Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ PACKET 5-10-21 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 747-3900 www.lakeelmo.org NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on Monday May 10, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA Please note: Note: Social Distancing protocols will be in place in the City Council Chambers due to the Corona Virus pandemic. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a. April 26, 2021 4. Public Hearings a. Launch Properties/Crossroads Properties PUD Preliminary Plan for a Light Industrial Business Park (Crossroads East First Addition) – Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue 5. New/Unfinished Business a. None 6. Communications/Updates a. City Council Update 05-04-2021 Meeting – 2 setback variances, Wallace RLS, Airport Zoning Ordinance 05-18-2021 Meeting - ?? b. Staff Updates c. Upcoming PC Meetings: 1. May 24, 2021 2. June 14, 2021 7. Adjourn ***Note: Every effort will be made to accommodate person or persons that need special considerations to attend this meeting due to a health condition or disability. Please contact the Lake Elmo City Clerk if you are in need of special accommodations. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-26-21 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2021 Commission Chair Risner called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Risner, Graen, Mueller Steil, Weeks COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: none STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Roberts, City Planner Ben Prchal Pledge of Allegiance at 7:00 PM Approve Agenda: M/S/P: Steil/Weeks moved to approve the agenda. Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously. Approve Minutes: M/S/P: Weeks/Risner moved to approve the Planning Commission minutes of April 12th, 2021. Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearings: a. FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE: Request is for a front yard setback variance to build a detached accessory building (a garage) in the front yard. The proposed garage would be located between the existing house and 32nd Street for the property located at 11075 32nd Street North. City Planner Ben Prchal gave the staff report. He explained that the applicant would like to place the accessory structure closer to the front lot line than the home for several reasons. If the garage was located in the rear yard there would be issues with accessing the building, the structure also could not meet both the setback requirement from the OHWL and top of bluff, and the septic system is also located in the rear yard. Prchal also explained that the property will soon connect to City sewer services (once they are available). The survey also shows a slope towards the water that would make construction difficult. Planner Prchal explained that based on all these factors, Staff has determined the rear yard would be a less ideal location for the accessory building. He also noted that given the size of the front yard it would appear that the accessory building could go in multiple locations. However, after visiting the site, Staff noted the applicant has chosen a good location for their building. Prchal also explained the applicants would like to build the structure on an already flat piece of ground and they have located the building between the water and sewer utility connections that will be servicing the property. Placing the structure in another location, perhaps closer to the home, would require additional grading. Applicant Amy Knowlan stated that they would be adding trees along the street to help camouflage the new structure. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-26-21 There were two neighbors that requested that this variance not be approved. They did not attend the public hearing. Commissioner Risner opened the public hearing at 7:18 PM There were no comments from the public. Commissioner Risner closed the public hearing at 7:19 PM. M/S/P: Steil/Weeks moved to recommend approval of the variance request to locate an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the principle building for the property at 11075 32nd St. with recommended findings and conditions of approval”. Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously. b. SETBACK VARAINCE: Request is for a setback variance from the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of Lake Jane to construct a new sport court 63 feet from the OHWL. This proposed location requires a 37 foot setback variance and is for the property located at 8950 Lake Jane Trail. City Planner Ben Prchal gave staff report. He explained that in 2002, the previous owners of the property requested and received approval of variances to build the existing home on the property. These variances were from the front right-of-way (ROW) as well as the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of the lake. Mr. Prchal told the Commission that Steve and Haley Meisterling are now the owners of the property and in 2020 they requested the City Council amend the conditions outlined in the original approving resolution to build the home. The Council approved their request and conditions 2-7 and 9 were removed as well as the covenants that further regulated the property (2020). Planner Prchal noted that with those conditions removed the property is now regulated to the same degree as other lake lots. He went on to explain that the property owners have now requested permission from the City to install a sport court on their property. With the property being a lake shore lot, there are minimum setbacks from the high water line (OHWL) that improvements are required to meet. Applicant Steve Meisterling added that two more neighbors are in agreement with the other two neighbors that requested that this variance be approved. Commissioner Risner opened the public hearing at 7:39 PM. There were no comments from the public. Commissioner Risner closed the public hearing at 7:39 PM. M/S/P: Graen/Mueller moved to recommend approval of a 63 foot setback variance from the OHWL of Lake Jane for the installation of a sport court on the property addressed as 8950 Lake Jane Trail with recommended findings and conditions of approval. Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously. c. REGISTERED LAND SURVEY: The City of Lake Elmo, in conjunction with Mr. Joseph Wallace, the owner of the property located 10920 32nd Street North, are requesting City approval of a registered land survey (RLS). This RLS will divide the existing property into two separate parcels for tax and identification purposes. Planning Director Roberts gave staff report. He explained that the City of Lake Elmo Engineering staff, in conjunction with the property owner, Mr. Wallace, are requesting City approval of an RLS to split the property with the address of 10920 32nd Street North in to two separate parcels. The proposed subdivision will result in the creation of one 0.33-acre (14,371 square-foot) parcel (Tract A) on which the Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-26-21 existing house (10920 32nd Street North) is located and second 0.26 (11,489 square-foot) parcel (Tract B) which includes parts of Upper 33rd Street Lane right-of-way. Director Roberts noted that this request would not create any additional building sites. He also explained that City approval of an RLS is required in this case because the property in question is Torrens property (not Abstract) and that City staff is making this request to allow the City to purchase proposed Tract B from Mr. Wallace as it includes parts of Upper 33rd Street Lane North. This proposal was prompted by the City Council’s recent approval of the Old Village Phase 5 and 6 Public Improvement Project for this part of Lake Elmo. Commissioner Risner opened the public hearing at 7:50 PM. No comments from the public. Commissioner Risner closed the public hearing at 7:50 PM. M/S/P: Weeks/Steil moved to recommended approval of proposed Registered Land Survey No. 131 for the property located at 10920 32nd Street N. Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously. New/Unfinished Business a. None Communications/Updates a. City Council Update 04-20-2021 meeting – No Planning Commission Items 05-04-2021 meeting -2 Variances, RLS, Airport Zoning Ordinance b. Staff Updates - Still looking for two Planning Commissioners. c. Upcoming PC Meetings: 1. May 10, 2021 2. May 24, 2021. M/S/P: Risner/Weeks moved adjourn the meeting. Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:56 PM. Respectfully submitted, Diane Wendt Permit Technician PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4C – PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 5/10/2021 AGENDA ITEM: 4A – PUBLIC HEARING TO: Planning Commission ITEM: Launch Properties/Crossroads Properties PUD Preliminary Plan for a Light Industrial Business Park (Crossroads East First Addition) SUBMITTED BY: Ken Roberts, Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner Jack Griffin, City Engineer INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: The City has received requests from Launch Properties (Dan Regan) and Crossroads Properties (David Johnson) for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan and a Preliminary Plat related to a two-phase, 297,570 square foot light industrial development in two buildings that would be located at the intersection of Lake Elmo Avenue and Hudson Boulevard North. On April 1, 2014, the City Council approved a Concept Plan for a Light Industrial Business Park (with 2 buildings) and a zoning map amendment from RT (rural transitional) to BP (business park) for this site. The BP – Business Park/Light Industrial zoning allows for a variety of office, light industrial, and non-production industrial uses on the site. ISSUE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission is being asked to review the preliminary PUD plans, hold a public hearing provide feedback and then make a recommendation to the City Council about the preliminary PUD plans. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicants: Launch Properties (Dan Regan) and Crossroads Properties (David Johnson) Property Owner: Launch Park Lake Elmo, LLC, 800 LaSalle Avenue, Suite 1610 Minneapolis, MN. Location: Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 36. Northeast quadrant of the intersection of Lake Elmo Ave. N. and Hudson Blvd. N. PID Number 36.029.21.33.0001 Requests: Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat Existing Land Use: Vacant/agricultural fields Existing Zoning: BP – Business Park Surrounding Land Use: Agricultural fields, single family residential, drive-in movie theater Surrounding Zoning: RT – Rural Transitional, LDR – Low Density Single Family Residential 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING Comprehensive Plan: BP - Business Park Existing Zoning: BP – Business Park/Light Industrial History: The site has been used for agricultural fields for a long time. Deadline for Action: Application Complete – April 12, 2021 60 Day Deadline – June 11, 2021 Extension Letter Mailed – No 120 Day Deadline – August 10, 2021 Applicable Regulations: 154.550 – BP Business Park Zoning District Article XIX – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Regulations Chapter 153 - Subdivision Regulations City of Lake Elmo Design Standards REQUEST DETAILS/ANALYSIS Project Overview The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Launch Properties (Dan Regan) and Crossroads Properties (David Johnson) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan and a Preliminary Plat for property located northeast of the intersection of Lake Elmo Avenue North and Hudson Boulevard North. The details concerning the two different aspects of the request are as follows: • A request for a PUD Preliminary Plan to allow the construction of two light industrial buildings with a net building area of 297,570 square feet. A PUD has been requested in order to allow for a zero lot line build out of what will eventually be two separate building parcels and to allow for a listing of permitted and conditional uses within the buildings and the site. • A preliminary plat to divide the property into two lots and three outlots (for storm water management) and to allow for the necessary public street right-of-way and easement dedications. If the City decides to approve the request, the applicant may then proceed with the preparation of final development plans and a final plat for the site. Under the City’s PUD Ordinance, the applicant must submit final development plans as part of the review process. The attached application narrative and site plans provide an overview of the applicant’s request that will be built out in two phases. The first phase will include the construction of a 148,470 square foot building for Crossroads Properties that would be located in the western portion of the project site. There is not a specific use or tenant identified for the building, but it is being planned to handle businesses looking for “flexible, functional space in an accessible location along the I-94 corridor” in accordance with the applicant’s project narrative. The second phase of the project includes a building of about 149,100 square feet that would be located in the eastern portion of the PUD. There is no specific use identified for the building, but it is being planned to handle businesses or perspective tenants that intend to use the space(s) for a warehouse/distribution center. The bulk of the space in the building would be used as a warehouse/distribution area, with smaller office areas located at the west side of the building facing Lake Elmo Avenue North. 3 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING Access for both buildings would be via a shared 30-foot-wide driveway entrance off of Hudson Boulevard North, with ancillary access provided through a driveway in the extreme southeast corner of the site. The proposed site plan includes a 100-foot-wide landscape and buffer area along the northern portion of the site and shared storm water facilities that would be located along Hudson Boulevard North. Please see the attached project narrative for more information about the proposed development. As part of the application for a PUD, the applicant has requested flexibility from some of the current BP zoning district requirements as follows: • The establishment of a zero lot line configuration for the shared driveway and parking lots between the two proposed buildings and lots. If the City does not approve the proposed zero lot line configuration as part of the project, the applicant would need to set the parking areas back 15 feet from the adjoining lot line (which would leave 30 feet of space between the two parking areas). The PUD will allow the creation of a common driveway and parking areas, all of which will be internal to the proposed development. • Allowing land uses in the PUD as permitted uses rather than requiring City approval of a separate conditional use permit (CUP) for many of the uses as is required by the BP zoning ordinance. 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan has designated this site Business Park (BP) in the land use plan. The specific description for the land use category from the 2040 Comprehensive Plan reads as follows: BUSINESS PARK: This land use provides for a wide variety of professional businesses such as medical and research facilities, offices and corporate headquarters. Retail sales of goods and services are allowable uses by conditional use permit provided such uses are goods and services for the employees of the permitted business use. This land use designation excludes any residential use. Zoning Designation. As noted above, the City rezoned the parcel to the BP – Business Park/Light Manufacturing District in 2014 consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The specific description of the BP zoning District is: BP Business Park/Light Manufacturing District. The purpose of the BP District is to provide areas for attractive, high quality business park development primarily for office, high quality manufacturing and assembly, and non-retail uses in developments which provide a harmonious transition to residential development and neighborhoods by: 1) Conducting all business activities and essentially all storage inside buildings; 2) Consisting of high quality and attractive buildings which blend in with the environment; 3) providing open space, quality landscaping and berming; 4) including berming and buffering of parking, loading docks and other similar functions; and 5) protecting and enhancing the natural environment; and 6) providing users with an attractive working environment that is unique in the eastern metropolitan area with immediate access to I-94. Proposed Uses. The proposed Preliminary PUD Plan and the buildings/uses are generally consistent with the BP Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the BP Zoning designation. As part of their application, the developer provided the City with a listing of the proposed permitted uses within the PUD. City staff would not support having all the listed uses as permitted uses in the PUD. There are some uses on the developer’s list that the City should require approval of a CUP and there are others uses such as day care and child care centers that the City should not allow in the development. 4 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING As part of the request for a planned development, City staff is recommending the City structure the PUD so the allowed uses within the development are consistent with the permitted and conditional uses within the BP zoning district. If the City approves the proposed preliminary PUD plan, staff is recommending the Developer provide the City with an updated list of permitted, conditional and prohibited land uses and activities for the PUD with an application for final PUD and final plat approval. The final PUD also should specify any of the zoning exceptions being sought by the applicant as described in the preceding section. The PUD Ordinance provides for flexibility from the underlying zoning standards with the understanding that this flexibility will help a developer better utilize site features and obtain a higher quality development. This flexibility would be necessary for the proposed setbacks for the shared driveway and for the adjacent parking areas on each of the development lots in the proposed PUD. Environmental Review. The proposed project does not meet any threshold for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). Site Character: The proposed development site is 30.2 gross acres in size and located within the City’s I-94 corridor planning area. The site has historically been used for agricultural fields except for the southern portion, which is lower in elevation and covered with vegetation. The surrounding existing uses include the Vali-Hi drive in movie theater, single-family homes to the north in the Hunter’s Crossing development and the Forest residential subdivision across Lake Elmo Avenue to the west. Preliminary Plat. The developer/applicant is asking the City to approve a preliminary plat as part of the PUD approval. The proposed preliminary plat would create 2 buildable lots that would each be 12.97 acres in size and would have 3 outlots for storm water management. The preliminary plat also shows right-of-way dedication for Lake Elmo Avenue. The platting process allows the City to ensure that all the necessary street right-of-way and drainage and utility easements are in place on the property. The City Engineer noted that additional right-of-way dedication appears to be required along Hudson Boulevard to accommodate the proposed turn lanes and to maintain the required typical section for the roadway and bituminous trail. The City requires 10-foot-wide drainage and utility easements along all public roadways including Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue. The applicant will be required to show these and all required easements on the project plans and on an updated preliminary plat. Site Plan: The proposed site plan shows two lots of 12.97 acres each for building sites, a 148,470 square-foot building on the west lot and a 149,100 square foot building on the eastern lot. The site plan also shows a 30-foot-wide shared access driveway to Hudson Boulevard, a total of 180 parking stalls, 48 spaces for parking semi-trucks and trailers and three outlots for storm water ponding along Hudson Boulevard. The proposed plan shows the parking spaces setback at least 100 feet and the proposed buildings setback more than 150 feet from the northern property line of the site. Setbacks: The Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum building setback of 150 feet from residential zones for buildings and 100 feet for parking areas (which would include maneuvering lanes and driveways) for properties zoned Business Park. The elements shown on the proposed site plan meet or exceed these minimum setback requirements. The applicant is proposing a berm and landscaping along the north property line to help mitigate the effects of the new development to the single-family homes to the north. The proposed buildings, parking areas and driveway areas will comply with the setback requirements of the BP zoning district with the exception of the internal side yard driveway and parking setback along the property line in the center of the site. Vehicular Access: The project plans show a primary access to the site would be a shared driveway along Hudson Boulevard about 670 feet east of Lake Elmo Avenue. The plans also show secondary driveway 5 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING access to Hudson Boulevard near the southeast corner of the property that is about 600 feet east of the first site access but is only about 200 feet from the existing access for the Vali Hi Drive-in movie theater. The City Engineer noted in his review comments that this driveway does not meet acceptable spacing requirements (660 feet minimum) for driveways on Hudson Boulevard. The developer is not proposing a driveway or access to the site from Lake Elmo Avenue. The City Engineer has noted that the driveways will need to comply with the City’s access spacing requirements and that the entrances along Hudson Boulevard North may need to be modified to meet these requirements. An earlier version of this PUD plan showed an access driveway to Lake Elmo Avenue in the northwest corner of the site. The City Engineer and the Washington County staff questioned the need and use of the Lake Elmo Avenue access point. After further review by the applicant, they revised their project plans to eliminate the driveway to Lake Elmo Avenue. This means all traffic going to and from this site will be using the two proposed driveways on Hudson Boulevard. Traffic Study Summary. The applicant completed a traffic impact analysis for the proposed development. In summary, the traffic study concluded that “no geometric mitigation is required as a result of the development beyond what is proposed on Hudson Boulevard. It is recommended to install side street control at all site accesses.” Washington County staff also had comments about the traffic study. Note: The developer’s plans show improvements for Hudson Boulevard that include adding turn lanes at the main site access driveway and adding turn lanes at the intersection with Lake Elmo Avenue. Parking: The City’s Zoning Code requires one off-street parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area up to 20,000 square feet of light industrial space, 1 parking space per 300 square feet of office or sales area, plus 1 parking space per 3,000 square feet of storage area for motor freight and warehouse uses. The proposed plan notes a total required parking for Building (Lot) 1 of 95 parking stalls and 85 parking stalls for Building (Lot) 2. The proposed site plan shows 398 parking stalls on Lot 1 and 189 parking stalls on Lot 2. City staff cannot determine if the amount of proposed parking would meet the minimum code requirements but based on the applicant’s calculations and the number of spaces shown on the plans, City staff expects there would be enough off-street parking on the site. If the City approves the preliminary PUD plans, the applicant should provide the City with a detailed breakdown of the types of uses and their floor spaces with a detailed parking calculation for each building in the development. Sidewalks and Trails. The preliminary plan shows a bituminous trail along Hudson Boulevard but the plans do not include a trail or sidewalk along Lake Elmo Avenue. The proposed trail along Hudson Boulevard is consistent with the City’s Hudson Boulevard Design Standards for the installation of an off-street trail along the north side of Hudson Boulevard for the entire length of Hudson Boulevard in Lake Elmo. The plans also show concrete sidewalks adjacent to the entrance (public) sides of each of the buildings within the site. The concrete sidewalks also would connect to the trail along Hudson Boulevard and would cross the shared driveway near the center of the site to allow for safe pedestrian movement between the two properties. Although this is a commercial development, Staff is recommending that if the City approves the preliminary plans the developer amend the plans to include an eight-foot-wide trail along Lake Elmo Avenue within the County right-of-way. This trail would provide the start of a trail connection going to the north to the existing and planned multi-purpose trail and sidewalk along 5th Street to the north of the subject property. Consistency with Planned Unit Development Regulations. The applicant has requested City approval of a PUD for this development because it will have reduced driveway and parking lot setbacks and it 6 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING would have a variety of land uses and business within the development. Staff has reviewed the proposed plan for its consistency with requirements of Article XVII: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Regulations and has found the following: • Intent. The intent of a PUD is to provide for greater flexibility in the use of land and the placement and size of buildings within the development in order to achieve more creative development outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable and to better utilize site features and obtain a higher quality of development. Approval of a planned unit development shall result in a zoning change to a specific PUD overlay district, with specific requirements and standards that are unique to that development. • Identified Objectives. When reviewing requests for PUDs, the City is to consider whether one or more objectives as outlined in Section 154.751: Identified Objectives of the Zoning Code will be served or is achieved. Staff has found that the proposed development would meet the following objectives: A. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches. • The proposed development is in part not a typical, multi-building commercial warehouse development and instead proposes two style of buildings to provide a variety of spaces for commercial and light industrial users. B. Promotion of integrated land use, allowing a mixture of residential, commercial and public facilities. • The proposed development is intended to accommodate a mixture of commercial/light industrial land uses in an area with a variety of land uses including single-family homes to the north a drive-in movie theater to the east, Hudson Boulevard and Interstate 94 to the south and vacant properties to the west across Lake Elmo Avenue. G. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses. • The design of the buildings while meeting the required setbacks and screening should be compatible with the single-family homes to the north. J. Higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development technique. • The City may impose design guidelines and standards on light industrial development such as this proposal. a. Minimum Requirements. PUDs must meet the following minimum requirements: A. Lot Area. A PUD must include a minimum of 5 acres for undeveloped land or 2 acres for developed land within the approved development. • The proposed development meets this requirement as it is a 30.2-acre property. B. Open Space: For all PUDs, at least 20% of the project area not within street rights-of-way to be preserved as protected open space. Other public or site amenities may be approved as an alternative to this requirement. Any required open space must be available to the residents, tenants, or customers of the PUD for recreational purposes or similar benefit. Land reserved for storm water detention facilities and other required site improvements may 7 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING be applied to this requirement. Open space shall be designed to meet the needs of residents of the PUD and the surrounding neighborhoods, to the extent practicable, for parks, playgrounds, playing fields and other recreational facilities. • The applicant’s application materials do not include a calculation of the amount open space within the proposed PUD. For a 30.2 acre site, 6.04 acres would need to be shown to be preserved as protected open space to meet the 20 percent requirement. The three storm water management outlots have a total area of 2.32 acres. With the required setback and buffer area along the north property line of the site, the applicant may be able to show a total of 20 percent open space within the PUD. C. Street Layout… In newly developing areas, streets shall be designed to maximize connectivity in each cardinal direction, except where environmental or physical constraints make this infeasible. All streets shall terminate at other streets, at public land, or at a park or other community facility, except that local streets may terminate in stub streets when those will be connected to other streets in future phases of the development or adjacent developments. • The proposed development site has about 1,211 feet of frontage on Hudson Boulevard North and about 656 feet of frontage on Lake Elmo Avenue. The applicant is not proposing any new public streets but rather one primary, shared private driveway from Hudson Boulevard to serve the development that should meet City spacing and access management standards. It is a recommended condition of approval that the developer address all the comments outlined in the Engineering memo dated May 5, 2021, before submitting plans for a final plat and final PUD approval for this site. Proposed Design. There are two proposed designs of the buildings in the development. The Crossroads Properties building on the west lot would be 30 feet tall with a mix of office and warehouse spaces with off street parking for 398 personal vehicles and parking for 18 semi-trucks and trailers. The elevations of the Crossroads building show it with an exterior with a mix of smooth face architectural and textured pattern painted precast concrete panels. The colors shown on the plans for the panels are off-white with medium gray and dark blue accent areas. For the Launch Properties warehouse on the east lot, the proposed elevations show a 38 foot tall building to allow 32 feet of clear interior space. The exterior would have a mix of smooth face architectural and textured pattern painted precast concrete panels. The colors shown on the plans for the panels are off-white with light gray, medium gray and dark blue accent areas. There would be 189 off-street parking spaces for personal vehicles and 30 parking spaces for semi-trucks and trailers on the north side of the building. Adherence to Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards: The proposed development will need to meet the standards of the Lake Elmo design guidelines. It appears that the project will meet the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards in that: • The proposed structures are located and oriented in a manner that allows for pedestrian accessibility and provides visual interest from the public right-of-way. 8 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING • The buildings are located as close to the public street as possible, easily accessible from the street; setbacks are varied slightly; recreational and common spaces are located at the interior or rear of the site. • Streetscapes provide for pedestrian accessibility and safety while offering aesthetically pleasing environments. With this proposed development, the City should require the developer to install a trail along Hudson Boulevard and a sidewalk along Eagle Point Boulevard to meet this City design standard. • Examples of past developments adhere to building design requirements. It is a recommended condition of final PUD approval that the applicant include a detailed architectural plan proposal (with a listing of colors, materials, etc) for the all the buildings in the development for City approval. All of the building exterior designs and materials will need to conform to the design standards in the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual including those regarding building facades, rooflines, colors entries, lighting, roof-top equipment screening and exterior building materials. At first review, it appears that all the building styles and materials will meet or exceed the City’s design standards for commercial/industrial buildings. City staff will need to verify the proposed exterior designs and materials will meet the City’s design standards before issuing building permits for the buildings. Engineering Comments: The City Engineer has reviewed the preliminary PUD plans and provided comments in a review letter to the City dated May 5, 2021. The applicant will need to address the Engineer’s comments as part of the final plan submission for the site. Staff would like to highlight the following comments in summary: • Streets and Transportation o The site plan shows two driveways onto Hudson Boulevard for access to this property. The location of the proposed primary driveway near the center of the site meets the acceptable spacing guidelines. The location of the second driveway to the east does not meet acceptable spacing requirements. o The preliminary plans must be revised to relocate all trees outside of the public drainage and utility easements including the proposed watermain easements that are missing from the plans and the small/dry utility easement corridors along Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue that are missing on the plans. o Hudson Boulevard Improvements. The proposed preliminary plans show improvements to Hudson Boulevard as required and in general conformance with the Hudson Boulevard Design Standards, with an Urban Section along the north boulevard with a bituminous trail. • Municipal Sanitary Sewer o Sanitary sewer is available along the entire eastern property line of the development and at the southeast corner near the MCES meter station. The applicant or developer will be responsible for connecting to the City sanitary sewer system and extending individual sanitary sewer service lines to each of the buildings. o The applicant will be responsible to extend sanitary sewer stubs for connection to the adjacent properties. For this site, the applicant must extend a trunk 25-inch sanitary sewer main from the MCES meter station to the corner of Lake Elmo Avenue and Hudson Boulevard. The stub must be accessible on the east side of Lake Elmo Avenue for a jacking pit that would not disturb any part of the newly constructed site improvements or the reconstructed Hudson Boulevard improvements. 9 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING o The City typically provides cost participation for the trunk sanitary sewer, paying the pipe oversize cost difference between a standard 8-inch diameter pipe. There would be no cost participation for extra pipe depth. • Municipal Water Supply o The existing City water system is currently extended to the site with an existing 12-inch trunk watermain running along the east property line of the proposed development from the Hunter’s Crossing subdivision to Hudson Boulevard. o The application did not include domestic and fire suppression water demands required to serve the development, nor did the application propose supplemental fire suppression facilities. o Municipal water service is not sufficient to support fire suppression demands for the proposed development until Water Tower No. 4 is operational. The City is currently negotiating and investigating potential water tower sites. Until a water tower site is determined (by the City) to be feasible and has been acquired by the City, the schedule for having Water Tower No. 4 operational is unknown. o The applicant will be required to extend municipal water into the development at its sole cost. Watermain stubs are required to adjacent properties. A minimum 8-inch diameter looped watermain network internal to the site will be required to avoid dead end runs with private water services stubbed for connection to each individual building. o The applicant will be responsible to place fire hydrants and water system valves throughout the property at the direction of the Lake Elmo Public Works Director and the Fire Department. Additional hydrants may be required to meet spacing requirements for commercial properties. All fire hydrants shall be owned and maintained by the City. o All internal site watermain lines and fire hydrants placed within the development will remain City owned and operated. Therefore, minimum 30-foot-wide utility easements centered over the hydrant or pipe are required. These easements must be dedicated to the City and provided in the City’s standard form of easement agreement. Dedicated watermain easements must be shown on all site, grading, utility and landscape plans. • Stormwater Management o The proposed development is subject the construction of a storm water management plan and system that meets State, Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) and City rules. All stormwater facilities need to be designed and installed in accordance with City and Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) requirements. o The Stormwater Management Report must be revised (as noted in the City Engineer’s review comments dated May 5, 2021). o Storm water facilities proposed as part of the site plan to meet State and VBWD permitting requirements must constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual. o All stormwater facilities constructed for this development are to remain privately owned and maintained. The City will require the applicant or developer to execute and record of a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement with the City in its standard form. o Even as privately owned and maintained facilities, the City requires the developer to provide maintenance access roads or drives that meet City engineering design standards for all storm water facilities. The maintenance access must be clearly shown on the grading plans including access to the facility and BMP maintenance access to all flared end sections and forebay. o The grading plans are incomplete and must be revised and resubmitted for City approval (as noted in the City Engineer’s review memo dated May 5, 2021). 10 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING Storm Water and Erosion Control. The applicant will need to submit detailed storm water and erosion control plans with the preliminary and final development plans. These plans will need to conform to City of Lake Elmo and Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) requirements. The applicant is strongly encouraged to meet with VBWD to review the district requirements prior to preparing this plan. Water System Needs and Impacts The City needs to construct a new water tower in the area generally bounded by 10th Street on the north, Manning Avenue on the east and Keats Avenue on the west. This new water tower is necessary to help provide adequate water pressure to the existing water users and for future municipal water customers in this part of Lake Elmo. As noted by the City Engineer, Municipal water service is not sufficient to support fire suppression demands for the proposed development until Water Tower No. 4 is operational. The City is currently negotiating and investigating potential water tower sites. Until a water tower site is determined (by the City) to be feasible and has been acquired by the City, the schedule for having Water Tower No. 4 operational is unknown. The City has reached a frame work of understanding with a property owner for a possible site for the new water tower near for property near the intersection of Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue. The City has not yet entered into a purchase agreement for the site nor has the City completed the necessary site exploration (soil borings) of the site to determine if it is suitable for the construction of a water tower. There are many steps that need to be completed before a new water tower is ready to be put online. These include finalizing the purchase of the site, the design work, advertising for construction bids, the City awarding a construction contract for the new water tower, the actual construction and final testing. The City has not yet finalized a purchase agreement for a water tower site and the City has not yet started design work for the water tower. There is no timeline as to when the construction of a new water tower could start and there is no date yet as to when a new water tower would be operational and ready for use. Premature Development The City adopted new ordinance language earlier this year that outlines when a development may be premature – that is when the City is not ready or able to serve or provide services to a development because of any one of a variety of conditions. The new ordinance reads as follows: § 153.025 PREMATURE SUBDIVISION PROHIBITED. Any plat or other subdivision of property may be denied by the City Council if it is deemed by the City Council to be premature for development pursuant to the criteria listed below. (A) Any proposed plat or subdivision of property may be denied by the City Council if it is deemed by the City Council to be premature for development. The burden of proof shall be on the subdivider to demonstrate to the City Council that the proposed subdivision is not premature for development. The City may deem a subdivision premature if any of the following conditions exist: (1) Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. A proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if the subdivision is inconsistent with the goals, purposes, policies, phasing, or other requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. An application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment may be made concurrently with an application for a plat or subdivision approval; however, a plat or subdivision application will not be considered for approval by the City Council until and unless any necessary Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved by the City Council. 11 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING (2) Inconsistent with the City Capital Improvement Program. A proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if it is inconsistent with the City’s Capital Improvement Program. A proposed plat or subdivision is inconsistent with the City’s Capital Improvement Program if public improvements, facilities, or services such as recreational facilities or police and fire protection that must be provided at public’s expense that are necessary to accommodate the proposed plat or subdivision will not be able to be reasonably provided within two years of the date of the plat or subdivision application. (3) Lack of Adequate Water Supply. Unless the City has guided the site of the proposed plat or subdivision as rural by the Comprehensive Plan, a proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if municipal water is not available to serve the proposed subdivision if it is developed to its maximum permissible density without causing and unreasonable depreciation of existing municipal water supplies. “Available” shall mean existing or readily extended and funded consistent with the phasing in the Comprehensive Plan, the Capital Improvement Program, and any relevant City ordinances, plans, and policies. If the site of the proposed plat or subdivision is guided as rural by the Comprehensive Plan, a proposed subdivision shall be deemed premature with respect to a lack of adequate water supply if a private well or wells cannot adequately or safely serve the proposed subdivision. (4) Lack of Adequate Waste Disposal Systems. Unless the City has guided the site of the proposed plat or subdivision as rural by the Comprehensive Plan, a proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if municipal sanitary sewer is not available or is not adequate in size to serve the proposed subdivision if developed to its maximum permissible density as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan. “Available” shall mean existing or readily extended and funded consistent with the phasing in the Comprehensive Plan, the Capital Improvement Program, and any relevant City ordinances, plans, and policies. If the site of the proposed plat or subdivision is guided as rural by the Comprehensive Plan, a proposed subdivision may be deemed premature if a private subsurface sewage treatment system or systems cannot adequately serve the proposed subdivision. (5) Lack of Adequate Streets. A proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if public streets to serve the proposed plat or subdivision are not available. “Available” shall mean existing or readily extended and funded consistent with the phasing in the Comprehensive Plan, the Capital Improvement Program, and any relevant City ordinances, plans, and policies. In addition, a proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if the traffic volume generated by the proposed plat or subdivision would create a hazard to public safety and the general public welfare or the streets are inadequate for the intended uses such that the subdivision would create unacceptable levels of traffic congestion on existing or proposed streets as determined by the City Engineer. (6) Lack of Adequate Drainage. A proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if municipal or private surface water management facilities are not available to meet minimum local, watershed, and state treatment requirements including downstream infrastructure to manage stormwater. “Available” shall mean existing or readily constructed and funded consistent with the phasing in the Comprehensive Plan, the Capital Improvement Program, and any relevant City ordinances, plans, and policies. In addition, a proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature in cases where flood plains, poor soils, or steep slopes exist in such a manner as to preclude adequate site drainage or treatment of surface water runoff, cause pollution of water sources, or damage from erosion would occur on downhill or downstream land. (7) Inconsistent or Not Compliant with State Environmental Statutes and Rules. A proposed plat or subdivision may be deemed premature if it is not in compliance or is not consistent with the 12 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING State’s environmental statutes and rules, set forth in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 116D and Minnesota Rules Part 4410. It is the opinion of City staff this site is premature for development. As noted by the City Engineer, Municipal water service is not sufficient to support fire suppression demands for the proposed development until Water Tower No. 4 is operational. The City is currently negotiating and investigating potential water tower sites. Until a water tower site is determined (by the City) to be feasible and has been acquired by the City, the schedule for having Water Tower No. 4 operational is unknown. At this time there are too many uncertainties about the construction and completion of the new water tower that is necessary to ensure there is adequate water pressure and supply for this part of Lake Elmo thus making this development proposal premature. Once the City has a purchase agreement in place for the site of a new water tower and an approved final design for a new water tower, the City will be more confident there will be adequate water supply and pressure to serve this development and other developments in this part of Lake Elmo. County Review. City staff sent the proposed development plans and the Draft Traffic Impact Analysis to Washington County for their review and comments. I have attached their review comments for your consideration. They noted missing information from the traffic study and the need for stop signs on Hudson Boulevard at Lake Elmo Avenue. They also noted the potential need for the intersection to be a 4-way stop and the eventual need for the intersection Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue to have a round-about or a traffic signal. County staff has indicated to City staff that they support the project plans that have access driveways only on Hudson Boulevard and not having any access driveways for the site on Lake Elmo Avenue. Tree Removal and Preservation. The applicant submitted a tree preservation and a proposed landscaping plan for this site. The latest plans show the developer not preserving any of the existing trees on the site. The City’s tree preservation ordinance allows for 30% removal of significant trees on a site and the City requires a tree mitigation plan showing how the developer will replace any removed trees. In this case, the applicant would be planting 211 total trees on the site including those required for tree mitigation and for screening purposes. Landscaping/Screening: The City Code requires a screening/landscape barrier between a less intense land use and a more intense land use that is at least 90 percent opaque. This standard will apply for the northern property line of this site. To help with the screening, the applicant is proposing to create a berm that would be planted with a variety of trees along the northern property line of the site. This design is to create a screening buffer between the development and the existing homes to the north. Staff is recommending that the proposed berm and landscaping as proposed be incorporated as a requirement of the PUD. The applicant should submit additional details, including a proposed cross section view of the berm, as part of the final plan submittal for City approval. The City’s landscape architect reviewed the proposed tree mitigation and landscaping plans for the proposed PUD. I have attached their review comments dated April 6, 2021 for your information. Their review noted the total number of trees the applicant is proposing to plant and the proposed screening plan along the north side of the project site. He found the proposed plans in compliance with City Code requirements. All final tree removal, screening, grading and landscape plans will subject to review and approval by the City’s Landscape Architect before the City releases or approves a grading or building permit for this development. 13 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING Parkland Dedication. The proposed development does not propose a public park and City Staff would not recommend a park land dedication with this proposal. The current City Code standard for park dedication for commercial developments is a fee of $6,000 per acre. At $6,000 an acre, the park dedication fee for this 30.2 acre site would be $181,200. The City will require the developer to pay this fee at the time the City approves a final plat and before the City issues a grading or building permit for the site. Impervious Coverage: The maximum amount of impervious coverage allowed in the BP zoning district is 75 percent of the site area. Staff estimates that the proposed site plan preserves 20-25 percent of the site as open space, including storm water ponds, screening buffer areas, and general landscaping. If the City approves this PUD, the applicant will need to provide the City with calculations and verification on the amount of preserved open space and the amount of impervious surface on the site. Easements. The City will require the applicant to dedicate 10-foot-wide drainage and utility easements along all property lines and drainage and utility easements for watermains and fire hydrants as they will become public infrastructure. The City also may require other easements as the applicant refines their project plans – especially around the elements of the stormwater management system. Watering Ban. Due to a shortage of water, the City may need to implement severe watering restrictions in the City in the future. This could include limiting or prohibiting the use water outside including for vehicle washing and for watering grass and landscaping. This could affect future buyers and renters as there may be a limited supply of water available for outdoor uses. It may be wise for the City to put a condition on this plat to require the owner/developer to inform the renters of the units about the possible outdoor watering restrictions. Lighting. A specific exterior lighting plan has been not been submitted and should be included with the any final development plans. Signs. The applicant has not provided an overall signage plan for the PUD. The City should require the developer to submit a comprehensive signage plan that shows the location and sizes of all proposed ground, monument and wall signs in the PUD to ensure all proposed signs would conform to the City’s Sign Ordinance. STAFF REVIEW SUMMARY As I have noted above, there are several important design elements missing, incomplete or that the developer needs to revise with the proposed PUD, the proposed preliminary plat and the project plans to make them consistent with City subdivision and City Engineering design standards. Many of these changes or corrections could require significant revisions to the overall project design and to the preliminary plat. In addition, this site is premature for development because of the current limitations of the City water supply system. Because of the number and scope of the recommended changes and because the site does not have an adequate supply of City water to meet all its potential water needs, staff is recommending denial of the preliminary PUD plans and the preliminary plat for the Crossroads East development. OPTIONS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION Section 153.09 (D) (below) of the Lake Elmo Subdivision Ordinance outlines the actions the Planning Commission may take when reviewing a preliminary plat. 14 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING (D) Planning Commission action. The Planning Commission shall make a finding of fact and recommend such actions or conditions relating to the request as it deems necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Chapter. The Planning Commission and shall have the authority to request additional information from the subdivider concerning the proposal, as deemed necessary to formulate a recommendation on the proposal. (1) The Planning Commission shall recommend approval of the preliminary plat if it in all ways conforms to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. The Commission shall recommend denial of the preliminary plat if it makes any of the following findings: a. That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Development Code, Capital Improvements Program, or other policy or regulation. b. That the physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type or intensity of development or use contemplated. c. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial and irreversible environmental damage. d. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the public. e. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will conflict with easements on record or with easements established by judgment of a court. f. That the subdivision is premature as determined by the standards of this Chapter. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS (for Denial): Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Preliminary Plat and preliminary PUD Plans for the proposed Crossroads East development. Staff is recommending denial based on the review comments and analysis in this report and based on the following review criteria and findings (from Section 153.09 (D)) of the City Code: a. That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Development Code, Capital Improvements Program, or other policy or regulation. b. That the site is premature for development due to a lack of water supply and water pressure to serve all the water needs of the development. Municipal water service is not sufficient to support fire suppression demands for the proposed development until Water Tower No. 4 is operational. The City is currently negotiating and investigating potential water tower sites. Until a water tower site is determined (by the City) to be feasible and has been acquired by the City, the schedule for having Water Tower No. 4 operational is unknown. c. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements could be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the public. Staff also recommends the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Preliminary Plat and preliminary PUD Plans for the proposed Crossroads East development based on the following additional findings: 15 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING 1. That the proposed PUD development is not consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. That the proposed PUD Preliminary Plan is not consistent with all the City’s engineering standards as noted in the City Engineer’s review memorandum dated May 5, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City at this time. The Concept Plan approval did not afford the applicant development rights. If and when the property develops, it will access the existing urban services and will pay water connection charges, building permit fees and the like that the developer and/or contractors will pay. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council denial of the requested Preliminary Plat and PUD Plans for the Crossroads East development based on the findings listed in the City staff report. ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION If the City wishes to approve the preliminary PUD and preliminary plat for Crossroads East development as proposed by Launch Properties and Crossroads Properties, staff would recommend the following findings and conditions of approval: Recommended Findings. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan for the proposed business park to be located on the northeast corner of Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue by Launch and Crossroads Properties based on the following findings: 1. That the Preliminary PUD Plan meets the general intent of the Business Park Land Use designation in the Comprehensive Plan and the Business Park zoning district with PUD modifications. 2. That the Preliminary PUD Plan generally complies with the City’s Subdivision regulations. 3. That the Preliminary PUD Plan is generally consistent with the City’s engineering standards with exceptions as noted in the City Engineer’s memorandum dated May 5, 2021. 4. The Preliminary PUD Plan meets the minimum requirement for a PUD including minimum lot area, open space and street layout. 5. The Preliminary PUD Plan meets more than one of the required PUD objectives identified in Section 154.751 including providing: innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches; provision of a more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques; accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for senior and affordable housing; coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses; and higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development technique. 16 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING Recommended Conditions of Approval. If the City wishes to approve the preliminary PUD and preliminary plat for Crossroad East development as proposed by Launch Properties and Crossroads Properties, staff would recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. That the applicant prepare any future final plat and final PUD plans showing all of the site perimeter property lines - including any revisions for any additional right-of-way or easements that may be needed for Hudson Boulevard or for Lake Elmo Avenue or around the perimeter of the property. 2. That the future final plat and final PUD Plans submittal identify all requests for flexibility from the Zoning Code. 3. That the final PUD development plans shall include a specific land use plan for the property clarifying the uses, types of businesses and activities allowed and not allowed under the PUD, the dimensional requirements for the site, including any deviations from the underlying zoning code standards, and other information deemed appropriate by the City. 4. That the Developer provide the City with an updated list of permitted, conditional and prohibited land uses and activities for the PUD with an application for final PUD and final plat approval. 5. That the applicant address all comments in the City Engineer’s Memorandum dated May 5, 2021 with the future final plat and final PUD Plans submittal. 6. That the final Plat and final PUD Plans submittal include an updated tree inventory and tree preservation/replanting and landscape and screening plans that address all comments in the City’s Landscape Architect’s memo dated April 6, 2021. All revised and final landscape plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Landscape Architect. All tree planting must outside of all drainage and utility easements. 7. That the final Plat and final PUD Plans submittal include accurate open space and impervious surface calculations. 8. That the applicant/developer provide the City fees in lieu of park land dedication as required by the City Code before any site grading and before the City releases the final plat for recording. 9. That the final plat and final PUD Plans submittal include detailed architectural plans for all the proposed buildings. The applicant shall submit detailed architectural plans at the time of the final development plan review by the City. These plans shall conform to the City’s Design Guidelines and Standards Manual. 10. That if City approves the preliminary PUD plans, the applicant must provide the City with a detailed breakdown of the types of uses and their floor spaces with a detailed parking calculation for each building in the development. 11. That the applicant shall secure all necessary permits including but not limited to all applicable City permits (building, grading, sign, etc.), NPDES/SWPPP permits and Valley Branch Watershed District approval before starting any grading or construction activities. 12. That the Final Plat/Final PUD include Valley Branch Watershed District preliminary review comments and that the applicant provide the City evidence that all conditions attached to a Valley Branch Watershed District permit will be met before the starting any grading activity on the site. 13. All storm water facilities internal to the site shall be privately owned and maintained. A storm water maintenance and easement agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat for all 100-year high water level areas and to protect all overland emergency flow paths. 17 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING 14. The Preliminary Plat/Preliminary PUD approval is conditioned upon the applicant meeting all City standards and design requirements unless specifically addressed otherwise in these conditions. 15. The Final Plat/Final PUD shall include all necessary public right-of-way and easements for Hudson Boulevard North and Lake Elmo Avenue North. The final plat shall include all right-of-way dedications, easements for drainage and utility and other purposes as required by the City Engineer. 16. The Final Plat/Final PUD submittal must include a complete storm water management plan and construction plans that provide all design details for the proposed underground storage systems including details regarding building roof drainage connections. 17. If necessary, the applicant shall provide the City with a copy of written permission for any off-site grading or utility work on adjacent properties before starting any site work, grading and as part of any final plat or final PUD application. 18. That the applicant or developer address all the comments of the Fire Chief and the Building Official with the final PUD, site and building plans including the placement of buildings and fire hydrants, street and driveway design, parking and emergency vehicle access within the site. 19. That the applicant revise the project plans to show watermain easements and effective maintenance areas with a minimum width of 30 feet with a minimum of 15 feet of clearance from the pipe centerline and easement agreements are included with the final plat and PUD application and plans. 20. That there shall be no encroachments into drainage and utility easements and corridors. Prohibited encroachments include, but are not limited to trees, landscaping, fences, retaining walls and buildings. 21. That the developer prepare exhibits for City staff approval that clearly identifies the property lines, easements, proposed locations of retaining walls and fences and the required and proposed setbacks for each building site within the development. 22. That the Applicant(s) or developer shall submit a photometric plan for the development for staff review and approval. All lighting must meet the requirements of Sections 150.035-150.038 of the City Code. 23. Before to the installation or construction of any subdivision identification signs or directional markers within the development, the developer shall submit sign plans to the City for review and obtain a sign permit from the City. The final development plans shall include a signage plan for the entire development including size and location of monument signs, wall signs and signage for tenant spaces. 24. That the applicant provide the City a detailed construction and staging plan with the construction plans and final plat for the development. These plans are to clearly indicate the phasing of the site grading, the phasing of the construction of each public infrastructure component (utilities, streets, trails and sidewalks) and shall address access to that phase of the development for construction purposes. 25. Before the execution and recording of a final plat for the development, the developer or applicant shall enter into a Developer’s Agreement or a Site Work Agreement with the City. Such an 18 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING Agreement must be approved by the City Attorney and by the City Council. The Agreement shall delineate who is responsible for the design, construction and payment for the required improvements with financial guarantees therefore. 26. That the City and the County do not allow any parking or any construction staging, including the loading and unloading of materials and equipment at any time on Hudson Boulevard or on Lake Elmo Avenue during the construction of the site improvements and buildings. All street, curb and boulevard damage caused by the construction activities must be repaired or replaced at no cost to the City and meeting City standards and specifications. 27. That if the City approves the preliminary PUD plans, that the applicant update the traffic impact analysis for the development to include all the missing information as noted by Washington County before submitting updated development plans to the City. 28. That if the City approves the preliminary PUD plans, the applicant or developer shall enter into a separate grading agreement with the City before starting any grading activity in advance of final plat of PUD approval. The City Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat or final PUD, and said plan shall document extent of any proposed grading on the site. 29. That if the City approves the preliminary PUD plans, the applicant shall submit revised preliminary plat and project plans meeting all conditions of approval for City review and approval. The revised applicant/developer project plans shall meet all of the above conditions before the City will accept a final plat or Final PUD application the development and before the start of any clearing or grading activity on the site. 30. That if the City Council approves the preliminary plat/preliminary PUD, the City’s approval is good for one year from the date of City Council action, unless the applicant requests and the City Council approves a time extension. FISCAL IMPACT: There would be no fiscal impact to the City at this time. The Concept Plan approval did not afford the applicant development rights. When the property develops, it will access the existing urban services and will pay sewer and water connection charges, building permit fees and the like that the developer and/or contractors will pay. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION (for Approval): If the City wishes to approve the proposed preliminary PUD plan and preliminary plat, then Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed preliminary PUD Plan office-warehouse industrial development as proposed by Launch Properties and Crossroads Properties. This development is to be located on the northeast corner of Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue. To recommend approval of the proposed PUD, the suggested motion for recommending approval is as follows: 19 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – PUBLIC HEARING “Motion to recommended approval of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan as requested by Launch Properties and Crossroad Properties for the office warehouse/light industrial development to be located on the northeast corner of Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue subject to recommended conditions of approval.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Project Narrative 2. Proposed list of PUD Uses 3. Location Map 4. Property Line Map 5. Property Line Map - Enlarged 6. Existing Conditions Map 7. Colored Site Plan 8. Proposed Preliminary Plat 9. Preliminary Plan Layout 10. Proposed Site Plan 11. Proposed Landscape Plan 12. Cross Section 13. Building Renderings 14. Woodbury Building Photos 15. City Engineer Review Comments dated May 5, 2021 16. Washington County Review Comments dated May 6, 2021 17. Landscape Architect Review comments dated April 6, 2021 18. Neighbor comments dated May 5, 2021 1) Launch Crossroads PUD. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide areas for attractive, high quality business park development primarily for office, high quality manufacturing and assembly, warehousing, and non-retail uses which provide a harmonious transition to residential development and neighborhoods by: 1) Conducting most business activities and essentially all storage inside buildings; 2) Consisting of high quality and attractive buildings which blend in with the environment; 3) providing open space, quality landscaping and berming; 4) including setbacks, screening, and buffering of parking, loading docks, commercial vehicle, truck, and trailer parking, and other similar functions; 5) protecting and enhancing the natural environment; and 6) providing users with an attractive working environment that is unique in the eastern metropolitan area with immediate access to I-94. 2) Permitted uses. Permitted uses within the PUD are as follows: a) Public and civic uses: i) Colleges and universities ii) Community service iii) Day care center iv) Schools, public and private v) Public assembly vi) Religious institutions b) Services: i) Business services ii) Business center iii) Office iv) Office showroom v) Commercial kennel without outdoor kennels or runs vi) Communication services vii) Educational services viii) Childcare ix) Financial institution x) Lodging (conditional use permit req’d) xi) Medical facility xii) Membership organization xiii) Repair and maintenance shop, interior only xiv) Self-service storage xv) Transportation services xvi) Veterinary services c) Food Services: i) Standard restaurant, incidental and subordinate to the primary use shall be allowed up to 50 percent of gross floor area for each tenant or occupant. ii) Commercial kitchen d) Sales of Merchandise: i) Retail sales, incidental to the primary use shall be allowed up to 50 percent of gross floor area for each tenant or occupant. ii) Building supply sales iii) Furniture and appliance sales iv) Garden center or greenhouse, interior only v) Wholesaling e) Automotive/Vehicular Sales i) Automobile maintenance and repairs, interior only ii) Automobile parts/supply, interior only iii) Automobile sales, interior only iv) Commercial vehicle repair, interior only f) Indoor Recreation i) Indoor athletic facility ii) Indoor recreation g) Industrial and Extractive Uses i) Office showroom ii) Laboratory, research, and testing iii) Light industrial iv) Light manufacturing and assembly v) Motor freight and warehousing 3) Compatible uses. Other uses as deemed compatible and appropriate by the zoning administrator. Where a question arises as to the compatibility of a use, the zoning administrator shall refer the issue to the planning commission. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the city council, who shall make a final determination as to whether a proposed use is to be allowed; is compatible as a permitted use; or is a use that may be added to the planned unit development. 9 2 0 930 93 0 930 940 922924 9 2 4 924 926926926 92892 8 928 93 2 932932932 932 93 4 93 6 938 942 9229249269 2 0 930 918922 924 926 926 926928 93 2934936942LAKE ELMO AVE NH U D S O N B L V D EXISTING PUBLIC DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PER DOC NO. 5020446 EXISTING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT PER DOC NO. 3956981 EXISTING SANITARY EASEMENT EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING 24" SANITARY SEWER EXISTING 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER EXISTING 12" DIP WATER EXISTING 15" RCP STORM SEWER EXISTING 15" CMP STORM SEWER EXISTING 15" CMP STORM SEWER EXISTING FIBER OPTICS EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING 36" RCP STORM SEWER EXISTING 24" SANITARY SEWER EXISTING 15" CMP STORM SEWER EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT PER DOC NO. 3956981 25% SLOPE OR GREATER 12-25% SLOPES 12-25% SLOPES 12-25% SLOPES 12-25% SLOPES 12-25% SLOPES 25% SLOPE OR GREATER 25% SLOPE OR GREATER EXISTING WOODLAND EXISTING WOODLAND EXISTING GAS 920912914916918922924926928 910 906908 912914 906908 910910 91 0 9109 1 0 9109 1 0 910920 920 920 920 912 912912912 912 914 914 914 916 916 916 916 916 918 918918918 922 922 922 922 92093094094091892292492 4924 92692893293493693893893893894294294494 4 946946948948930 940940 940 940 940 94094092 2 922924 924 926 928 932 934 936 936 93 6 938 938938942 942 944 944 946 946920 930930930916916918 918918 9229249269289329 3 2 932932932932 9349349 3 4 9349349349369369369369 3 6 936936936938938938938910 9 0 2 904 906 908 912 914 910 91 0 910 904 906 908 912 912 912 91493094092292 2 924 92492492692893293 4936938942 9 4 4 94 6 94 8 9 4 4 946920916 918 9 2 2 910912 912 912 914 914 914 9 1 6 916 918918920916918922922924924 9 4 0 9 3 6 9 3 8 9429 4 4 946 930930932932934936938930940940922924926928932934936938942942EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT EXISTING 12" DIP WATER This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.SHEET NUMBER 2020 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114PHONE: 651-645-4197WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COMK:\TWC_LDEV\LAUNCH PROPERTIES\LAKE ELMO - INDUSTRIAL\3 Design\CAD\PlanSheets\C2-EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN.dwg February 23, 2021 - 10:24pmBYREVISIONSNo.DATEPRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPREPARED FOREXISTINGCONDITIONS MAPC200CROSSROADS LAUNCHBUSINESS PARKLAKE ELMOMNDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BYME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.MNLIC. NO.FIRST M. LASTXX/XX/XXXXXXXXXDATECHECKED BYSCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYKHA PROJECT16073401608/03/2018AS SHOWNBRJBRJWDMNORTH EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS GROSS SITE ACREAGE 29.01 AC EXISTING WETLANDS 0.0 AC EXISTING WOODLANDS ± 2.4 AC SLOPES 12%-25%± 1.5 AC SLOPES 25% OR GREATER ± 0.3 AC WOODLANDS PROPOSED 0.0 AC AGRICULTURAL COVER ± 26.6 AC LAUNCH PROPERTIES/CROSSROADS PROPERTIES Sheet Title Project Number Sheet Number Issued For Date Project Client Project Manager Date Reg. No. I hereby certified that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota Edward A. Farr ©COPYRIGHT 2018 Location C:\Users\kdr\Documents\18.015 Lake Elmo Industrial -Site_k.rickabaugh@edfarrarch.com.rvt2/15/2021 3:40:44 PMA718.015 COLORED SITE PLAN 02/12/2021 16362 NSL The Crossroads Launch Business Park Lake Elmo Ave N at Hudson Boulevard Lake Elmo, Minnesota SITE PLAN REVIEW 02/12/2021 THE CROSSROADS LAUNCH BUSINESS PARK COLORED SITE PLAN LAKE ELMO AVE NS50°07'56"E 25.02' S51°14'26"E 24.99' R =929.52' ∆=10°21'59" L=168.18' C B=S 58°00'09"E C =167.95' R=2118.25' ∆=1°42'32"L=63.18' CB=S67°25'48"E C=63.18' N0°07'18"W 58.99' N89°52'56"E 150.11'S0°03'56"E99.74'R=767.03' ∆=9°18'09" L=124.53'CB=S85°27'03"EC=124.40'N89°53'52"E 122.70'N0°03'46"W109.95'N89°56'15"E 55.99'N0°01'38"W1100.26'S89°50'54"W 477.22' S89°50'40"W 753.24'S0°06'14"E319.25'S0°01'30"W337.11'S 4 3 ° 4 1 ' 0 1 " E 9 6 . 2 9 ' S 4 3 ° 3 8 ' 1 4 " E 2 4 . 4 6 ' ∆=32°46'48" R=558.22' L=319.37' CB=S66°20'36"E C=315.03' S 4 9 ° 2 8 ' 3 1 " E 86 . 1 0 ' S 4 9 ° 4 3 ' 1 6 " E 7 1 . 9 4 ' S47°38'24"E 4.98' N40°20'04"E 25.03'S49°41'43"E 20.13' S40°20'12"W 25.00' S49°36'54"E 35.57' S56° 4 5' 5 5" W 336. 0 2' S89°58'01"E 637.14'N39°45'51"E256.89'S0°02'41"W246.85'S28°42'13"W 45.16'S0°00'00"E795.44'S39°45'41"W 305.17'S0°00'00"E53.72'S39°45'56"W 281.45'This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.SHEET NUMBER 2020 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114PHONE: 651-645-4197WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COMK:\TWC_LDEV\LAUNCH PROPERTIES\LAKE ELMO - INDUSTRIAL\3 Design\CAD\Exhibits\V1-PRELIMINARY PLAT-CLEAN.dwg January 29, 2021 - 8:33amPRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPREPARED FORPRELIMINARYPLATPP-0CROSSROADS EASTFIRST ADDITIONLAKE ELMOMNDATECHECKED BYSCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYKHA PROJECT16073401601/29/2021AS SHOWNCPCCPCWDMNORTH PRELIMINARYTHE PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, CITY OF LAKE ELMO, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA LYING NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT 82-52, ON FILE AND OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA. EXCEPT SMALL PARCELS OF RECORD. EXISTING SUBJECT SITE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROPOSED SUBJECT SITE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CATCH BASIN ELECTRIC BOX GATE VALVE HYDRANT UTILITY POLE GAS METER SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MANHOLE LIMITED ACCESS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD WIRE SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN CULVERT PROPERTY LINE LEGEND SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN TELEPHONE GAS MAIN STORM SEWER EXISTING PROPOSED GATE VALVE HYDRANT TEE REDUCER SANITARY CLEANOUTCO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE SETBACK LINE EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR925 UNDERGROUND TELECOMMUNICATION UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC OWNER RECO, INC. PATRICK O. REGAN 425 EAST 31ST STREET HASTINGS, MN 55033 APPLICANT LAUNCH PROPERTIES DAN REGAN 800 LASALLE AVE. SUITE 1610 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 CIVIL ENGINEER KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, INC. BRIAN M. WURDEMAN, P.E. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100 ST. PAUL, MN 55114 SURVEYOR EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC. ERIC ROESER 1229 TYLER ST NE # 100 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413 PRELIMINARY PLAT SUMMARY LAKE ELMO INDUSTRIAL TOTAL PROPERTY AREA 1,237,104 SF (28.24 AC) SITE 1 AREA 564,973 SF (12.97 AC) SITE 2 AREA 564,973 SF (12.97 AC) OUTLOT A AREA 50,529 SF (1.16 AC) OUTLOT B AREA 25,700 SF (0.59 AC) OUTLOT C AREA 24,829 SF (0.57 AC) LAKE ELMO AVE R.O.W. DEDICATION 15,865 SF (0.36 AC) ZONING SUMMARY EXISTING ZONING (TO REMAIN)BP (BUSINESS PARK) BUILDING SETBACKS FRONT = 50' SIDE = 35' REAR = 150' LOT 1, BLOCK 1 CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION LOT 2, BLOCK 1 CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION OUTLOT A CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION OUTLOT B CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION OUTLOT C CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION LAUNCH PROPERTIES/CROSSROADS PROPERTIESCROSSROADS PROPERTIES MIKE CONNERS 7200 HUDSON BLVD N SUITE 230 ST PAUL, MN 55128 BUILDING B 36,480 SF FFE:930.5 LAKE ELMO AVE NBUILDING D 149,100 SF FFE: 930.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BUILDING A 56,995 SF FFE:930.5 BUILDING C 56,995 SF FFE: 930.5 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 100' PRKG SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL 150' BLDG SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL 50' BLDG SETBACK FROM ROW 92' R.O.W. DEDICATION EXISTING 40' SEWER EASEMENT S50°07'56"E 25.02' S51°14'26"E 24.99' R =929.52' ∆=10°21'59" L=168.18' C B=S 58°00'09"E C =167.95' R=2118.25' ∆=1°42'32"L=63.18' CB=S67°25'48"E C=63.18' N0°07'18"W 58.99' N89°52'56"E 150.11'S0°03'56"E99.74'R=767.03' ∆=9°18'09" L=124.53'CB=S85°27'03"EC=124.40'N89°53'52"E 122.70'N0°03'46"W109.95'N89°56'15"E 55.99'N0°01'38"W1100.26'S89°50'54"W 477.22' S89°50'40"W 753.24'S0°06'14"E319.25'S0°01'30"W337.11'S 4 3 ° 4 1 ' 0 1 " E 9 6 . 2 9 ' S 4 3 ° 3 8 ' 1 4 " E 2 4 . 4 6 ' ∆=32°46'48" R=558.22' L=319.37' CB=S66°20'36"E C=315.03' S 4 9 ° 2 8 ' 3 1 " E 86 . 1 0 ' S 4 9 ° 4 3 ' 1 6 " E 7 1 . 9 4 ' S47°38'24"E 4.98' N40°20'04"E 25.03'S49°41'43"E 20.13' S40°20'12"W 25.00' S49°36'54"E 35.57' S56° 4 5' 5 5" W 336. 0 2' S89°58'01"E 637.14'N39°45'51"E256.89'S0°02'41"W246.85'S28°42'13"W 45.16'S0°00'00"E795.44'S39°45'41"W 305.17'S0°00'00"E53.72'S39°45'56"W 281.45'This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.SHEET NUMBER 2020 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114PHONE: 651-645-4197WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COMK:\TWC_LDEV\LAUNCH PROPERTIES\LAKE ELMO - INDUSTRIAL\3 Design\CAD\Exhibits\V1-PRELIMINARY PLAT.dwg January 22, 2021 - 9:48amPRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPREPARED FORPRELIMINARYPLATPP-0CROSSROADS EASTFIRST ADDITIONLAKE ELMOMNDATECHECKED BYSCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYKHA PROJECT16073401601/22/2021AS SHOWNCPCCPCWDMNORTH PRELIMINARYTHE PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, CITY OF LAKE ELMO, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA LYING NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT 82-52, ON FILE AND OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA. EXCEPT SMALL PARCELS OF RECORD. EXISTING SUBJECT SITE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROPOSED SUBJECT SITE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CATCH BASIN ELECTRIC BOX GATE VALVE HYDRANT UTILITY POLE GAS METER SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MANHOLE LIMITED ACCESS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD WIRE SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN CULVERT PROPERTY LINE LEGEND SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN TELEPHONE GAS MAIN STORM SEWER EXISTING PROPOSED GATE VALVE HYDRANT TEE REDUCER SANITARY CLEANOUTCO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE SETBACK LINE EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR925 UNDERGROUND TELECOMMUNICATION UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC OWNER RECO, INC. PATRICK O. REGAN 425 EAST 31ST STREET HASTINGS, MN 55033 APPLICANT LAUNCH PROPERTIES DAN REGAN 800 LASALLE AVE. SUITE 1610 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 CIVIL ENGINEER KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, INC. BRIAN M. WURDEMAN, P.E. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100 ST. PAUL, MN 55114 SURVEYOR EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC. ERIC ROESER 1229 TYLER ST NE # 100 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413 PRELIMINARY PLAT SUMMARY LAKE ELMO INDUSTRIAL TOTAL PROPERTY AREA 1,237,104 SF (28.24 AC) SITE 1 AREA 564,973 SF (12.97 AC) SITE 2 AREA 564,973 SF (12.97 AC) OUTLOT A AREA 50,529 SF (1.16 AC) OUTLOT B AREA 25,700 SF (0.59 AC) OUTLOT C AREA 24,829 SF (0.57 AC) LAKE ELMO AVE R.O.W. DEDICATION 15,865 SF (0.36 AC) ZONING SUMMARY EXISTING ZONING (TO REMAIN)BP (BUSINESS PARK) BUILDING SETBACKS FRONT = 50' SIDE = 35' REAR = 150' LOT 1, BLOCK 1 CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION LOT 2, BLOCK 1 CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION OUTLOT A CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION OUTLOT B CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION OUTLOT C CROSSROADS EAST FIRST ADDITION LAUNCH PROPERTIES/CROSSROADS PROPERTIESCROSSROADS PROPERTIES MIKE CONNERS 7200 HUDSON BLVD N SUITE 230 ST PAUL, MN 55128 100' PRKG SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL 150' BLDG SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL LAKE ELMO AVE N98 74 67 101 118 48 81 8 10 13 17 H U D S O N B L V D BUILDING B 36,480 SF FFE:930.5 BUILDING D 149,100 SF FFE: 930.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BUILDING A 56,995 SF FFE:930.5 BUILDING C 56,995 SF FFE: 930.5 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT LOT 1 LOT 2 OUTLOT A OUTLOT B OUTLOT C 50' BLDG SETBACK FROM ROW 92' R.O.W. DEDICATION EXISTING 40' SEWER EASEMENT MONUMENT SIGN A A A A A A A A P B B B B B B B O C DD D D D D D D E E E E E E E E F F F F F F F F G G G G G G G G H H H H I I J J J J K K K K K K L M L L L L L L M N M M M M N N 30.0' 30 . 0 ' 30.0' 18.0'24.0'18.0'6.0'18.0'24.0'18.0'6.0'18.0'24.0'18.0'6.0'30.0'18.0'24.0'18.0'9.5'18.0'24.0'18.0'10.0'15.0'9 0 . 0 ' 11. 0 '70.0'130.0'50.0'R25.0'R25.0'R15.0' R 1 1 . 5 ' R 1 5 . 0 'R12.0'R12.0'R12.0'R15.0'R15.0'R15 . 0 ' R15.0' R75. 0' R 4 0 . 0 ' R20.0' R 1 5 . 0 'R15.0'R28.0'R15.0'R 1 5 . 0 ' R15.0' C ACCESS GATES ACCESS GATES R2 5 . 0 'R25.0'P P P P PR3 6 . 0 'This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.SHEET NUMBER 2020 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114PHONE: 651-645-4197WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COMK:\TWC_LDEV\LAUNCH PROPERTIES\LAKE ELMO - INDUSTRIAL\3 Design\CAD\PlanSheets\C4-SITE PLAN.dwg April 09, 2021 - 3:30pm©BYREVISIONSNo.DATEPRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPREPARED FORSITE PLANC401CROSSROADS LAUNCHBUSINESS PARKLAKE ELMOMNDATECHECKED BYSCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYKHA PROJECT16073401602/16/2021AS SHOWNBRJDSSWDMSITE PLAN NOTES 1.ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL CITY/COUNTY REGULATIONS AND CODES AND O.S.H.A. STANDARDS. 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF VESTIBULES, SLOPE PAVING, SIDEWALKS, EXIT PORCHES, TRUCK DOCKS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS. 3.ALL INNER CURBED RADII ARE TO BE 3' AND OUTER CURBED RADII ARE TO BE 10' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. STRIPED RADII ARE TO BE 5'. 4.ALL DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5.EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ARE TO BE ABANDONED, REMOVED OR RELOCATED AS NECESSARY. ALL COST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN BASE BID. 6.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL RELOCATIONS, (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLANS) INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ALL UTILITIES, STORM DRAINAGE, SIGNS, TRAFFIC SIGNALS & POLES, ETC. AS REQUIRED. ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNING AUTHORITIES REQUIREMENTS AND PROJECT SITE WORK SPECIFICATIONS AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY SUCH. ALL COST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN BASE BID. 7.SITE BOUNDARY, TOPOGRAPHY, UTILITY AND ROAD INFORMATION TAKEN FROM A PRELIMINARY SURVEY BY FOLZ FREEMAN SURVEYING, DATED 02/08/2018. KIMLEY-HORN ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS, INACCURACIES, OR OMISSIONS CONTAINED THEREIN. 8.PYLON / MONUMENT SIGNS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED BY OTHERS. SIGNS ARE SHOWN FOR GRAPHICAL & INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY SIZE, LOCATION AND ANY REQUIRED PERMITS NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PYLON / MONUMENT SIGN. 9.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE ARCH / MEP PLANS FOR SITE LIGHTING AND ELECTRICAL PLAN. 10.NO PROPOSED LANDSCAPING SUCH AS TREES OR SHRUBS, ABOVE AND UNDERGROUND STRUCTURES, OR OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN EXISTING OR PROPOSED UTILITY EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON PLANS OTHERWISE. 11.ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT. 12.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT. 13.ALL PARKING STALLS TO BE 9' IN WIDTH AND 18' IN LENGTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. BUILDING DATA SUMMARY AREAS BUILDING A 56,995 SF (4.61% OF TOTAL PROPERTY AREA BUILDING B 36,480 SF (2.95% OF TOTAL PROPERTY AREA) BUILDING C 56,995 SF (4.61% OF TOTAL PROPERTY AREA) BUILDING D 149,100 SF (12.05 % OF TOTAL PROPERTY AREA) PARKING REQUIRED PARKING 1 SPACE PER 1,000 SF UP TO 20,000 SF, PLUS 1 SPACE PER 2,000 SF IN EXCESS OR 20,000 SF; SITE 1 = 95 STALLS, SITE 2 = 85 STALLS PROPOSED PARKING SITE 1: 398 STALLS @ 2.68 RATIO; SITE 2: 189 STALLS @ 1.26 RATIO ADA STALLS REQ'D / PROVIDED 15 STALLS / 16 STALLS PROPERTY SUMMARY CROSSROADS LAUNCH BUSINESS PARK TOTAL PROPERTY AREA 1,237,104 SF (28.40 AC) SITE 1 AREA 564,973 (12.97 AC) SITE 2 AREA 564,973 (12.97 AC) OUTLOT A AREA 50,529 (1.16 AC) OUTLOT B AREA 25,700 (0.59 AC) OUTLOT C AREA 24,829 (0.57 AC) PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 799,7661.60 SF (18.36 AC) PROPOSED PERVIOUS AREA 437,342.40 SF (10.04 AC) TOTAL DISTURBED AREA 1,237,104 SF (28.40 AC) ZONING SUMMARY EXISTING ZONING BP (BUSINESS PARK) PROPOSED ZONING BP (BUSINESS PARK) BUILDING SETBACKS FRONT = 50' REAR = 150' NORTH PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED FENCE SETBACK LINE PROPOSED STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK LEGEND PROPOSED HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT KEYNOTE LEGEND B612 CURB & GUTTER 9' X 18' STALL WITH 4" WHITE PARKING STALL STRIPING 11' X 60' TRAILER STALL WITH 4" WHITE PARKING STRIPING ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE, 9' WIDE WITH 9' ACCESS AISLE ACCESSIBLE SIGN ACCESSIBLE RAMP PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK. 4" THICK CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN HAND RAIL STOP SIGN AND PAINTED STOP BAR TRASH ENCLOSURE (SEE ARCH. PLANS) LANDSCAPE AREA STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE 15' x 90' TRAILER STALL WITH 4" WHITE PARKING STRIPE 4" ROLLED CURB A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P LAUNCH PROPERTIES/CROSSROADS PROPERTIESDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BYME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.MNLIC. NO.BRIAN M. WURDEMAN, P.E.02/16/202153113PROPOSED ROLLED CURB A LANDSCAPE KEYNOTES EDGER (TYP.) DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH (TYP.) ROCK MULCH (TYP.) SOD (TYP.) MAINTENANCE STRIP (TYP.) A B C D E SEEDING KEYNOTES SEED WITH PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS, INC: SAVANNA GRASS SEED MIX (TYP.) SEED WITH MNDOT 33-261: STORMWATER SOUTH & WEST SEED MIX (TYP.) SAV 33-261 22-112LANDSCAPE LEGEND EDGER (TYP.) APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF SOD / IRRIGATION, SOD ALL DISTURBED AREAS (TYP.) SEED/ SOD EDGE (TYP.) EXISTING VEGETATION LINE (TYP.) STEP 1- PROGANICS BIOTOIC SOIL MEDIA STEP 2- HYDRAULICALLY-APPLIED EROSION CONTROL PRODUCT-PROMATRIX ENGINEERED FIBER MATRIX INSTALL/APPLY PER MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS (MANUFACTURER: PROFILE PRODUCTS) CONIFEROUS TREE CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME BHS PICEA GLAUCA `DENSATA` / BLACK HILLS SPRUCE ERC JUNIPERUS VIRGINIANA / EASTERN RED CEDAR ORNAMENTAL TREE CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME PFC MALUS X `PRAIRIFIRE` / PRAIRIFIRE CRAB APPLE RVB BETULA NIGRA / RIVER BIRCH MULTI-TRUNK WSB BETULA POPULIFOLIA `WHITESPIRE` / WHITESPIRE BIRCH CLUMP OVERSTORY TREE CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME ABM ACER X FREEMANII `AUTUMN BLAZE` / AUTUMN BLAZE MAPLE BAL TILIA AMERICANA `BOULEVARD` /BOULEVARD AMERICAN LINDEN IHL GLEDITSIA TRIACANTHOS VAR. INERMIS `IMPERIAL` /IMPERIAL HONEYLOCUST STL TILIA AMERICANA `MCKSENTRY` / SENTRY LINDEN SWO QUERCUS BICOLOR / SWAMP WHITE OAK TRI ULMUS `MORTON GLOSSY` / TRIUMPH ELM GRASSES CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME KFG CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA `KARL FOERSTER` /KARL FOERSTER FEATHER REED GRASS PDS SPOROBOLUS HETEROLEPIS / PRAIRIE DROPSEED CONIFEROUS SHRUBS CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME BSJ JUNIPERUS SQUAMATA `BLUE STAR` / BLUE STAR JUNIPER TGA THUJA OCCIDENTALIS `BAILJOHN` TM / TECHNITO GLOBE ARBORVITAE DECIDUOUS SHRUBS CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME AFD CORNUS SERICEA `ARTIC FIRE` / ARTIC FIRE DOGWOOD ANH HYDRANGEA ARBORESCENS `ANNABELLE` /ANNABELLE HYDRANGEA BLC ARONIA MELANOCARPA `MORTON` / IROQUOIS BEAUTY BLACK CHOKEBERRY DBH DIERVILLA LONICERA / DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLE GFS SPIRAEA X BUMALDA `GOLDFLAME` / GOLDFLAME SPIREA GLS RHUS AROMATICA `GRO-LOW` / GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SUMAC LDN PHYSOCARPUS OPULIFOLIUS `DONNA MAY` TM /LITTLE DEVIL NINEBARK PERENNIALS CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME AFS SEDUM X `AUTUMN FIRE` / AUTUMN FIRE SEDUM BES RUDBECKIA FULGIDA `GOLDSTURM` / BLACK-EYED SUSAN GVH HAKONECHLOA MACRA `AUREOLA` / GOLDEN VARIEGATED HAKONECHLOA RAS ASTILBE JAPONICA `RHINELAND` / RHINELAND ASTIBLE SDO HEMEROCALLIS X `STELLA DE ORO` /STELLA DE ORO DAYLILY WLC NEPETA X FAASSENII `WALKERS LOW` /WALKERS LOW CATMINT PLANT SCHEDULE LAKE ELMO AVE NHU D S O N B L V D D D BERM-SEE GRADING PLAN SAV SAV 33-261 33-261 SAV SAV SAV EXISTING VEGETATION LINE MONUMENT SIGN C C C C C C C C D D D D D D D D 1 - TRI 1 - IHL 1 - TRI 1 - TRI 1 - BAL 1 - TRI 4 - BLC 4 - TGA 4 - KFG4 - BLC1 - IHL3 - TGA4 - LDN1 - TRI4 - KFG 1 - BAL4 - TGA 4 - LDN 1 - STL4 - KFG 4 - BLC1 - IHL 2 - LDN 1 - STL4 - KFG4 - BLC1 - BAL3 - TGA4 - LDN1 - STL 3 - BLC 3 - TGA1 - IHL 4 - LDN1 - STL4 - KFG1 - BAL2 - TGA4 - LDN4 - KFG1 - STL6 - BLC 1 - IHL 2 - LDN4 - KFG1 - TRI4 - BLC3 - TGA1 - BAL4 - LDN 1 - TRI4 - KFG 4 - BLC3 - TGA1 - STL4 - LDN4 - KFG 4 - TGA2 - PFC4 - BLC 3 - SWO 5 - AFD 3 - BHS6 - AFD 6 - AFD 2 - RVB 5 - ERC 3 - WSB 3 - ABM2 - SWO 8 - AFD3 - BHS 2 - RVB 7 - AFD2 - RVB 3 - ABM2 - RVB 2 - RVB7 - AFD3 - BHS 3 - BHS 6 - AFD 2 - WSB 3 - SWO 5 - ERC 6 - BHS 4 - BHS 3 - ERC 4 - ERC 2 - ABM 3 - BAL 1 - ABM7 - GLS38 - SDO 1 - ABM 1 - ABM 1 - ABM36 - AFS 1 - PFC13 - GLS26 - SDO 1 - BAL3 - BHS 18 - DBH1 - BAL 42 - SDO12 - KFG1 - BAL 4 - KFG3 - PDS3 - ANH4 - PDS7 - ANH 10 - KFG 3 - KFG3 - GFS4 - AFS4 - BES 4 - AFS4 - BES3 - GFS3 - KFG11 - KFG 2 - KFG3 - GFS4 - SDO2 - WLC 4 - SDO2 - WLC3 - GFS2 - KFG 10 - KFG 3 - KFG3 - GFS4 - AFS4 - BES 4 - AFS4 - BES 3 - GFS 2 - KFG 9 - KFG 7 - GFS 10 - KFG 9 - KFG3 - GFS2 - WLC4 - SDO2 - WLC4 - SDO3 - GFS3 - KFG 5 - KFG 4 - BLC3 - TGA4 - LDN4 - KFG1 - BAL 4 - LDN3 - IHL4 - KFG4 - BLC 3 - TGA 4 - KFG4 - BLC2 - BAL3 - TGA4 - LDN 4 - KFG 2 - BLC 3 - TGA 4 - LDN 3 - TGA 5 - LDN4 - KFG 1 - BAL 4 - BLC4 - KFG4 - LDN3 - TGA 3 - LDN1 - BAL3 - TGA4 - BLC4 - KFG 4 - BLC4 - KFG4 - LDN4 - TGA 3 - IHL1 - BAL 4 - TRI 9 - STL 4 - TRI 4 - STL 2 - TRI 2 - TGA9 - KFG11 - LDN8 - WLC 3 - BHS3 - LDN 3 - BLC9 - KFG3 - TGA4 - LDN4 - KFG3 - TGA4 - BLC 2 - PFC 3 - TGA2 - LDN 3 - TGA4 - BLC1 - IHL4 - KFG3 - BAL 2 - BLC4 - KFG4 - LDN3 - TGA2 - BLC1 - BAL 2 - LDN3 - TGA1 - BAL4 - BLC4 - KFG2 - LDN 3 - TGA1 - BAL4 - BLC4 - KFG4 - LDN3 - TGA1 - IHL2 - BLC 4 - KFG4 - LDN4 - TGA1 - IHL 4 - LDN1 - BAL4 - KFG4 - BLC5 - TGA1 - IHL 5 - TGA4 - LDN1 - BAL 3 - TGA4 - LDN1 - IHL4 - KFG4 - BLC 6 - TGA 3 - BAL 2 - BHS 1 - BAL 1 - ABM 1 - BAL1 - ABM 1 - ABM66 - SDO8 - GLS16 - KFG 1 - BAL 8 - KFG8 - KFG 46 - SDO20 - LDN 20 - KFG 2 - BAL 48 - AFS 2 - ABM58 - SDO 9 - GLS47 - AFS33 - SDO14 - KFG 1 - PFC 58 - AFS2 - ABM 2 - BAL 2 - ABM66 - SDO8 - GLS16 - KFG 8 - KFG 8 - KFG32 - DBH1 - BAL 21 - DBH 1 - BAL 4 - AFS4 - BES2 - BSJ 3 - KFG 2 - LDN2 - WLC 4 - SDO4 - SDO 2 - WLC2 - LDN 3 - KFG2 - BSJ4 - BES4 - AFS4 - AFS4 - BES2 - BSJ3 - KFG2 - LDN2 - WLC4 - SDO 2 - WLC4 - SDO2 - LDN3 - KFG 2 - BSJ4 - AFS4 - BES 4 - AFS4 - BES2 - BSJ3 - KFG2 - LDN 2 - WLC4 - SDO 4 - SDO2 - WLC2 - LDN 3 - KFG 3 - BSJ 7 - KFG2 - BSJ 5 - RAS5 - GVH3 - ANH 3 - ANH5 - RAS5 - GVH 4 - SDO2 - WLC2 - BSJ3 - KFG2 - LDN4 - AFS4 - BES 5 - GVH5 - RAS3 - ANH 3 - ANH5 - RAS 5 - GVH 4 - AFS 4 - BES2 - LDN3 - KFG 2 - BSJ2 - WLC4 - SDO 2 - WLC4 - SDO2 - BSJ3 - KFG 2 - LDN4 - AFS4 - BES 4 - AFS 4 - BES2 - LDN3 - KFG2 - BSJ2 - WLC4 - SDO4 - SDO 2 - WLC 2 - BSJ3 - KFG 2 - LDN4 - AFS4 - BES 4 - AFS 4 - BES3 - LDN3 - KFG 3 - BSJ 5 - KFG2 - BSJ 3 - KFG2 - BSJ4 - AFS4 - BES 2 - LDN2 - WLC4 - SDO 4 - AFS4 - BES3 - BSJ3 - KFG3 - LDN2 - WLC 4 - SDO 4 - SDO2 - WLC2 - LDN3 - KFG2 - BSJ 4 - AFS 4 - BES 4 - AFS4 - BES2 - BSJ3 - KFG2 - WLC3 - KFG 2 - LDN4 - SDO 2 - WLC 2 - WLC2 - WLC2 - LDN3 - KFG2 - BSJ4 - AFS4 - BES 4 - AFS4 - BES3 - BSJ3 - KFG3 - LDN 4 - SDO2 - WLC 4 - SDO2 - WLC2 - LDN3 - KFG 2 - BSJ4 - AFS 4 - BES 935 935 936 937 938 939 936937 940 940 930 925 920 92592093 5 93 0 92 5 92 0 925 920 915935934929 925920935 930 925940 SECTION WEST SECTION EAST This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.SHEET NUMBER 2020 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114PHONE: 651-645-4197WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COMK:\TWC_LDEV\LAUNCH PROPERTIES\LAKE ELMO - INDUSTRIAL\3 Design\CAD\PlanSheets\L1-LANDSCAPE PLAN.dwg April 09, 2021 - 3:33pmBYREVISIONSNo.DATEPRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPREPARED FORLANDSCAPE PLANL101CROSSROADS LAUNCHBUSINESS PARKLAKE ELMOMNDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BYME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OFTHE STATE OF MINNESOTA.MNLIC. NO.RYAN A. HYLLESTED, PLA02/16/202153828DATECHECKED BYSCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYKHA PROJECT16073401601/22/2021AS SHOWNPWBPWBRAHNORTH LAUNCH PROPERTIES/CROSSROADS PROPERTIES RESIDENTIAL LOT PROPOSED GRADE PROPERTY LINE PROFILE 5 920 930 940 950 960 970 980 990 920 930 940 950 960 970 980 990 0+00931.67930.500+10932.06930.500+20932.43930.440+30932.81929.480+40933.19929.100+50933.56928.820+60933.94928.590+70934.32928.780+80934.70928.980+90935.08929.181+00935.51930.611+10935.96931.591+20936.41933.241+30936.86935.001+40937.31936.561+50937.76938.341+60938.21940.501+70939.21940.501+80940.39937.511+90941.23940.461+99.75941.70PROPOSED OVERSTORY TREE PROPOSED SAVANNA SEED GRASS MIX 2-3' HEIGHT PRAIRIE GRASS PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE PROPOSED SOD AREA PROPOSED BUILDING 18.00'16.29'81.23'5.69' CAR PARKING LANDSCAPE AREA BERM LANDSCAPE AREA 32.09'18.00'13.34' CAR PARKING DRIVE AISLEWALK PROPOSED CURB EXISTING GRADE LANDSCAPE CROSS SECTION WEST 940 BERM-SEE GRADING PLAN 3 - SWO 5 - RAS 5 - GVH 0+001+002+00This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.SHEET NUMBER 2020 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114PHONE: 651-645-4197WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COMK:\TWC_LDEV\LAUNCH PROPERTIES\LAKE ELMO - INDUSTRIAL\3 Design\CAD\PlanSheets\L1-LANDSCAPE Profiles.dwg April 09, 2021 - 3:34pmBYREVISIONSNo.DATEPRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPREPARED FORLANDSCAPECROSS SECTIONWESTL104CROSSROADS LAUNCHBUSINESS PARKLAKE ELMOMNDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BYME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OFTHE STATE OF MINNESOTA.MNLIC. NO.RYAN A. HYLLESTED02/16/202153828DATECHECKED BYSCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYKHA PROJECT16073401601/22/2021AS SHOWNRAHPWBRAHNORTH LAUNCH PROPERTIES/CROSSROADS PROPERTIES T/PRECAST 130' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A2 4 T/PRECAST 130' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" 1 2 3 4 FASCIA FEATURE AT ENTRIES FASCIA FEATURE AT ENTRIES T/DECK 125' -0" PAINT COLOR 1 "OFF WHITE" PAINT COLOR 3 "DARK BLUE" PAINT COLOR 2 "MEDIUM GREY" PRECAST PANELS; PAINTED SMOOTHFACE ARCHITECTURAL ARCH'L PC PANELS TEXTURED/PATTERNED PRECAST PANELS; PAINTED SMOOTH FACE ARCHITECTURAL ROOFTOP HVAC UNITS FULLY SCREENED BY PARAPET WALL GLAZED ALUM STOREFRONT SYSTEM WITH 1" INSULATED LOW-E GLASS TENANT ENTRY DOORS, TYP. T/PRECAST 130' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" 13141516 DRIVE-IN DOOR CANOPY 32' - 0" T/PRECAST 130' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" A B C D E F G H J K L M N O PQ 32' - 0" Sheet Title Project Number Sheet Number Issued For Date Project Client Project Manager Date Reg. No. I hereby certified that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota Edward A. Farr ©COPYRIGHT 2021 Location C:\Users\kdr\Documents\20.068 CrossroadsEast_k.rickabaugh@edfarrarch.com.rvt2/12/2021 12:27:05 PMA220.068 CROSSROADS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 02/12/2021 16362 XXX Crossroads East Lake Elmo Ave N at Hudson Boulevard Lake Elmo, MN SCALE:1" = 30'-0"A2 1 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A2 4 ENLARGED ELEVATION 0'4'8' 16' SCALE:3/64" = 1'-0"A2 3 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:3/64" = 1'-0"A2 2 WEST ELEVATION (EAST ELEVATION SIM / OPP. HAND) SITE PLAN REVIEW 02/12/2021 T/ PRECAST 138' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" ABCDE 2' - 0"CANOPY HOLLOW MTL DOOR CLERESTORY WINDOW T/ PRECAST 138' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" A B C D E 2' - 0"8"8"CANOPYCANOPY HOLLOW MTL DOOR CLERESTORY WINDOW PREFINISHED MTL COPING T/ PRECAST 138' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" 1 2' - 0"CANOPY CANOPY PREFINISHED MTL COPING 23456789101112131415 A5 5 2' - 0"T/ PRECAST 138' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" 1 8"DRIVE-IN DOOR DOCK DOOR W/ LEVELER MTL DOCK STAIRS BOLLARD CLERESTORY WINDOW CANOPY HOLLOW MTL DOORS PREFINISHED MTL COPING FDC CONNECTION CABINETS 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 TRASH ENCLOSURE TRASH ENCLOSUREDOCK DOOR NO LEVELER EXIT LIGHT T/ PRECAST 138' -0" FLOOR 1 100' -0" 789 8"2' - 0"8' - 0"1' - 8"14' - 4"13' - 4"PAINT COLOR 1 "LIGHT GREY" PAINT COLOR 4 "DARK BLUE" PAINT COLOR 2 "MEDIUM GREY" PAINT COLOR 3 "OFF WHITE" Sheet Title Project Number Sheet Number Issued For Date Project Client Project Manager Date Reg. No. I hereby certified that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota Edward A. Farr ©COPYRIGHT 2021 Location C:\Users\kdr\Documents\18.017 Lk Elmo Whse Lot2_k.rickabaugh@edfarrarch.com.rvt2/12/2021 12:19:51 PMA518.017 LAUNCH OFFICE / WAREHOUSE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 02/12/2021 16362 NSL Launch Office / Warehouse Lake Elmo Ave N at Hudson Boulevard Lake Elmo, MN SCALE:1" = 30'-0"A5 3 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:1" = 30'-0"A5 4 SOUTH ELEVATION 0'15'30' 60' BUILDING HEIGHT OPTIONS: -CURRENT DESIGN ASSUMES STEEL BEAM DEPTH AS CRITICAL CLR HT LIMIT OF 32'-0" INSIDE. -IF 28'-0" CLR HT DESIRED, SUBTRACT 4'-0" TO ABOVE MENTIONED HEIGHTS SCALE:1" = 30'-0"A5 1 WEST ELEVATION SCALE:1" = 30'-0"A5 2 EAST ELEVATION 0'15'30' 60' 0'15'30' 60'0'15'30' 60' SCALE:3/32" = 1'-0"A5 5 ENLARGED ENTRY ELEVATION 0 4'8'16' SITE PLAN REVIEW 02/12/2021     PAGE 1 of 4  MEMORANDUM           Date:  May 5, 2021      To:  Ken Roberts, Planner Director  Re:  Launch Crossroads Business Park  Cc:  Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer    Preliminary PUD Plan Review  From:  Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer          An engineering review has been completed for the Launch Crossroads Business Park Preliminary PUD Plans. The  review consisted of the following documentation received on April 9, 2021:   Crossroads East First Addition Preliminary Plat, not dated.   Launch Crossroads Site Development Plans dated February 16, 2021.   Stormwater Management Report dated April 1, 2021.   DRAFT Traffic Impact Analysis dated April 2021.      STATUS/FINDINGS: Engineering has prepared the following review comments based on the plans submitted.      PRELIMINARY PLAT AND EASEMENTS   Additional right‐of‐way dedication appears to be required along Hudson Boulevard to accommodate the  proposed turn lanes and to maintain the required typical section for the roadway and bituminous trail.   Dedicated drainage and utility easements, minimum 10‐feet wide, are required along all public roadway  frontage including Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue. No easements are shown on the preliminary  plat  or  preliminary  plans.  Roadway  easements  must  be  dedicated for  use  by  small/dry  utilities  and  therefore cannot be encumbered with tree plantings or grades exceeding 4:1.   Outlot ownership must be identified on the preliminary plans. As stormwater management facilities,  Outlos A, B and C and must be shown as privately owned and maintained.    STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION     Site Access. The preliminary plan proposes two access points to the property, located along Hudson  Boulevard. Hudson Boulevard is a city owned street, classified as a Major Collector. The projected 2040  average  day  traffic  volume  is 6,800  trips.  The  access  spacing  guideline  for  streets  and  commercial  driveways along Hudson Boulevard is 660 feet.   One access is located approximately 670 feet from the Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue  intersection (plans are missing centerline stationing). This access meets the acceptable spacing  requirements and appears to be a good access location for the site.   The second access is located approximately 600 feet east of the first access, but it is only about  200  feet  from  the  existing  access  for  the  Vali‐Hi  Drive‐in.  This access does not meet the  acceptable spacing requirements, and the access does not connect to Hudson Boulevard at 90‐ degrees as required by city standards.   Lake Elmo Avenue Improvements. The developer may be required to provide turn lane improvements  along Lake Elmo Avenue at the intersection with Hudson Boulevard, if improvements are identified by  Washington County to be needed as a result of the development.   FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.  Cara Geheren, P.E.   651.300.4261  Jack Griffin, P.E.                651.300.4264  Ryan Stempski, P.E.  651.300.4267  Chad Isakson, P.E.  651.300.4285      PAGE 2 of 4   Lake Elmo Avenue Right‐of‐way Dedication. The proposed preliminary plat shows right‐of‐way dedication  along Lake Elmo Avenue (CR 17). Right‐of‐way along Lake Elmo Avenue must be provide as required by  Washington County.   Hudson  Boulevard  Improvements.  The  proposed  preliminary  plans  show  improvements  to  Hudson  Boulevard as required and in general conformance with the Hudson Boulevard Design Standards, with an  Urban  section  along  the  north  boulevard  and  bituminous  trail.  In  addition,  the  Hudson  Boulevard  intersection with Lake Elmo Avenue shows the required improvements along Hudson Boulevard to add a  dedicated left turn lane, right turn lane and through lane. As part of these improvements the existing  superelevation must be removed at the intersection which may result in temporary improvements to the  west leg of the intersection. Detailed design elements in the preliminary plans are not all shown or may  not be consistent with city standard requirements and will need to be revised accordingly as part of any  final construction plans, including stormwater management for the Hudson Boulevard improvements.   Hudson Boulevard Right‐of‐way Dedication. It appears additional right‐of‐way dedication is needed along  Hudson Boulevard to accommodate the proposed turn lanes and to maintain the required typical section  for the roadway and bituminous trail.   Pedestrian  Connectivity.  The  preliminary  plans  propose  an  8‐foot  bituminous  trail  along  Hudson  Boulevard as required by the Hudson Boulevard design standards. No trail or sidewalk is shown along Lake  Elmo Avenue.   Private Streets. The streets, driveways and parking areas interior to the development are proposed to  remain privately owned and maintained, located on Lots 1 and 2. Interior street design may require  revisions to provide adequate fire lanes and safety access, subject to review from the Lake Elmo Fire  Department.  Turning  templates  must  be  provided  to  demonstrate  adequate  turning  movements  for  emergency vehicles throughout the site.    MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER   The proposed site is located in the Southeast MUSA service area in the city’s Comprehensive Plan and will  discharge to the MCES Cottage Grove Ravine Interceptor. Municipal sanitary sewer service is available  along the entire eastern property line of the development and at the southeast corner near the MCES  meter station. The existing sanitary sewer main is located within an existing 50‐foot‐wide drainage and  utility easement.   The preliminary plat application did not include sanitary sewer use flow projections for the development  or provide Met Council SAC determinations. Although this information needs to be submitted, there are  no capacity limitations for sewer in this area.   The applicant will be required to connect to the City sanitary sewer main and extend individual sanitary  sewer service lines to each of the proposed buildings. The sewer service lines will be privately owned and  maintained and must be clearly identified on the plans as private services. The proposed utility plan must  be revised to eliminate the extension of public sewer into the site, unless dedicated drainage and utility  easements are provided.    The  applicant  will  be  responsible  to  extend  sanitary  sewer  service  stubs  for  connection  by  adjacent  properties. For this site, a trunk 15‐inch sanitary sewer main must be extended from the MCES meter  station to the corner of Lake Elmo Avenue and Hudson Boulevard at a pipe invert no higher than 902.5.  The stub must be accessible on the east side of Lake Elmo Avenue for a jacking pit that will not disturb any  part off the newly constructed site improvements or reconstructed Hudson Boulevard improvements.  Alternately the sewer stub must be extended to the west side of Lake Elmo Avenue at a pipe invert no  higher than 903.0 (the current location of Manhole SS‐08).   Sanitary manholes located within the pavement surfaces of Hudson Boulevard must be placed at the  roadway centerline.   The City typically provides cost participation for the trunk sanitary sewer, paying the pipe oversize cost  difference between a standard 8‐inch pipe. No cost participation is made for extra pipe depth.          PAGE 3 of 4  MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY   The public watermain is currently extended to the site with existing 12‐inch trunk watermain running  along the east property line of the proposed development, from the Hunters Crossing subdivision to  Hudson Boulevard. This main is located within an existing 50‐foot‐wide drainage and utility easement.   The preliminary plat application did not include domestic and fire suppression water demands required to  serve  the  development,  nor  did  the  application  propose  supplemental  fire  suppression  facilities.  Municipal  water  service  is  not  sufficient  to  support  fire  suppression demands for the proposed  development  until  Water  Tower  #4  is  operational.  The  city  is  currently  negotiating  and  investigating  potential water tower sites. Until a water tower site is determined feasible and has been acquired by the  city, the schedule for having Water Tower #4 operational is unknown.    The applicant will be responsible to extend municipal water into the development at its sole cost and will  be required to construct a looped watermain network internal to the site to avoid dead end runs greater  than 1,000 feet.  Watermain stubs are required to adjacent properties. The preliminary plans propose a  looped watermain as required, connecting in two locations to the existing 12‐inch watermain located  along the east property line. A watermain stub has been proposed to the west property line for future  extension to the east side of Lake Elmo Avenue.   All internal site watermain lines with hydrants will remain city owned and operated. Therefore, minimum  30‐foot easements centered over the pipe/hydrant are required, without encroachments from retaining  walls, trees, or other small/dry utilities. Easements must be dedicated to the city as part of the plat or  provided in the city’s standard form of easement agreement. Dedicated watermain easements must be  shown on all site, grading, utility, and landscape plans.   The looped watermain internal to the site must be minimum 8‐inch DIP pipe constructed to city design  standards using city standard plan notes. Privately owned water service pipe must be clearly identified on  the plans, where applicable.    The applicant will be responsible to place hydrants and water system valves as determined by the Lake  Elmo Public Works Director and Fire Department. The project proposes six hydrants with spacing that  exceeds maximum coverage radius for commercial properties. Additional hydrants may be required. All  fire hydrants shall be owned and maintained by the city.    No watermain pipe oversizing is anticipated at this time.     STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND GRDAING PLANS   The proposed development is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, Valley Branch  Watershed District (VBWD) and City rules. A permit will be required from the Minnesota Pollution Control  Agency and VBWD.    The Stormwater Management Report (SWMR) must be revised as follows:   The SWMP plan must be certified by a MN registered professional engineer.   Stormwater  management  plan  revisions  (and  potentially  site  plan  revisions)  are  necessary  to  determine if rate control requirements are met for all points of discharge from the site. The existing  and proposed drainage exhibits must be revised to clearly show and label all points of discharge from  the site. The rate control tables must reference each discharge location.   The SWMP remains unclear if all improvements have been accounted for, including the full extent of  the Hudson Boulevard improvements.   Outlet control structure (OCS) outlet pipe diameter/invert elevation varies between detail and plan.  Detail shows 30‐inch RCP at 919.9 while the plan and HydroCAD show 36‐inch RCP at 920. Clarify and  correct outlet configuration. A city standard outlet control structure must be used.   Time of concentration calculations must be provided.   Storm water facilities proposed as part of the site plan to meet State and VBWD permitting requirements  must be constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual.   The storm water basin NWL and HWL contours must be clearly shown on the plans.   Pond grading encroachments to the 10‐foot small/dry utility corridor, adjacent to the roadway  right‐of‐way, must be removed.      PAGE 4 of 4   The  storm  water  facilities  constructed  for  this  development  should  remain  privately  owned  and  maintained. The applicant will be required to execute and record  a  Stormwater  Maintenance  and  Easement Agreement in the City’s standard form of agreement.   Even as privately owned and maintain facilities, maintenance access roads meeting the City engineering  design standards must be provided for all storm water facilities. Maintenance access must be clearly  shown on the grading plans including access to the facility, and BMP maintenance access to all flared end  sections and forebay.   The grading plans remain incomplete and must be revised and resubmitted.   Existing conditions must be shown on the grading plans for a minimum distance of 150 feet from ALL  limits of construction. The minimum grading plan scale is 1‐inch = 50 feet.   The plans do not address the Hudson Boulevard urbanized boulevard changes and how grading and  drainage revisions are fully addressed and tied to exiting conditions.   The grading plan shows a low spot with no defined outlet in the area west of the Building D driveway.   The grading plans must clearly show all drainage and utility easements.   Overland emergency overflows or outlets must be clearly identified on the grading plans.    LANDSCAPE PLANS   The preliminary landscape plans must be revised to relocate all trees to reside outside of the proposed  public easement areas including the proposed watermain easements that are missing on the plans, and  the small/dry utility easement corridors along Hudson Boulevard and Lake Elmo Avenue that are missing  on the plans.    Memo To: Ken Roberts, City of Lake Elmo Planning Director From: Lucius Jonett, Landscape Architect Jenna Niday, Landscape Designer File: City of Lake Elmo Landscape Plan Review Launch Crossroads, Review #3 Date: April 6, 2021 Submittals ▪ Tree Preservation Plan, dated April 2, 2021, received April 5, 2021. ▪ Landscape Plans, dated February 16, 2021, received April 5, 2021. Review History • Initial landscape review on February 2, 2021. • Re-review of landscape on February 18, 2021. Location:. Northeast quadrant of the intersection of Lake Elmo Avenue & Hudson Boulevard, Lake Elmo, MN Land Use Category: Business Park Surrounding Land Use Concerns: The area to the north is designated as residential. Special landscape provisions in addition to the zoning code: Screening is required between the less intensive residential development on the north side of the site and the more intensive proposed business park. April 6, 2021 Ken Roberts Planning Director City of Lake Elmo Page 2 of 4 Tree Preservation: A. A tree preservation plan has been been submitted that does meet all requirements. Entire Site Total Caliper Inches of Significant Trees On-Site: 1177.0 Cal Inches Common Trees 1148 Conifer/Evergreen Trees 23 Hardwood Trees 6 Nuisance Trees 0 Significant Inches Removed On-Site 1145 Cal Inches Common Trees 1122 Conifer/Evergreen Trees 23 Hardwood Trees 0 Nuisance Trees 0 30% Tree Removal Limits (Cal. Inches) Allowed Proposed Subtract Common Tree Removals 344.4 1122 Subtract Conifer/Evergreen Tree Removals 6.9 23 Subtract Hardwood Tree Removals 1.8 0 Removals in excess of 30% allowances Removals in excess of 30% allowances 794 Cal Inches Common Removals in Excess of 30% Allowance 777.6 Conifer Removals in Excess of 30% Allowance 16.1 Hardwood Removals in Excess of 30% Allowance 0.0 Common Tree Replacement Needed (1/4 the dia inches removed) 194.4 Cal Inches Conifer Tree Replacement Needed (1/2 the dia inches removed) 8.1 Cal Inches Hardwood Tree Replacement Needed (1/2 the dia inches removed) 0.0 Cal Inches Common Tree Replacement Required @ 2.5" per Tree 78 # Trees Conifer Tree Replacement Required @ 3" per 6' Tall Tree 5 # Trees Hardwood Tree Replacement Required @ 2.5" per Tree 0 # Trees ** Commercial, mixed-use development - mitigation replacement trees can be included toward landscape required tree counts. B. Tree replacement is required because more than thirty (30) percent of the diameter inches of significant trees surveyed will be removed. C. Tree replacement calculations follow the required procedure and are correct. D. This project is a commercial development, therefore mitigation replacement trees can be included toward landscape required tree counts. April 6, 2021 Ken Roberts Planning Director City of Lake Elmo Page 3 of 4 Landscape Requirements: The proposed plan does meet the code required number of trees. Master Plan Master Plan (Code Required) Proposed Street frontage 1835 Lineal Feet Lake Shore 0 Lineal Feet Stream Frontage 0 Lineal Feet Total Linear Feet 1835 Lineal Feet /50 Feet = Required Frontage Trees 37 40 Trees Development or Disturbed Area - SF Development or Disturbed Area 12.97 Acres *5 = Required Development Trees 65 65 Trees Interior Parking Lot Spaces* 592 Spaces /15 = Required Parking Lot Trees 40 40 Trees Perimeter Parking Lot Frontage Length 1753 Lineal Feet /50 = Required Frontage Strip Trees 35 35 Trees Property Line Length to be Screened 1231 Lineal Feet /40 = Required Screening Trees 31 31 Trees Required Mitigation Trees 83 Required Number of Trees (**or***) 208 Total Trees to Date 211 1. A minimum one (1) tree is proposed for every fifty (50) feet of street frontage. 2. A minimum of five (5) trees are proposed to be planted for every one (1) acre of land that is developed or disturbed by development activity. The landscape plans do meet the minimum compositions of required trees: Master Plan Qty % Composition Deciduous Shade Trees 127 60% >25% required Coniferous Trees 53 25% >25% required Ornamental Trees 31 15% <15% required Builder Trees 0 Tree Count 211 April 6, 2021 Ken Roberts Planning Director City of Lake Elmo Page 4 of 4 The landscape plans do not include the required mitigation tree types and quantities, however the value of the missing 37 common trees is more than offset by the 86 hardwood trees above and beyond requirements. This will not detract from the intent or quality of the submitted landscape plan. Required Proposed Onsite Common Trees 78 41 Conifers 5 53 Hardwood Trees 0 86 A. A landscape plan has been submitted that does meet all requirements. B. The landscape plan does meet City landscape layout requirements. C. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping – The development does include interior parking lots and meets the 5% landscape planting area requirement. D. Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping – The development does include perimeter parking lots and meets the landscape frontage strip and screening requirements. E. Screening – The landscape plan does meet screening requirements. Findings: 1. It is understood that many trees that appear to be in conflict are near a sanitary sewer line that will be 40+ feet underground and it is very unlikely for future conflict to arise. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Launch Crossroads landscape plans be approved pending no site design revisions are made. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Lucius Jonett, PLA (MN) City of Lake Elmo Municipal Landscape Architect A great place to live, work and play…today and tomorrow North Shop • 11660 Myeron Road North • Stillwater, MN 55082-9537 Telephone: 651-430-4300 • Fax: 651-430-4350 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www.co.washington.mn.us Washington County is an equal opportunity organization and employer Public Works Donald J. Theisen, P.E., Director Wayne H. Sandberg, P.E., Deputy Director, County Engineer Memorandum Date: May 6, 2021 To: Ken Roberts, Lake Elmo City Planner From: Mitch Bartelt, Washington County Assistant Traffic Engineer Re: Launch Properties Draft Traffic Impact Analysis Thank you for sharing the Draft Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed Launch Properties development in Lake Elmo, located at the intersection of Hudson Boulevard and County Road (CR) 17B (Lake Elmo Avenue). We are grateful for the City of Lake Elmo's partnership on this project. A key function of Washington County is to provide and support a robust transportation system. The County’s goals with its transportation system are to: 1) Plan, build, and maintain an interconnected and accessible transportation system that considers all users and modes of travel. 2) Preserve and modernize the existing transportation system. 3) Improve safety and efficiency for all users. 4) Promote positive environmental and health outcomes. One way to accomplish these goals is to ensure consistency with roadway design and access guidelines. The County has reviewed the Draft Traffic Impact Analysis and has concluded that much of what is included in the study appears reasonable, particularly in relation to the assumptions made for the Existing Year No Build Condition. However, the study does not include some of the necessary information that would help affected agencies determine whether traffic control changes or turn lane construction, including the lengthening of existing turn lanes, would be needed as a result of the proposed development. The County has the following comments: • The study proposes that under the Opening Year Build Condition in 2021, the developer will provide dedicated left turn, through, and right turn lanes on the westbound approach of Hudson Boulevard at CR 17B, as well as a painted median on the eastbound approach. However, the improvements to the Hudson Blvd approaches to CR 17B are not plausible as currently proposed by the applicant. o The widening as proposed on the west leg would have constructability and durability issues, along with driver behavior issues, due to the narrow strips of pavement being proposed along the existing road edges while leaving existing pavement in place. o Having three side street approach lanes to a two-way stop can create operational and sight line issues, as vehicles in each lane attempt to see past each other to look for gaps in cross traffic. • The traffic study did not analyze the performance of the Hudson Blvd and CR 17B intersection under its current geometry with the addition of site traffic, likely because the addition of dedicated left and right turn lanes was already presumed. However, the absence of this information makes it difficult to consider other design alternatives. • Based on the projected volumes contained in the study for Hudson Blvd at CR 17B, all-way stop warrants will be met for the AM and PM peak hours, and could be met for additional hours as well. (Volume thresholds must be met at an intersection for 8 hours as a condition of the warrant). Washington County staff will continue to monitor this intersection and may install all-way stop control if and when such control is determined to be both warranted and justified. • Consideration of street lighting is recommended for this intersection. • Under Site Trip Generation, the newly generated trips should be broken down by passenger cars versus heavy commercial vehicles, particularly considering the nature of the proposed land use. We are concerned that if the site traffic has a higher heavy commercial volume than the surrounding road network, it could affect the level of service and queue lengths being reported. Please provide information on whether and how this has been taken into account. • The allowable axle weights for each roadway in the study should be noted in the document, even if they’re all 10-ton roads. And if Hudson Blvd is less than a 10-ton roadway, the study should note the allowable axle weight of Hudson Rd, as it could be assumed that, under such a scenario, some traffic from the proposed site would migrate down to Hudson Rd to access eastbound I-94. • If the Hudson Blvd and CR 17B intersection were to be controlled by a traffic signal in the future, it would be required that dedicated left and right turn lanes be constructed on both approaches of Hudson Blvd, at city cost, as was recently the case at the nearby intersection of Hudson Blvd and Keats Ave (County State Aid Highway 19). A roundabout is also a possible future scenario for this intersection, which would still entail a local cost share. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns regarding the County’s review. I can be reached at mitch.bartelt@co.washington.mn.us or 651-430-4349. Cc: Jack Griffin, Lake Elmo City Engineer Joe Gustafson, Washington County Traffic Engineer Frank Ticknor, Washington County Design Engineer Kurt Howard, Washington County Planner I