Shrink lots down if possible, in particular lots in Block 2 so that this area can be included in the greenway. Vote 5 to 1 in favor of approval, Mike Trehus voting against. • Use native vegetation in all surface water treatment areas • Buffer areas should be sign posted • Page 3 KLL 2°'"‘ Cc 2O� ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF At PLAT BIRCH CT. 23 - mufti W Mire; mNEf m.,O ma ® ®`'W Ilf AkaWr Q6 33 WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES FOR LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLE, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR SADDLE CLUB PREPARED FOR HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT INC. CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA PROJECT LOCATION CR 10 Cedar Lake CR 32 5i SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS SOIL TESTING • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55305 6 b .3 IJ(Th 02 CU wg, .)i, 3 200 SHEET INDEX SHEET DESCRIPTION 1. COVER 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN 3. PRELIMINARY PLAT 4. GRADING, DRAINAGE At EROSION CONTROL PLAN 5. UTILITY PLAN 6. DETAILS 7. TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 1 HEREBY CERTIFY TINT 71.16 PLAN. SPEOFICAT1011, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER W MELT SUPE /MON 1.140 TINT 1 AM A DULY 0CENSSO PROFESSIONAL EN UNDER THE LAWS OF 1113 STATE OF MNNE50TA. 04TE • f)41REC. NO 19584 RENEWED BY: CETE AUG 1 3 2001 CITY Oz DATE BY REVISIONS REVISION 2 -12 -01 RE PREIIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL 4 -6 -01 RF CRY k WATEASHEU REASONS 5 -7 -01 0S CRY REVISIONS 0 -13 -01 RF NEW SUBMITTAL S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 61513 -006 SHEET 1 OF 7 SHEETS) J BENCHMARK: OUTLOT E L n d 0 00 120 100 N LEGEND 998 DENOTES COSTING 03N1OUR X 3333 0ENO1E5 085080 SPOT ELEVATION Sr STOW SAM a OEN01E5 EXISTING STORM SDYER a' WATERS. N DENOTES 000005 WATEREWN, 1TYORINT & GATE VALVE n• svunm' SCRS. DENOTES 010000 SANITARY SEWER 0EN01FS 000088 TREE LINE DENOTES 000000 TREE — - — • — • — — DENOTES EXISTING WERAND 80000ARY ` DENOTES EXISTING FENCE DENOTES 0l6TNG WETUNO DENOTES S0I1. BORING NOTE: SURVEY WORK PERFORMED BY METRO LAND SURVEYING & ENGINEERING: 1 851 -788 -0112 WETLAND DELINEATION PERFORMED 8Y AQUATIC EC050ELRONS, INC: 952 -545 -0912 AUG 1 3 2001 C T4.0 LANO -APES J DATE REVISIONS BY REVISION 2 -12 -01 1-6 -01 RF 1 PRELIMINARY PUN SU MITTAL RF COY & WATERSHED REVISIONS 6 -1 -01 OS 011? RE/1510MS 8 -13 -01 RF NEW SUBMITTAL �HEREBI GERM, THAT 'INS PLAN, SPECRIGVION. OR ` ! REPORT WAS PREPARED 1 6Y ME OR UNDER 4Y DIRECT 010160 SUPERVISION ANO THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PR6 ESSIO L ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF TIE STATE OF MINNESOTA DOUG STAHL OATS RED. N0. 189,1E \RE016080 9Y: 00TE ./ SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ` / OWNER /DEVELOPER ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLA7INING 506. TEST1NG • ENWRONMENTAL 008810ES 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SURE 1 MINNETONKA MN 55305 (852) 548 -7601 FAX: 548 -9085 Wnw.s1Fwsllmaawn.carn F: \bN(\ 1151.3 \OUh \(i2 \EXC )ND.dwg, (414200i 09:42:077 AM, -_alvinT HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 422 EAST COUNTY ROAD D ST PAUL, MN 661- 481 -0017 DATE: APRIL 6, 2001 J PROJECT NAME /SHEET TITLE SADDLE CLUB ADDITION LINO LAKES, MN EXISTING CONDITIONS S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 61513 -006 SHEET 2 OF 7 SHEETS • • • 8 DRAINAGE. UOUTY t 00N50541109 588.50.10 "E .EASEMENT 1307.62 BLOCK 1 20' TRAIL EASEMENT 8 *A- / 038- DRAINAGE. 01UI■ 4i CONSERVATION EASEMENT BENCHMARK: 180 FEET SOUTH OF SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OUTLOT 5. TOP OF WATERMAIN PIPE 8EVATWN = 1034. ` ,A.5UMEO FROM TOR)9 O PLAN w nn4cos) 9Y REVISIONS REVISION R / OUTLOT A 1 +CO 210.9 ORMNAGE, UTILITY 4 CONSERVATION EASEMENT DRAINAGE. 011910 CONSERVATION EASEMENT WETLANDS .8G G /40.8 r i OUTLOT). I• J ._( •/ AMY, 121E WETLANDS / 374.2 q JTJ1OT B �• } / WEMNOS\ 301.0 E. 001311 SERVAII WETLANDS • 892 \ OUTLOT 8 WETLANDS WETLANDS WETLANDS \ 1306.98 .N86'44'01'8 1 �1 092 892 20' DRAINAGE, OSLOY k CONSERVATION EASEMENT WETLANDS ASPEN LA OUTLOT 73 0 60 120 180 LEGAL DESCRIPTION SE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF 58CE108 28. TOWNSHIP 31, RANGE221 ANOKA COUNTY. MINNESOTA 5118 TYPICAL ESMT. DETAIL (DRAINAGE AND 311L1TY) LEGEND BLOCK 1 E1051160 CONTOUR EXLSONG WE0N40 BOUNDARY PROPOSED ORMNAGE 4 UI19TY EASEMENT PROPOSED IRNL EA5ELENT TYPICAL SET -BACK DETAIL ETBACX UNE UNE REAR LOT UNE LOT DATA LOT R1 " Ire mere. 1 21622.4 0 216224 2 12800.4 0 12800.4 3 13128.8 0 131289 4 15789.8 0 15789.8 5 12881.1 0 12661.1 8 17185.4 26822 19847.6 7 21713.7 7241.6 28955.3 8 18219.4 3769.1 199889 9 15447.4 0 15447.4 10 11481.7 11570.8 23041 0 11 15043.8 113.5 15157.3 12 11242.1 3858.8 14900.9 13 10822.0 5128.4 15950.4 14 201728 4578.5 24752.3 15 20561.4 7828.1 28189.5 16 24008.5 10581.4 34569.9 17 14500.5 0 14500.5 16 12299.3 0 12299.3 19 15419.0 0 15419.0 TOTAL 302119.6 58913.2 3590328 BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3 101 R1 008139INARY PLAN SUBMNTAL 4-0-01 1 226452 9826.2 32471.4 2 18898.3 8549.6 27245.9 3 25874.2 370.4 26244.6 4 20451.0 4484.0 24935.0 5 25090.7 2196.6 27287,3 8 19364.5 11491.4 30855.9 TOTAL 132121.9 36918.2 169040.1 BLOCK 3 101 R1 008139INARY PLAN SUBMNTAL 4-0-01 RF 21415.4 1352.8 22768.2 2 19506.3 661.8 20168.1 3 16277.1 6937.4 23214.5 TOTAL 57196.8 8952 0 56150.8 1 OUTLOTS LOT ORM 15713.0 30365.7 46078.7 425382.3 507095.3 934277.6 TOTAL 441095.3 5374610 978556.3 1 AUG 1 3 200 i CITY OF LINO LAKE? AREA TABULATIONS TOTAL SITE AREA : 39.77 ACRE TOTAL LOTS : 28 PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY AREA : 3.54 ACRE AREA WITHIN PLATTED LOTS : 13.64 ACRE AVERAGE LOT AREA : 21222.3 S.F. AVERAGE LOT AREA (UPLAND) : 17551.4 5P. AVERAGE LOT AREA (WE1VN0) : 3870.8 S.F. DENSITY : 0.49 UN(115 /ACRE 2 -12 -01 R1 008139INARY PLAN SUBMNTAL 4-0-01 RF CRY k WATERSHED REVISIONS 8 -7-01 8 -13 -01 D5 RF CRY REVISIONS NEW SUBMITTAL 0000 623L PAGE 46 (106/88) 1 1 ERERV CERTIFY 'HAT INS PUN, SPECIFICATION. M! REPORT WAS PREPARED 8Y ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT 91PERMSIO6 AND THAT 1 AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNGER THE 1.685 OF THE STATE Of MINNESOTA DOUG STAN. 047E 115.61. A\REWEWE9 DT: DATE SCHOELL & MADSON, INC: 1 OWNER /DEVELOPER ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNING SOL TESTING • F049066ENTAL SERVICES 10580 WAYZATA 0019EVARO. SUITE 1 M188800NKA. M8 55305 (952) 546 -780TH FAX: 548 -9065 ww,59ne.001ae.a,l.aoal :AENG \h1513 \GO5 \132 \PkEPLA.1 .dwg, O''d /1.ij2 01 09:4J:51i AM, (-alvinT HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 422 EAST COUNTY ROAD D ST PAUL, MN 851 - 481 -0017 DATE: APRIL 5. 2001 / PROJECT NAME /SHEET TITLE SADDLE CLUB ADDITION LINO LAKES, MN PRELIMINARY PLAT S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 61513 -006 SHEET 3 OF 7 SHEETS Y WETLAND ALTER. 44.3 50.Fr. 388.50'10 -a 1307.82 100 YR NY/L4895.0 (AS PER 104 STUDY) ORANAGE, 6010115 dot CONSERVATION EASEMENT Id! BLOCK 1 20' TR6L EASEMENT 2 3 r A"aPENTA. _ OUTLOT 0L01 WETLAND ALTER. 3403 SO.FT. .08 ACRES WETLANDS •94e SURMOUNTABLE CURB dot GUTTER 694 90 -' DRANAGE. UTLUTY CONSERVATION EASEMENT 59 WETLAND BUFFER 13085 50.FT. 000 j aSv2 ATL a-' lo >• 2262 S OFT. / .- .07 ACRES OUTLOT A ry WETLAND ALTER .0700 2622/SOLFT. RES NURP BASIN A HWL -897.8 NWL -894.5 WETLANDS WETLANDS \x�iw iw4a. WETLAND BUFFER 7-.J 10053 5D.FT. . 4441 TEMPORARY CUL-4.--SAC i ` I1 / /1// ( l \ 1101:,// O 27R eVLn / 6 Q \ \ `1, ,' 7.n> / /t l ACRES I 1 ♦ / \ F1e _ _ /// i3O (°o a,J v ��- LCO `� 909 / A /// 37 / . A.r /// / O / Her \• of R 1 1 D /. k, �mtWv..{A!Yi ?►+Ii 417 'IMAM AVAIKettrAlr AMR SW _TA Adriaremarmim p. \1��7►ia�ii. WETLANDS Sag DRAINAGE. URLRY h CONSERVATION EASEMENT WETLAND BUFFER 7389 5OFT. DRAINAGE 0RU1Y do CONSERVATION EASEMENT WETLAND BUFFER 7385 SOFT. MITIGATION 17186 SOFT. 0.38 • 413 RCYO HMI-4892A 181.-09 8151,1191.5 ��:�• \ \ (M ¢ ` 4684 50. 6E5 OUTLOT B RCM X01-892.1 WETLANDS WETLANDS WETLAND BUFFER 1158 05.F1'. PAP WEIR ELEV4891.3 N ORCH 692 'AN- TON 1580 SF 568961' 1' FR ' MH 5 1' GRANULAR SOILS 120' DRAINAGE 0111.115 et CONSERVATION EASEMENT l 1� :'��}Ic 1 - v�d/•q 1..0 {"L1m `', 1 11111 I °o \ u6 + i �.� i� /t ..Ba2 692 \64R400o0\ vim` "4�900••� / I • C}a�a 1\00 419 _ 5980�pj " A Loma L7ND.13;a 0 3 WETLANDS 1 I sots i /.arcs `ag2 ' -MGM 'es -4 WETLANDS .1%831.'0311 I - WETLANDS LEGEND 998 E491150 CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR PEHCENI OF GRADE DRAINAGE ARROW Ki ^- e� -•-^- EXISTING STORM SEWER <9-18 PROPOSED STORM SEWER - - • • - - • - ULM OF CONSTRUCTION 00000000000000 EROSION CONTROL SILT FENCE 1.0X X 999.3 ( 038.3 :4 • • 0_9_4 Wai i i.: 932.0 924,0 wo SE 588-1 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION ED511N0 SPOT ELEVATION WEML10 ALTERATION WETLAND MYTIGATION WE9LN10 ENHANCEMENT ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE HOUSE PAD WT1H GRADE .IYA0065 WALKOUT SPLIT ENTRY S08. BORING LOCATION SOIL BORINGS 99912 899.80 895.27 69951 894.89 898.43 899.57 EF Man CREWS 06w SWF WETLAND MmGATION TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION 2. 3. 4. 2, 0 50 120 180 SCALE IN FEET WETLAND NOTES TOTAL WEHAl10 ALTERATION - 18970 5.F. TOTAL M0f104TON RE00. - 37940 S.F. TOTAL WE11AN0 MMGATION - 19252 S.F. PUBLIC VALE CREDIT (BUFFER) - 29288 S.F. (.75 X 39051 S.F. - 29288 5.F.) TOTAL WETLAND MmGATION - 38540 S.F. EROSION CONTROL NOTES ALL PERIMETER SILT FENCE AND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT TANNAGE BASINS PRIOR TO 51TE GRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE STYE 4,110 145161-1_ UYR01E5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTAL CATCH BASIN EROSION CONTROL MELNRI3. 5. WITHIN Iwo WEEKS OF SITE GRADING. ALL DISTURBED MEALS SHALL 8E STABILCZED W011 SEED, SOO OR ROCK BASE SEEDING 5HAL BE IN ACCORDANCE 141141 •61001' SPEC. 2575. SEED MIXTURE SHALL 8E /MOOT MIXTURE 500. ALL MULCH SHALL BE TYPE 1 AID SHALL BE DISC MONGREL). FERTILIZER 5%LML BE 10 -10-10 COMMERCIAL. GRADE MEE'i160 THE REQUIREMENTS FOR MN00T 3881 410 SHALL BE APPUE9 AT A RATE OF 200 /185. PER ACRE 500 SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF MOOT 3878. ALL AREAS TO BE 5000ED OR SEEDED SHAT. BE COVERED WITH MINIMUM OF FOUR 199X65 OF TOPSOIL 5. AL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE I85TAIIED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOY, WATERSHED D15TRIC1 910 MINNESOTA POILUIWN CONTROL (WOES) PERMITS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAMAN ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATED SILT IN FROM OF SILT FENCES. DURING THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION. 8. ANY EXCESS SEDIMENT IN PROPOSED BASINS 5LNLL 90 RIDM0A4D BY THE CONTRACTOR. 9. REMOVE AL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AFTER VEGETATION IS ESTABUSNEO. 10. THE CONTRACTOR 5HAUL. REMOVE ALL SOTS MO SEDIMENT TRACKED ONTO EXISTING STREETS AN0 PAVED AREAS. 11. IF SLOWING OUST BECOMES A NUISANCE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY WATER FROM A TANK TRUCK TO AL CONSTRUCTION MEAS. 12. SWEEP ADJACENT STREET IN ACCORDANCE 15104 CRY REQUIREMENTS Mixture 25A Modified (268) Prairie Meadow & Streambanks Common Ham. 001001001 Name X el M, 9aabm, 6i9 Andaam'n 9rmm 5.0 Co* aramane Ammons mmMnf, 00.1 Par. ,S..m pi6. imam 5 Nw Daana aatr Haar nwvPa9ua. 0.6 sS.. „tw M. mniama 0.6 anima mi. 6.0 9o,ta.M gram Catammfw6. minas • 0.2 Meet/ Llrtrd•9 Dmm.dum cam.. 64 Wheat gram. ,Omar Oym *. teallya 0 a• -T.. Virginia Dymu. NgFia. 0.0 9* ...d Fuataium perf'Matorn 0.2 Manna gram. mod Cam. grad. 0.2 Mama gam. 40.4 GFF.d6 ,1r da 0.3 Eay .rMM.r Nine. hWantaM6 0.7 Moe -flag ih .nminla-68 CO M.adO. Mmim.lar Lk.. rawl.Raa 0.4 Tao 6 zing., 6*6. p.45686 drys 0.• Gat Mae 0000 Loci. e6hW110m 0.1 Rya 9aµ annual W01 81690 10.0 Ma d8 BO.ar NMndw fin• 0 6 M.o. 69°m°` va 6.i. maw ;Madam vir.a0un 1.0 9o.gre.. Rod Pm .069 40 99 006 Soan'e Rua6ecY0 h0ta 0.6 Gan 6dn. Slrpw amoime 0.3 Wad gram Sdnaa. 1Wrim, 0. G wd 2 low -lm 9adraad Sal9aga mama.. 02 Indian Pam Smya.fium SS , Cord, mai. sat dm pa4m6900 10 3.0 Ma Verbena a rot 05 mmain larm664 ed .fi rania btlalala 02 02 loot 24.0 coma virgin. 1 0.1 C . Amender, 21ma coma 0.4 Tonal: 100.0 Rats 30 Ito/aim (33 41/14*)._ NM 00•d oQew� -110610 a and far mOand rat. bn. b M 0(I i lo I•2t fi ow0000 .1 Ma Se9Y m h 00.. «ry m m m eM •. m. m a m aM 4 . Pm�9r 6Nnn 13 M ,paam a.m.. CONTRACTOR MUST CONTACT ENGINEER'S WETLAND SPECIAUST PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION OF MITIGATION AREAS AT: (952) 546 -7801( �v. /DATE REVISIONS 9r TENSION 2_12 -01 4 -6 -01 RF 1 PREUMINANY PLAN SUBMITTAL RF I CITY It 'WATERSHED REVISIONS 5-7 -01 OS CRY REVISIONS 8 -13 -01 RF NEW SUBMITTAL /1 NEAEHY S PRE THAT iTs PLO. NCER CATl01A OR ` SCHOELL & MADSON, INC` r OWNER /DEVELOPER REPORT WAS PREPARED 9Y ALE DR VNICE MY 01ROFE 586866 6 0068 4011' WA A 0146 LICENSED 0F6SK1NAL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNING ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MVIER:PA SOIL TESTING • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10590 WAYZATA 6. 418 5 SUITE 1 MINNETONKA MN 55305 (952) 546- 7801'" FAX 548 -9085 REVLEwED 9V: OATE / WWW.R9Resllm0afi0n.c0m v / I-: \ENG \;.1513 \(Jt)h \tie \PREGRA DOUG STALK DATE: :G 00425Ci NERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 422 EAST COUNTY ROAD D ST PAUL, MN 651- 481 -0017 DA : AUGUST 13 2001 (.1 Of I a • / vin PROJECT NAME /SHEET TITLE SADDLE CLUB ADDITION LINO LAKES, MN PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 61513 -006 SHEET 4 OF 7 SHEETS 18RY UNK SANITARY OMER5 f 7 FUTURE 8' WATERMAIN 2 / L 01 OTHERS HV.- 885.40 2 3 1 I I i \ L - / ^ A PERTA.- 588.50.10.8 1807.8E OUTLOT E CONNECT 8' DIP 5152 WM 1320' TO 21TV CONNECTION.. . 110' -18' CB 17 RIM•901.80 INV. =69750 18 19 195' -8• SOR35 0 0.400 58111 INV.- 888.20 101' -8' 50035 0 0.401 N NURP BASIN A HW1 -897.6 NWL -894.8 RIM - 902.40 IM/.- 886.60 2 115• -18' RCP 614- 901.50 NV.- 896.50(5115 20(TIM-897.1) 0 1.360 51161 9 6144- 899.50 INV.-894.67(5) 109:394. N)-' 32' -12• RC' • 1.001 CBMH 11 RIM -90220 4 001.-897.10 90-15' RCP 0 0.600 COON 12 MM- 997.40 �(>�1 INV.- 897.90(5) 1/64-4198.60(E) L - ED2- 697.70(Nj 8' -21' RCP•N %60 1' RCP FES , 11NV.44894 190' -8' 50835 0 0.400 RIM - 902.50 0N.- 892.30 40-8' SDR35 0 0.400 55_3 RIM - 901.70 INV0- 892.19 CB 16 PoM - 903.30 204.- 899.10 9 RIMS -90320 119.- 667.60 CB fi RIM-896.00 INV.- 694.38 58109 13 PoM •905.00 961.- 900A0(N) 118•00.20 (56E) '- 121'RCP 0 1. 0 3.750 / / i I N / OUTLOT)B / l / L OUTLOT B RCAD HWL -892.1 PoM •90200 6"'•-893.40 BLOCK 3 KN.>= 890.70 2' -la' RCP 0 0.300 RI/4-407.50 1140-895.00 - 905.50 INV.- 889.000 58 14 RIM- 906.00 INV. -900.70 77' -8' SOROS 0 0.400 - \ 32' -12' RCP 0 1.001 TL0OT B CORN 05' -8' SOR35 • 0.40X RIM - 904.20 INV.- 899.70 - / 60•-8' 500 35 • 0.401 \ 10110 00 WARN 3 RIM -904.00 IM'.- 693.12( INV.- 899.15( 5' -12' RCP • 1.000 /yl• / / / 225' -21' RCP 0 0.240 COW 2 \ 636 -902.60 8(1) INV.- 892.3 I / 2' -24 RCP 0 0.24X 4-2 -89.30 N / L 1 POW FUT. CB J 4 RIM -90200 INV.- 891.80(E) MV.•892.00(14) 150-27'-'913P 0 0.200 IXV.- 897.70(00) OUTLOT B RCM • HWL -892.1 \. 9060 P.02614 P.02P.02614 g ' P / HWL•894.3• 185 -8915 FUTURE 32' -12' RCP 010 003.146000 1560 55 SUBCUT 1• FILL WITH 1' GRANULAR SOILS 0 ERSRNC SANITARY 4RT -8' SOR35 0 0.400 NH 1 RIM - 901.50 ON -891.50 71 0 90 120 180 LEGEND 1Z"-§r) E91R_T- 060005° 53X6* SEWER ° N10Q°R•N 1 DOMING WATERMAN 8' 540 WATErAN PROPOSED WATERMAN SWART SEWER e' 5A! SE 74.111 PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER tPROPOSED HYDRANT W/ VALVE I-44- PROPOSED GATE VALVE CONSTRUCTION NOTES:= 1. REFER TO ARCHITECTS SITE PLAN FOR WILDING MN0 PARKING LAYOUT. DIMENSIONS, AND LOCATORS. 2. THE UTILITY CONTRACTOR SHALL VEROY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS CF THE BUILDING PIPE SYSTEM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTING SERVICE CONNECTIONS. 3. Al PIPE CONNECTIONS TO ETOSIING ROUES STRUCTURES SHALL BE NOR-N -SEA.' 08 CITY APPROVED EQUAL FOR CONCRETE BLOCK OR BRICK STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCT AN OPENING EWA. TO THE PIPE SIZE GROUT AROUND PIPE TO CLOSE OPENING AN0 REPAR STRUCTURE TO CRY REQUIREMENTS. TIE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY TYPE OF CONNECTION WITH CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND COORDINATE ANY REWIRED CITY DISINFECRONS NEEDED FOR CITY ACCEPTANCE 4. 5112G1 RESTORATION RECUIREYENT5. 1 -1/• 01U 31005 WEAR COURSE 3-1/2' BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE 8' CL 5 AGO. (1000 CRUSHED UMESLONE) COMPACTED 528CRADE IND TRENCH SACK FILL. 5. PRIOR TO UOUTY CONSTRUCTION 114E CONTRACTOR SHALL FlET.D VERIFY EXISTING UTILITY LOCATORS AND INVERTS. ANY OISCRFPANCT BETWEEN PUW5 AN0 FlE153 CONDITIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE OWNER IMMEDIATELY. WARNING 114E CONTRACTOR 9VLJ. CONTACT ALL PUNIC UTILITIES FOR LOCATORS OF ALL UNDERGROUND MARES. CAKES, CONDUITS, PIPES. MANHOLES. VALVES. OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE 114E ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED WRING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO 0164ER. AUG ciry REVISIONS BY REVISION 2 -12 -01 4 -8 -01 RF PREL1016AITY PLAN SUBMITTAL RF CITY k ''WATERSHED TENSIONS 5 -7 -01 DS CFIY REV1510N5 8 -13 -01 RF N6* SUBMITTAL / r NEREHY E81Fr THAT 1119 PUN, SPECIFICATION. OR ' REPORT WAS PREPARED eY ME OR UNDER MY MELT SUPERVISION AND I1N0 1 AM A CULT 0*10 0 PROFESSIONAL D PFESSIONAL FNGWEER UNDER THE LAWS Of THE STATE OF MINNESOTA DOUG STAHL DATE RED. NO. IPS. / :SPEWED RD SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. \ 1" OWNER /DEVELOPER 260104 ERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNING SOIL TESTING • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SURE 1 MINNETONKA, MN 55305 (952) 548 -7001 FAX 548 -9065 W W W 6oho4Nnla0°on.eem F: \EN6\61 13 \OOb \O2 \PREIJTILI HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 422 EAST COUNTY ROAD D ST PAUL, MN 651 - 481 -0017 DATE: AUGUST 13. 2001 / FY.dwg, {) [13/2001 09:44:13 AM, (_aivinT /PROJECT NAME /SHEET TITLE SADDLE CLUB ADDITION LINO LAKES, MN PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN J S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 61513 -006 SHEET 5 OF 7 SHEETS tl G£0TEATILE WITH NET BACKING BACKFILL GEOTEXTILE TO OVERLAP THROUGH TRENCH. 5' METAL OR 2'0211000 FENCE POST 11 NOTE -SILT FENCE SHALL CONFORM TO MN00T 3888, TYPE B. -FENCING SHALL BE PLACED ALONG CONTOURS OR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. SILT FENCE 06 OF OUANTRSES r' /-RIP RAP TUTU AR BLANKET SEC. 8 -B r'' R GRANULAR FILTER BLANKET OR APPROVED FABRIC FILTER -� BLANKET, 3' UNDER SEC. A -A RAP RIP RAP DETAIL FOR RCP APRONS 6' Min. 1' To 2' Washed Rock P1 Rock 3iI9 shook! be 1' to 2' in &ae ouch oa Mn00T CA -1 or CA -2 coupe oggragote. A grat.ABla fabne may be Ford under the rock to prevent migration of the weedy: mg rag into the atom. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1- 27 -97, REP 6-9. 8703-5 12' DEPTH -CL2 RIP RAP WITH FABRIC RIP RAP OVERFLOW DETAIL. R/W ARIES VARIES 16' 16' VARIES 7/'A' -4' 707501E k 500 (BY OTHERS) 2.01 -1.5' -2350 TYPE IN 4 BIT. NEARING COURSE -TACK COAT Y -2350 217E LV 2 OR 3 8R. NON - WEARING COURSE 5' AGGREGATE 6•50. CL 5 (PLACED ON APPRO,58 5UBGRAOE) 24' SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TYPICAL SECTION (URBAN STREET /PERMANENT SECTION) 5' MAIL ton NWL OVER EXCAVATE BOTTOM 2' FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT STORAGE TYPICAL BASIN GRADING - 3' CLEAR CRUSHED ROCK BERM AROUND GRATE. DO NOT COVER GRATE. REVISIONS REV150N 2 -12 -011 4 -6 -01 122 OE1 P O0.1.166AR .17LT ir DEPTH *8. 4_ EP1 rnA911aM UR g• OEP0 RE PA YD. GL N. CU Y. CU 19 12• 117 09 1.3 15' 1C . 13 1a 53 45 7-3 SIT 3 0• U L 17. 1 LS 26 42' a o 11.7 i3A GI .10. s )z6 7.2 47 213 26.1 tae 111 SOT eff 20.6 2 19 MO 211 MA 116 too 75' eY r 273 50.7 xs 146 174 1 � 1 sir 23.1 22.1 259 vn PIPE - AROf ii SA 15 ie• 0.2 iii 16 1. n9 .N 06 a 1.i .6• 216 111 ni 519 1. 10Y 6 17.4 115• .2 10.6 5 21 26.1 20.4 1. M. 4 49.0 243 716 WI 1W 593 29A 1110.3 44.7 r' /-RIP RAP TUTU AR BLANKET SEC. 8 -B r'' R GRANULAR FILTER BLANKET OR APPROVED FABRIC FILTER -� BLANKET, 3' UNDER SEC. A -A RAP RIP RAP DETAIL FOR RCP APRONS 6' Min. 1' To 2' Washed Rock P1 Rock 3iI9 shook! be 1' to 2' in &ae ouch oa Mn00T CA -1 or CA -2 coupe oggragote. A grat.ABla fabne may be Ford under the rock to prevent migration of the weedy: mg rag into the atom. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1- 27 -97, REP 6-9. 8703-5 12' DEPTH -CL2 RIP RAP WITH FABRIC RIP RAP OVERFLOW DETAIL. R/W ARIES VARIES 16' 16' VARIES 7/'A' -4' 707501E k 500 (BY OTHERS) 2.01 -1.5' -2350 TYPE IN 4 BIT. NEARING COURSE -TACK COAT Y -2350 217E LV 2 OR 3 8R. NON - WEARING COURSE 5' AGGREGATE 6•50. CL 5 (PLACED ON APPRO,58 5UBGRAOE) 24' SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TYPICAL SECTION (URBAN STREET /PERMANENT SECTION) 5' MAIL ton NWL OVER EXCAVATE BOTTOM 2' FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT STORAGE TYPICAL BASIN GRADING - 3' CLEAR CRUSHED ROCK BERM AROUND GRATE. DO NOT COVER GRATE. REVISIONS REV150N 2 -12 -011 4 -6 -01 RF RF PRELIMINARY RAN SUBMITTAL C0'7 k WATERSHED REVISIONS 6 -7 -01 OS CITY REVISIONS 8 -13 -01 RF NEW SUBMITTAL (l'HEAEHY GRITTY THAT THIS PUN, 5140 01CATI0N. OR \ I / RETORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER 177 DIRER 2.1IPERMSION AND TNT 1 AM A 1ULY LICENSE) PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNOR TIE UN'S Of THE STATE Of MINNESOTA DOUG STAHL DUE: REG. N0. 19 :vow. S1`. DATE SCHOELL & MIADSON, INC. / OWNER /DEVELOPER ENGINEERS • 53.5951084 • PLANNING 501L TESTING • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SURE 1 MNNETONKA, MN 55305 (952) 548 -7801 FAX: 548 -9085 5 W 5.eehw 71112 d 6011. aom 1 :\ ENu \b1513 \n:)r; \t)2 \PkEDETAIU.cwg, O HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 450 EAST COUNTY ROAD D ST PAUL, MN 861 -481 -0017 /0x11 09:42:52 AID, Calvin! I DATE: AUGUST 13, 2001 / PROJECT NAME /SHEET TITLE SADDLE CLUB ADDITION LINO LAKES, MN PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION DETAILS S.M.1. PROJECT NO. 61513 -006 SHEET 6 OF 7 SHEETS r. 15 3200 'td3 ?: t�nsa EZ ASPEN LA. OUTLET E 7L 0 80 120 180 N LEGEND Cr DENOTES TREE TO BE SAVED DENOTES TREE TO BE REMOVED 0000 DENOTES SILT FENCE/ UNITS OF CONSTRUCTION 10611116110 CONSTRUCTION NOTES:_ 1. PLACE SILT FENCE PROTECTION AT THE ORIPUNE OF TREES DESIGNATED TO REMAN. FOR THOSE ASSOCIATED tWTFH THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION PRESERVE AND PROTECT THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. TREE LE90O Number following abbreviation denotes estimated diameter in inches three feat above ground I.0N. The second number f any) denotes the number of thinks at that ation 11 denotes a dead tree). Number following shrubs denotes it"s diameter in feet 0 Denotes deciduous tree. CI Denotes shrub. Denotes coniferous tree. ' ' Denotes tree line. A Denotes Ash AV Denotes Arbor 018. BF Denotes Balsam Fir BA Denotes Basswood BI Denotes Birch BE Denotes Box Elder BN Denotes Butternut BU Denotes Bush CA Denotes Catalpa CR Denotes Cedar CH Denote* Cherry CN Denotes Cottonwood DG Dent.* Dogwood EL Denotes Elm FR Denotes Fruit GN Denotes Gingko N Denotes Hackbeny HC Denotes Home Chestnut IR Denotes Ironwood 4U Denotes Junio., KC Denotes Kentucky Coffee U Denotes Lilac LO Denotes Locust M Denotes Maple MP Denotes Maga Pin. O Denotes Oak PI Denote* Pine PO Denotes Poplar RO Denotes Russian Olive SM Denotes Silver Maple SP Denotes Soma. TD Denotes Tree Deciduous TE Denotes Tree Evergreen WA Denotes Walnut Wt Denotes Willow E:omple O BE8.2 AUG 1 3 20( §� CITY OF Ls3Tr WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT 9..L PUBLIC UITURES FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNOERCROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS. PIPES. MANHOLES. VALVES. OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. 4E SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWNER. REVISIONS SY 2 -12 -01 RF PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL 4-5 -01 8 -7-01 RF OS CITY te WATERSHED .REVISIONS CRY REVISIONS 8 -13 -01 RF NEW SUBMITTAL ("HEREBY CERTIFY 'MAT 1195 ANC, SP8LO 1Gi10N. OR REPORT WAS PREPARED 81 4E OR UNDER 111 DIRECT SIIPFANSION ANO TWAT 4 A4 A OULT LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER 111E LAWS OF Ott STATE OF 4056019. DOUG STALL GTE RED. N0. 18000 REVIEWED BY: SCHOELL do MADSON, INC. OWNER /DEVELOPER ` ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNING 501. TESTING ' ENVIRONMENTAL 'SERVICES 70580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 1 904414 TONKA. NN 55305 (952) 548 -7801 FAX: 548 -9085 www.eohoegmadean.cem DATE F:AENG \b1513 \UU€-ALIZ \TFZEE -PR HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 422 EAST COUNTY ROAD D ST PAUL, MN 651-481-0017 r.0 wg, Lij[J u'i: A '.i2 7 ATE: AU UST 13 2001 vin /PROJECT NAME /SHEET TITLE SADDLE CLUB ADDITION LINO LAKES, MN TREE PRESERVATION PLAN S.M.l. PROJECT NO. 61513 -006 SHEET 7 OF 7 SHEETS 1,1; 4i/ ZONE Boi ZONE B 1 / ) O/ LANTERN LN CAPTAIN PLACE ZONE B BIRCH ZON C O 1 tn PHEASANT RUN STREET ZONE A ZONE C COUNTY TOTEM TRAIL ZONE B ZONE C HIGHWAY ZONE B ii 1I 10 z w Q ZONE ZONE A UOUN FY ZONE C ZONE C ZONE C ROAD 0 ZONE C ZONE C J J 0 2 II ZOIVEC ii Ii ANOKA COUNTY RAMSEY COUNTY WASHINGTON KEY TO MAP 500•Year Flood Boundary 100 -Year Flood Boundary Zone Designations* 100 -Year Flood Boundary 500-Year Flood Boundary Base Flood Elevation Line With Elevation In Feet ** Base Flood Elevation in Feet Where Uniform Within Zone ** Elevation Reference Mark Zone D Boundary River Mile 513 (EL 987) RM7x •M1.5 * *Referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 *EXPLANATION OF ZONE DESIGNATIONS ZONE EXPLANATION A Areas of 100 -year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined. AO Areas of 100 -year shallow flooding where depths are between one (1) and three (3) feet; average depths of inundation are shown, but no flood hazard factors are determined. AH Areas of 100 -year shallow flooding where depths are between one (1) and three (3) feet; base flood elevations are shown, but no flood hazard factors are determined. A1-A30 Areas of 100 -year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors determined. A99 Areas of 100 -year flood to be protected by flood protection system under construction; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined. B Areas between limits of the 100 -year flood and 500 - year flood; or certain areas subject to 100 -year flood- ing with average depths less than one (1) foot or where the contributing drainage area is less than one square mile; or areas protected by levees from the base flood. (Medium shading) C Areas of minimal flooding. (No shading) G Areas of undetermined, but possible, flood hazards. ✓ Areas of 100 -year coastal flood with velocity (wave action); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined. V1 -1/30 Areas of 100 -year coastal flood with velocity (wave action); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors determined. NOTES TO USER Certain areas not in the special flood hazard areas (zones A and V) may be protected by flood control structures. This map is for flood insurance purposes only; it does not neces- sarily show all areas subject to flooding in the community or all planimetric features outside special flood hazard areas. For adjoining map panels, see separately printed Index To Map Panels. INITIAL IDENTIFICATION: DECEMBER 13, 1974