Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PZ Packet 06-13-11
The City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on Monday, June 13, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a. March 28, 2011 b. April 25, 2010 c. May 23, 2011 4. Public Hearing a. (CONT.) BREMER BANK PUD AMENDMENT. Consideration of a request to amend the Planned Unit Development for Eagle Point Business Park to allow the expansion of the parking facility at 8555 Eagle Point Boulevard. 5. Business Item a. SOUTHERN LAKE ELMO — PROCESS, GOALS AND VISION. Review of draft policy document concerning the vision and goals for the 1 -94 planning committee. b. FORM -BASED CODES DISCUSSION. Review of examples of form -based zoning codes. c. Discussion of the Planning Commission Meeting Process — Robert's Rules (Verbal) 6. Updates a. City Council Updates i. Sewer Infrastructure Project — Council Rejected Bids ii. Fence Ordinance - Approval b. Staff Updates c. Commission Concerns 7. Adjourn DRAFT City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 28, 2011 Chairman Van Zandt called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bidon, Blitz, Fliflet, Hall, Haggard, Pelletier, Van Zandt, Williams and Ziertman. Absent: Obetmueller. STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Klatt and Planner Matzek. Agenda Minutes —March 7, 2010 M /S /P, Hall/Williams, move to approve as presented. Vote: 6:0. Abstained: Blitz, Haggard, Pelletier. Public Hearing — Zoning Text Amendment to allow Park and Ride Uses Planner Matzek introduced the item, stated the Council's direction to consider the use for inclusion near the Interstate 94 corridor, and asked the commission to provide a recommendation. She asked the commission to consider if the suggested zoning district — HD -RR -LB would be the appropriate locations for that type of use; if the use should be permitted, conditionally permitted or an interm use; and if there should be additional regulations for the use such as a height limitation. Commissioner Williams asked if I -94 was a public transit route. Planner Matzek said that the corridor is guided in the Metro Transit long range plans as a transit route and it is currently being studied for various transit options. She said changing the ordinance to allow the use would be setting the table if there was interest in someone coming forward with that use. Commissioner Fliflet asked if a park and ride would generate any revenue for the city versus having a commercial type use on that land. Planning Director Klatt said it would depend on who owns the property. He said if it was owned by a public entity like Metro Transit they would not pay property taxes, but if it were owned privately and a public entity leased the land, there would be property taxes. He said the purpose of providing a park and ride is to provide residents with a service. Commissioner Williams asked what other properties are guided for Limited Business within a quarter mile of the interstate. Planner Matzek said the properties being suggested are the only properties guided for Limited Business. There is an area at the intersection of Manning Avenue and Hudson Boulevard that is guided for a business park and everything else guided for sewer in this area is identified as residential. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 3 -28 -11 r� THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:22 P.M. Jake Ebertz, 1147 Clipper Way; Woodbury Mr. Ebertz said his family owns property off of Keats and the frontage road. He said to think of the property right on the Highway as residential is a mistake. Planner Matzek said that there is a meeting later that week starting apublic process to revisit the future land use map. Chairman Van Zandt said that in other communities, businesses have found that building near park and rides have been a good investment. Mr. Ebertz said he would encourage the park and ride. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:27 P.M Commissioner Fliflet said she is opposed to a park and ride at the proposed locations. She said there are two prime locations for businesses and that is where the park and rides are identified. She suggested on Maiming Avenue south of the freeway would be a better location, but said she thinks the I -94 task force should discuss the options. She said she would be more in favor of allowing the use as an interim use instead of a conditional use because it is in the holding district. Commissioner Hall thought a conditional use permit would be more applicable given that this would be a part of the regional infrastructure. He said existing park and rides are at capacity now. Commissioner Bidon said he thinks this is premature and does not see any real benefits for Lake Elmo. He said he would rather see a park and ride on Highway 5 near the airport. Commissioner Pelletier said if it is on Manning Avenue she would like the safety of Oakland Junior High considered as the school is just up the road. Chairman Van Zandt said he found statistics that say western Wisconsin will continue to grow and utilize I -94 which will only increase the traffic. Commissioner Haggard asked about the timing Planner Matzek said that at preliminary discussions with the Metro Transit group, staff made them aware of the upcoming discussions for potential park and ride locations. However, their study of alternative transit options along the I -94 corridor is going to be a year long and if the city were interested in taking additional time to study this, it would not impact potential funding. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 3 -28 -11 WMEW Commissioner Fliflet asked how many people live south of Highway 5, because that is the population that would utilize the park and ride other then populations from other communities. M /S/F, Williams/Fliflet, move to recommend that no action be taken at this time, neither the inclusion of a Park and Ride as a use within the Limited Business district nor selection of any particular parcels along I -94 for a park and ride. 1. The Planning Commission is in favor of park and rides in the general sense. 2. The particular proposal is too soon as it is unknown if or where public transit will be located in this corridor. 3. There is little financial benefit to Lake Elmo to divert the very few limited business areas to most likely tax exempt uses. 4. We should wait until the I -94 Work Group has made its recommendations for zoning categories and zoning locations in this corridor before taking action. Vote: 4:5. Against: Britz, Van Zandt, Ziertman, Haggard, Pelletier M/S Pelletier /Fliflet, move to recommend adding a Park and Ride as a conditional use in the HD -RR -LB district with the condition that the I -94 Work Group address this issue in a timely manner. Commissioner Williams said if the Commission and Council approve it, it would not come back in front of the Commission unless an application were made. Commissioner Pelletier withdrew her motion. M /S /P, Pelletier / Ziertman, move to recommend adding a Park and Ride as a conditional use in the HD -RR -LB district. Vote: 5:4. Against: Bidon, Hall, Williams, Haggard. Business Item — Zoning Code Update and Form Based Zoning Discussion Planning Director Man introduced the item and showed potential revisions to the uses and definitions in the city code in order to simplify and to increase usability of the zoning code. He showed the comparisons of current code versus the proposed language, but did not provide an analysis. Commissioner Williams said he is confused as the proposed districts do not match. Commissioner Fliflet suggested that although most uses would be fine if they looked a certain way on the outside, there are some uses the city would not want anywhere in the city and would like to have a list of excluded uses. Planning Director Klatt said he would need to check with the attorney to see if that is allowed. Commissioner Pelletier asked if a use is not listed, does that mean it is not allowed. Planning Director Klatt said some city codes are more explicit in stating that, but Staffs interpretation has been if it is not listed, it is not allowed. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 3 -28 -11 DRAFT M /S /P, Williams /Van Zandt, the commission is in favor of the complete shift in code format and that the additional step of defining uses not allowed within the city be completed as well. Vote: 9:0. The Commission asked to defer discussion on the zoning districts to the next meeting. Business Item — Zoning Text Amendment— Public Purchase ofLand Planning Director Klatt said this item will come before the Commission at their next meeting. He said the City Engineer has been trying to site a well on one acre in the northeast area of the City. The City must be fee owners of the land, but is having difficulty in finding an area for purchase that would not impact the existing property owner. He said Staff will be looking for general guidance to allow an underlying property owner to have underlying development rights retained if the City needs property for public purposes. Commissioner Williams said he is in favor of this proposal for any parcel that is ten acres or greater, but when you smaller lots such as the R -1 district are involved, making the lots smaller could drastically alter the neighborhood. Updates Planning Director Klatt said the City will not be moving forward with the Commission's recommendation for the zoning text amendment and rezoning for the ECFC in the Village Area as the two parties were unable to come to a master agreement governing the purchase or lease of the site. Commission Concerns Chairman Van Zandt said he would like the Commission to receive the packets earlier. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned 9:24 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kelli Matzek Planner Lake Elmo planning Commission Minutes; 3 -28 -11 DRAFT City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 25, 2011 Chairman Van Zandt called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bidon, Hall, Obermueller, Van Zandt, and Haggard (7:02). Absent: Williams, Ziertman, Fliflet, and Pelletier. STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Klatt and Planner Matzek. Agenda M /S /P, Hall / Bidon, move to approve the agenda. Vote: 5:0. Minutes -April 11, 2011 Commissioner Haggard said on page two she would like it to reflect that she said neighborhoods in general that were highly compact, not just the one she lived in. Planner Matzek read Williams' comments into the minutes. M /S /P, Haggard /Hall, move to approve as amended. Vote: 5:0. Public Hearing- Septic Variance Request 8242 Hidden Bay Trail Planner Matzek asked the Commission to consider approval of a 50 foot Lakeshore setback variance request for the purpose of installing a replacement septic system twenty - five feet from the ordinary high waterline. Planner Matzek also described the site, highlighting an underground weir on the north end of the property, further restricting the placement of the new septic system. Pete Ganzel, Washington County Public Health, described the proposed septic system as an elevated mound system. He also noted that this system would be more effective and efficient. Planner Matzek noted that the system currently in use at 8242 Hidden Bay Trail is classified as a failing system under current state statute. Chairman Van Zandt asked whether the current system, left as is, would be a threat to the lake. Mr. Ganzel noted pathogens could get into the lake as well as drinking water if left as -is. He also noted that the new system would be safer in this regard. Commissioner Bidon questioned the placement of the system and wondered whether it could be placed further to the North. Planner Matzek provided further clarification with pictures of where on the property the easement for the weir exists. She also explained that the placement of the septic system Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4 -25 -11 WNEW was at that location in order to not be located within the flood plain in the northern portion of the property. Commissioner Hall noted that the 75 foot setback from the ordinary high waterline is a design safety standard, but does not mean that a design that is closer to the waterline is not safe. Mr. Ganzel explained the reasoning behind the traditional 75 foot setback. He also noted that the contractor would have to implement erosion control in order to be careful and sensitive to the lake. Commissioner Haggard questioned how close the final product would be from the lake. Pete Ganzel reassured her that there would be 25 feet. He explained that the absorption area would be far enough away to not be a concern. Commissioner Haggard expressed interest in why the relocating of the well was not considered when placing the septic system. Planner Matzek speculated that the applicants may not have considered that location due to the cost of moving a well and the chance they would also need to work with a neighbor to move the neighbor's well to maintain the required separation. CHAIRMAN VAN ZANDT OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:27 P.M. Planner Matzek stated that Staff had received two letters from neighbors of the applicants. The first letter; from Bob and Margie Sevenich at 8224 Hidden Bay Trail, showed support for the approval of the variance. The second letter, from Gordon and Mary Grundien at 8270 Hidden Bay Trail, showed concerns about the elevation of the drain field and potential contamination of the lake by the septic system. Planner Matzek also read an email from Commissioner Williams, in which he also questioned the location of the septic system. Commissioner Obermueller wondered whether the current proposal before the Commission included a lift station. Pete Ganzel affirmed that is does include a lift system. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:30 P.M. M/S, Hall /Obermueller, move to approve the variance request for a reduced Lakeshore setback for the replacement septic system. Chairman Van Zandt suggested an amendment to the motion that the recommendation of approval was contingent on all other locations were deemed impractical. The amendment was approved. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4 -25 -11 2 WME err Vote: 5:0. Public Hearing — Conditional Use Permit Amendment: Jesuit Retreat House Garage and Greenhouse Structure Planning Director Klatt introduced a Conditional Use Permit Amendment application at 8243 Demontreville Trail, which is zoned Public Facilities, to build an earth- sheltered maintenance shop and greenhouse. He summarized activities on the site and stated that the proposed site is highly screened and hardly visible. Planning Director Klatt outlined the various conditions of approval for the garage which is planned for servicing vehicles. He said that the design standards were not covered in staff report and staff is interpreting that we will regulate it so that the exposed surfaces will meet the requirements. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:53 P.M. No one spoke. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:53 P.M. Commissioner Van Zandt commented that Commissioner Williams (absent) said he would be supportive of approving the conditional use permit. M /S /P, Obennueller /Hall move to recommend approval of CUP as submitted by the applicant. Vote: 5:0. Public Hearing — Zoning Text Amendment for Public Land Acquisition Planning Director Klatt said this amendment was briefly discussed at the last meeting. The proposed amendment allows the purchase of land for municipal purposes to not count against property owners for acreage standards. He suggested using a percentage to put a cap on the amount as well. Commissioner Haggard wondered if the situation could be solved using a variance. Planning Director Klatt identified that there has been a recent court case that has greatly limited the city's ability to approve variances. He said the replacement of failing septic systems on small lots are the only variances the city has undertaken since that court case, which would render a house unusable. Chairman Van Zandt agreed with the benefits of this amendment, noting that it would allow the city to move forward with infrastructure needs without penalizing the existing property owners. Director Klatt explained that generally the city is able to acquire easements to complete other infrastructure projects, but in the most recent case, the city is trying to site a well Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-25 -11 and the Department of Health requires that the city be the fee owner of the land so an easement is not an option. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC AT 8:09 P.M. No one spoke. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:09 P.M. Chairman Van Zandt read Commissioner Williams' comments, which were supportive of the amendment. M /S /P, Bidon/Haggard, move to recommend approval with changes identified by staff. Vote: 5:0. Business Items None. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned 8:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kelli Matzek Planner Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4 -25 -11 4 1163-MM City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 23, 2011 Chairman Van Zandt called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bidon, Fliflet (7:02), Hall, Haggard, Obermueller, Van Zandt, Williams, and Ziertman. Absent: Pelletier. STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Klatt, Planner Matzek and Planning Intern Johnson. Agenda M /S/P, Williams/Hall, move to approve as presented. Vote: 7:0. Minutes — None. Public Hearing — Bremer Bank PUD Amendment Planning Director Klatt introduced a PUD Amendment application to allow a parking lot expansion of 155 parking stalls. He asked the Commission to discuss the item, to open the public hearing and to continue it to the next meeting. He said the City Engineer has requested revisions to the Storm Water Management Plan, therefore Staff is recommending tabling the application pending submission and review of the revised documents. Fliflet arrived 7:02 p.m. Commissioner Hall asked what the expected future land use of the property to the north was. Planning Director Klatt said north of this site is part of the planned future sewered development. The current Future Land Use Plan designates this land as future residential development at an average of 3 and a half units per acre. Commissioner Williams asked if the slopes would require a retaining wall for the expansion to the north. Planning Director Klatt said the City Engineer will review that. Chairman Van Zandt asked if runoff caused by the additional impervious area would be handled by the existing ponding. Planning Director Klatt said the City Engineer will be reviewing that as well. He said the original ponding design encompassed this future expansion, but the City's ordinance has changed since then. Commissioner Williams asked if the City's regulations address a two level parking structure as opposed to a ground level expansion. Planning Director Klatt said it did not, to his knowledge. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5 -23 -11 r14 THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:31 P.M. M /S/P, Williams /Ziertman, move to table the public hearing to the June 13, 2011 meeting. Vote: 8:0. Public Hearing — Amendment to Fence Ordinance Planner Matzek introduced amendments to the fence ordinance to allow solid fences to be constructed on the rear or side of a through lot that abuts a road with a classification of principal arterial, A minor arterial or B minor arterial. She said the solid fence, as written, would not be allowed in the side yard when it does not abut a street or is the side yard of a coiner lot— only a through lot. She said additional amendments put into place the need for an Easement Encroachment Agreement when a fence is proposed within an easement and a screening fence no longer needed to be enclosed. Staff is recommending the approval of the amendments to the ordinance, but to remove the language regarding the side yard and only allowing solid fences in yards designated as rear yards. Commissioner Fliflet said a variance is an option for residents interested in adding a solid fence in a location not outright allowed. Commissioner Hall asked if the City has requirements to keep obstructions from the view of traffic at street intersections. Planner Matzek said there are not specific distances listed, but it is a nuisance to obstruct those views and she would rely on the City Engineer to determine that distance based on the speed of traffic. Commissioner Haggard expressed concern regarding the view of traffic also leaving private driveways when they are not adjacent or a part of a street intersection. Commissioner Williams said variances are expensive and to ask residents to pay for that without knowing if they will be able to put in their fence is asking too much. He suggested adding an exception for special cases involving side yards. He suggested changing the definition of double front lot to include front and side. Commissioner Ziertman asked if a solid fence were allowed if it would meet the setback requirement for a structure. Planning Director Klatt said screening fences are required when there is something being stored outside that is not allowed to be stored outside. He said there is also a provision in the code that allows a solid fence, if it is entirely enclosed at the same size as an accessory building allowed on the property. He said staff is suggesting a change to that portion of the ordinance as well. Planner Matzek said she received an email from a resident interested in the fence ordinance. Her concern was that the ordinance does not allow fences to be within the Ordinary High Waterline setback and she thought it should be allowed. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5 -23 -11 r•� Chairman Van Zandt said lakeside property owners' property rights are frequently violated. Commissioner Haggard asked if variance fees can be waived or reduced for fence applications. Planner Matzek said that would be a legal question and she would ask the City Attorney. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:06 P.M. Rob Konop, 12418 Marquess Way N Mr. Konop said his neighbors have a solid fence adjacent to Highway 5. He said that variances are expensive and the fence ordinance is currently more restrictive then any other city. He said he needs a solid six foot fence in the side yards as well because neighbors can look into his back yard and could take his kids. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:09 P.M. Commissioner Fliflet said she supports a strict fence ordinance, but does not like the idea of having mismatching fences in the back yard and side yards. She said to fix the problem for that person who spoke, it still wouldn't accomplish what is being sought because you could see in the side yard from Highway 5. Commissioner Bidon asked if there were regulations for landscaping or berms. Planner Matzek said there are not regulations for landscaping, but berms may be regulated if they affect drainage. Chairman Van Zandt said it amazes him that people buy homes in the airport approach path and then complain about the noise from the airplanes. He said the homes were cheaper to start with because of the airport and noise. Commissioner Zierhnan noted that when commercial uses abut residential property that the commercial property is required to screen that area by either a fence or landscaping. Commissioner Fliflet asked why the city would care if the person's yard was a side yard instead of a rear yard if they felt the need to have a screening fence on a busy roadway. Commissioner Obermueller suggested certain architecturally appealing fences could be allowed to be up to 72 inches. M /S /P, Williams /Hall, moved to amend 154.120 C 1 to say "lots with frontage along improved public streets at both the rear yard and front yard or at both the front yard and a side yard may apply the standards of subdivision B above for fences paralleling rear or side yards" and to change "fences on double front lots" to "fences on through lots ." Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes: 5 -23 -11 DRAFT Commissioner Williams said the definition for "through lot" says all roads abutting a street should be considered the front yard, but that is not what is wanted in this case. Planning Director Klatt said the fence ordinance makes that as an exception where it is considered differently. Vote: 8:0. M /S, Williams /Ziertman, move to recommend approval of revised fence ordinance as amended. Commissioner Fliflet said she is not in favor of it as it does not seem to solve the problem. Planning Director Klatt said it could be allowed as a conditional use permit which would require an individual review. Commission Haggard suggested having a lower variance fee for fences. M /S, Williams /Hall, move to postpone consideration of the previous motion and direct staff to return at a future date with proposed language which will satisfy the commission's concern. M /S, Hall /Williams, to amend the motion to include the reasons for postponing are to ensure staff has clearly understood the commission's intent and motions and can come back with alternate language and additional information for the commission. Vote on amendment failed 2:6. Against: Ziertman, Fliflet, Van Zandt, Obermueller, Bidon and Haggard. Vote on motion to postpone consideration failed 3:5. Against: Ziertman, Fliflet, Van Zandt, Bidon and Haggard. M /S /F, Obermueller /Ziertman, move to amend the original motion to not allow fences in a side yard on a corner lot, but instead to ask the City Council to consider a sliding fee for a fence variance. Vote: 3:5. Against: Williams, Hall, Van Zandt, Bidon and Haggard. Original motion made by Commissioner Williams on ordinance: Vote: 4:3. Obermueller abstained as she was unclear with what was being. Against: Fliflet, Ziertman and Bidon. The Commission tabled the next two items: Vision. Statement and Goals for the South of 10t" Street Area; Form Based Code Discussion City Council Items Planning Director Klatt said the septic variance at 8242 Hidden Bay Trail was approved, but the City Council had a question about the removal of a second driveway, which was a Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5 -23 -11 condition of a variance from years ago. He said the variance legislation has changed, making it easier for cities to grant variances again as it is now worded as "practical difficulties." He said Washington County will be holding an open house on June 8th to receive input on potential trails along Inwood Avenue North and 10'b Street as well as a western entrance to the Lake Elmo Regional Park Reserve. Chairman Van Zandt said this Commission has, in the past, agreed to use a loose version of Robert's Rules. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned 9:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kelli Matzek Planner Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5 -23 -11 Planning Commission Date: 6/13/11 PUBLIC HEARING Item: 4a ITEM: Planned Unit Development Amendment— Bremer Bank Parking Lot Expansion SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director a. REVIEWED BY: Kell Matzek, City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a request from Bremer Financial Services to amend the Planned Unit Development for Eagle Point Business Park to revise its site plan to expand the parking lot that is accessory to the Bremer Bank Building at 8555 Eagle Point Boulevard. The parking lot currently is comprised of 405 parking stalls and the proposed amendment would expand this number to 560 stalls (an increase of 155). The expansion has been requested due to the increase in employment within the facility that has been experienced since its construction in 2002. The proposed PUD Amendment has been requested in order to reduce the parking setback along the northern property boundary of the business park from 80 feet down to 20 feet and to remove a landscaped berm that was planted under a powerline easement on the northern portion of the site. The Planning Commission continued a public hearing on this agenda item from its last meeting, and should take additional testimony from the public on this matter at its June 13, 2011 meeitng. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The attached Staff report includes a detailed review of the application along with a Staff recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request from Bremer Financial Services to amend the Planned Unit Development for Eagle Point Business Park to revise its site plan to expand the parking lot that is accessory to the Bremer Bank Building at 8555 Eagle Point Boulevard, provided the following conditions are met: 1. Easements shall be provided up to the 100 -year high water level for all storm water facilities. These easements shall be shown on the utility and grading plans. 2. The applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City of Lake Elmo related to the construction (and /or expansion) of the storm water facilities on the site. The legal descriptions for all storm water facilities (including access) must be added to the maintenance agreement, and this agreement must be approved and executed by the City prior to the commencement of any work authorized as part of the PUD amendment. 3. The applicant shall provide written approval from Xcel Energy to allow the expansion of the parking lot underneath an existing power line easement. 4. The applicant shall submit a revised landscaping plan depicting the landscaping materials to the salvaged during construction and replanted on other portions of the site. The plan shall also provide for additional plantings on along the northern property line where necessary to provide screening and buffering to the adjacent property. The updated landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to the commencement of any work authorized as part of the PUD amendment. ORDER OF BUSINESS: 1. - Introduction .................................... ............................... .......................Planning Director - Report by staff ............................... ............................... .......................Planning Director - Questions from the Commission .... ............................... Chair & Commission Members - Applicant Comments ..... ... ... ............ ............ ......... .................................. Chair facilitates - Questions of the Applicant ............. ............................... Chair & Commission Members - Open the Public Hearing ............................... ............................... ..........................Chair - Close the Public Hearing., ................................................... .................. ..... Chair - Call for a motion .................................................... ............................... Chair Facilitates - Discussion of Commission on the motion ............. ............................... Chair Facilitates - Action by the Planning Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report 2. Application Form 3. Letter from Bremer Financial Services 4. Review Letter from TKDA — UPDATED 5. Review Letter from SWWD 6. Response Letter from Applicant's Engineer 7. Storm Water Runoff Summary 8. Proposed Site Plans — UPDATED 9. Eagle Point Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plans City of Lake Elmo Planning Department Planned Unit Development Amendment Request To: Planning Commission From. Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Meeting Date: 6/13/11 Applicant: Larson Engineering, Inc. Owner: Bremer Financial Services, Inc. Location: 8555 Eagle Point Boulevard Zoning: BP — Business Park Application The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Bremer Financial Services to Summary: revise its site plan to expand the parking lot that is accessory to the Bremer Bank Building at 8555 Eagle Point Boulevard. The parking lot currently is comprised of 405 parking stalls and the proposed amendment would expand this number to 560 stalls (an increase of 155). The expansion has been requested due to the increase in employment within the facility that has been experienced since its construction in 2002. This report and attached information has been updated from the last Planning Commission based on the submission of revised plans from the applicant. Property The Bremer Bank building is located in the northeast comer of the Eagle Point Information: Business Park, which was platted as part of a larger Planned Unit Development in 2001. The Bremer Bank facility received its site plan approval from the City in early 2002, at which point the plans indicated that the total parking stalls planned was 508, with some planned for construction with a future addition. The current conditions plan submitted by the applicant depicts 405 stalls on the site, along with the area that is set aside for a future addition. At this time, the applicant is not proposing any addition or alterations to the building. When the City granted approval for construction of a building on this site, the applicant was allowed to construct only the parking needed to comply with the minimum standards of the code. It was noted in the staff report for the project that the actual surface parking surface installation be limited to 402 stalls Until a need for the additional spaces is clearly demonstrated (by employee data from the tenant). With the present application the applicant has submitted a letter indicating that the number of persons employed at the site has increased fi-om 248 in 2002 to 450 today, with an average number of monthly guests at 1,200, substantially more than when the building Applicable Codes: lianf 1 arn.n.„.,, s. i °itJii was first opened. As part of the Eagle Point Planned Unit Development, the applicant's property is regulated by not just the underlying BP — Business Park zoning district regulations, but also by the approval documents for the Planned Unit Development. The overall PUD plans were approved by the City in 1999, and contain a written description of the development standards for the park in addition to the illustrative graphics for various elements of the site. Staff has attached two of these documents for consideration by the Planning Commission, including a concept plan and prototypical elevation study depicting the northern border of the PUD area. Section 154.058 BP — Business Park Zoning District. Includes the list of permitted uses and specific zoning regulations for properties zoned BP. Section 154.070 Planned Unit Development. Contains the regulations for a PUD including the application requirements. Site Overview Site Data: Lot Size: Approximately 13 .15 acres (without small ponding area) Existing Use: Financial Services Existing Zoning: BP — Business Park Property Identification Numbers (PID): 33.029.21.41.0049 and 33.029.21.42.0007 Review: Review Requirements The proposed parking lot expansion does not represent a significant change fi-om the plans previously approved by the City, but would result in the removal of some curb lines and landscaped areas with additional parking. The primary parking expansion area would be north of an existing lot, which would reduce the setback fiom the northern property line from 80 feet down to 20 feet. This area also happens to be located underneath a large power line that runs along the edge of this same property line. The other expansion areas are located fairly close to the existing facility and in close proximity to the future expansion area. In reviewing the PUD for the business park, the proposed expansion deviates from the preliminary plans because it moves the parking area closer to the northern property line than was previously depicted on these plans. The proposed site plan does comply with the other written standards for parking lots as stated in the PUD plans. The General Development Plan approval for the Eagle Point Business Park includes a document that describes the development standards that are to be applied within the PUD area These standards typically mirror the BP — Business Park requirements, but in certain instances are more restrictive than the underlying zoning requirements. Since the parking lot addition only impacts a few of these standards, Staff will focus rJ Vin+ i/lo2GRC n< ..,t i3lt .f. -n r, 1 d�',�tST .ni?ft»c'i I 11"naIn K, r of '. "S J PUD Review: only on those requirements that apply to the current request. These PUD requirements include the following: • Parking spaces shall be 9' by 18' for all developments north of Hudson Boulevard. The proposed plans match the existing width of existing parking spaces which comply with this requirement. • Primary landscaping materials shall be shade trees, with shrubs, hedges, etc., used only to complement trees, not as the sole means of landscaping. A landscape berm is shown on the northern portion of the Bremer Bank site, and the standards note that id landscaping within the benn is disturbed, it needs to be replaced by NSP (the holder of a power line easement over the berm) or the property owner. The proposed PUD Amendment would amend this development standard since parking is proposed to extend into a portion of the landscaped area. • Minimum parking setbacks: 20' side and 10' rear. The proposed plans conform to these requirements. • Parking ratio: One space for each 250 square feet of office building area or one space per two employees, whichever is greater. The proposed plan well exceeds these minimum requirements, and the applicant has submitted documentation regarding the need for the additional spaces. • Storm Water Control. The City has adopted stricter storm water requirements since the PUD was approved, the new plan conforms to these requirements as per the most recent review by the City Engineer. • Lighting Height: 30'. The proposed plans conform to the height requirement and the light fixtures have been documented to comply with the City's lighting ordinance. In addition to these specific standards, the general development plans also depict a specific setback for the parking area on the Bremer Bank site at the current 80' from the northern property line. The PUD amendment would reduce this setback to 20' as noted earlier in this report. Although the 20' setback is consistent with the general written standards, it would not adhere to the general development plans; hence the need for a PUD amendment. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission continue its review of the PUD amendment to its June 13`i' meeting in order to give the City Engineer time to review revised storm water and erosion control plans for the site. This review has since been completed and the Engineer has found that the project will comply with the City's storm water and erosion control requirements. There are a few comments noted in the updated review from the City Engineer that can be addressed as conditions of approval, which are included in the Staff recommendation noted below. Because the parking lot expansion does not represent a significant expansion of the use on the site, Staff will not review all PUD and BP District requirements for the u,, .,,f. rant; 1 t.oi .cnutrsian Plarnir t _. lbmart, purposes of this analysis. the plans that have been submitted conform to the application requirements, and the proposed parking lot will comply with all applicable development standards for the business park zoning district. The proposed project would alter certain elements of the general development plans for the Eagle Point Business Park Planned Development; however, and these changes can be approved through a PUD amendment. If approved, the most significant impact from the parking lot expansion will be the increased amount of storm water runoff from all of the new impervious area. The applicant has addressed the City Engineer's previous comments regarding the erosion control and stonn water management plans for the site, and Staff is content that the project will conform to the City's recently updated storm water requirements. The plans call for the expansion of existing storm water retaining ponds, and make use of existing infrastructure and previous grading that occurred on the site. The other significant impact associated with the parking lot expansion is the loss of existing green space and landscaping. The applicant proposes to minimize these impacts by salvaging as many of the existing trees and shrubs as possible and planting them elsewhere on the premises. An updated landscape plan has not been provided as part of the application materials; however, and Staff is recommending that a new plan be submitted that depicts how and where the reclaimed landscape materials will be distributed throughout the site. The northern property line of the applicant's site is currently occupied by a large power line and associated easement, under which a landscape berm has been planted. This berm and landscaping provides a buffer between the future residential area to the north and the business park, and this berm will be eliminated should the applicant be allowed to expand its parking area. Different alternatives to expanding northward with the parking were considered, but ultimately were found to have the potential for much greater effects on surrounding properties due to the topography of the site. For example, any expansion of parking to the west of the existing building would have required the construction of a very large retaining wall to gain a modest amount of new parking (new residential ,development is planned in this direction as well). Based on the parking and employment information submitted by the applicant, there is a need for additional parking on this site. Staff has also observed that at certain times the existing parking is at capacity and employees are forced to parking along Eagle Point Boulevard adjacent to the site. The need for additional parking is further expected to remain a problem for this site once a future addition is built in accordance with the original site plan for the property. With the need for additional parking on the site established, the proposed plans seem reasonable given the lack of options that exist on this property. The loss of the landscape berm is mitigated somewhat by the fact that this area is not useable for much else other that parking because of the power lines. In addition, tall trees would not be an option under the power lines, which minimizes the screening effect of any landscaping that could be painted in this location. In order to compensate for moving the parking rot closer to the north and removing existing landscaping from this area, Staff is recommending that the applicant, as part of an updated landscape plan, provide as much additional vegetation along the northern property line as is feasible. Of primary concern is filling in any larger gaps in the existing landscape buffer, and addressing the loss of plant materials in the northeastern corner of the site due to the grading work that is planned for this location. The applicant has provided calculations that document the interior landscaping proposed will comply with the City's requirements. On this site, 17,300 square feet of landscaped area is required for the size of parking area proposed, and 19,4020square feet of interior landscaping areas are depicted on the plans. All comments from the City Engineer are referenced below as recommended conditions of approval Resident Staff has not received any feedback from neighboring property owners regarding the Concerns: proposed Planned Unit Development amendment. This action requires a public hearing to be conducted by the Planning Commission at which time members of the public may address the Commission regarding this application. The public hearing that was opened at the last meeting was continued until June 13, 2011. Additional The South Washington Watershed District has reviewed the proposed site plans and Information: I found that the work meets their standards. Conclusion: Commission Options: Bremer Financial Services has asked to amend the Planned Unit Development for the Eagle Point Business Park to revise its site plan to expand the parking lot that is accessory to the Bremer Bank Building at 8555 Eagle Point Boulevard. The parking lot currently is comprised of 405 parking stalls and the proposed amendment would expand this number to 560 stalls (an increase of 155). The expansion has been requested due to the increase in employment within the facility that has been experienced since its construction in 2002. The proposed PUD Amendment would reduce the parking setback along the northern property boundary of the business park from 80 feet down to 20 feet and would permit the removal of a landscaped berm that was planted under a power line easement on the northern portion of the site. The Planning Commission has the following options: A) Recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development amendment request; B) Recommend denial of the Planned Unit Development request. The 60 -day review period for this application expires on June 25, 2011, but can be extended an additional 60 days if more time is needed. 33..... - 4 : I rn =aF± `on ;rdr rsr i;�)for• S','", StaffRec: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request from Bremer Financial Services to amend the Planned Unit Development for Eagle Point Business Park to revise its site plan to expand the parking lot that is accessory to the Bremer Bank Building at 8555 Eagle Point Boulevard, provided the following conditions are met: 1. Easements shall be provided up to the 100 -year high water level for all storm water facilities. These easements shall be shown on the utility and grading plans. 2. The applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City of Lake Elmo related to the construction (and /or expansion) of the storm water facilities on the site. The legal descriptions for all storm water facilities (including access) must be added to the maintenance agreement, and this agreement must be approved and executed by the City prior to the commencement of any work authorized as part of the PUD amendment. 3. The applicant shall provide written approval from Xcel Energy to allow the expansion of the parking lot underneath an existing power line easement. 4. The applicant shall submit a revised landscaping plan depicting the landscaping materials to the salvaged during construction and replanted on other portions of the site. The plan shall also provide for additional plantings on along the northern property line where necessary to provide screening and buffering to the adjacent property. The updated landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to the commencement of any work authorized as part of the PUD amendment. Denial To deny the request, you may use the following motion as a guide: Motion Template: I move to recommend denial of the request by Bremer Financial Services to amend a the Planned Unit Development for Eagle Point Business Park ... (please site reasons for the recommendation) Approval To approve the request, you may use the following motion as a guide: Motion Template: I move to recommend approval of the request by Bremer Financial Services to amend a the Planned Unit Development for Eagle Point Business Park based on the findings provided in the staff report ... (or cite your own) ...with the conditions outlined in the staff report. cc: John Nemec, Larson Engineering ci` E � t 5 2011 City of Lake Elmo DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ❑ Variance * (See below) ❑ Zoning District Amendment ❑ Minor Subdivision ❑ Text Amendment ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Flood Plain C.U.P. Conditional Use Permit ❑ Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) ❑ Residential Subdivision Sketch/Concept Plan © Site & Building Plan Review Fee $ ❑ Residential Subdivision Preliminary /Final Plat O 01 -10 Lots O 11 - 20 Lots O 21 Lots or More ❑ Excavating & Grading Permit ❑ APPS ■ m APPLICANT: John Nemec, Larson Engineering, Inc. 3524 Labore Rd., White Bear Lake, MN 55110 (Name) (Mailing Address) (Zip) TELEPHONES: 651- 481 -9120 651- 260 -5159 651 -481 -9201 (Home) (Work) (Mobile) (Fax) FEE OWNER: Kathy Tucci, Bremer Bank, 8555 Eagle Point Blvd, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (Name) (Mailing Address) (Zip) TELEPHONES: 651- 734 -4744 651- 247 -9222 (Home) (Work) (Mobile) (Fax) PROPERTY LOCATION (Address and Complete (Long) Legal Description): Lot 1, Block 1, EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK 3RD ADDITION, according to the plat thereof filed of record in the office of the H t f Titles and f Wash C' Y t p t (Per Certificate of Title No. 58177) AND OTJTLOT E, EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK 2ND ADDITION, r Washington County, Minnesota. (Per Certificate of Title No. 59457) DETAILED REASON FOR REQUEST: Site plan review for parking lot additions, and stormwater management calculations. *VARIANCE REQUESTS: As outlined in Section 301.060 C. of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code, the Applicant must demonstrate a hardship before a variance can be granted. The hardship related to this application is as follows: Ig signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application rp ocedures and herebv aeree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional application expense nature of Applicant Date Signature of Applicant Date 1/22/20D4 City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Avenue North - Lake Elmo • 55042 • 651- 777 -5510 • Fax 651- 777 -7615 April 21, 2011 Bremer Financial Services, Inc. 8555 Eagle Point Blvd Lake Elmo MN 55042 RE Addition of parking spaces To whom it may concern at the City of Lake Elmo: I am writing to you today as we've engaged Larson Engineering to design additional parking due to the growth we've enjoyed over the past 8 years at the address listed above. When we moved to our new building in December 2002, we employed 248 staff along with our tenant having 40 employees, We currently have 420 parking spaces which includes handicap, guest and tenant parking, designated spaces for those coming in for training and regular staff. We are in desperate need of additional parking spaces as street parking is only consistently viable April thru October each year. We have grown to 450 employees with the average number of monthly guests at 1,200. Our tenant's staff has decreased to 12. It's a tight schedule to get this type of work done this year as we've had such a long winter. The work must be done prior to the first snow, so we ask you to strongly consider this request. If there is further information I can provide, please let John Nemec of Larson Engineering know and I'll get it to him right away. Thanks so much for your consideration to our request. Respectfully, {' r"fit , Kathy Tucci VP Facilities Bremer Financial Services Bremer Service Center Lake Elmo, MIN 1 S_ The right time. The right people. The right eampaW To: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Copies To: Jack Griffin, City Engineer From: Ryan Stempski, P.E. Date: June 9, 2011 444 Cedar Street, Suite 1500 Saint Paul, MN 55101 (651) 292 -4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax w 'tkdaaom Reference: Bremer Bank 2011 Parking Lot Addition _Updated Review Proj. No.: 14816.001 Routing: We have reviewed the updated submittals for the Bremer Bank 2011 Parking Lot Addition. The updated submittals were provided by Larson on June 1, 2011, to address the comments from the TKDA memo dated May 16, 2011. Updated Submittals: 1. Stormwater Calculations and Summary of Stormwater Runoff dated May 23, 2011. 2. Plan Set, dated May 23, 2011. 3. Comment Response Letter dated May 26, 2011. 4. Storm Water Quality Treatment Facility Maintenance Agreement received June 1, 2011. The following comments must be addressed prior to engineering approval on this item: Storm Water Management and Erosion and Sediment Control: 1. Easements must be provided up to the l 00 -Year HWL for all Storm Water Facilities. The easements must be shown on the utility and grading plans. 2. The legal descriptions for all storm water facilities (including access) must be added to the Maintenance Agreement. The agreement must be approved by City Staff and executed by both parties. General Comments: The parking lot expansion is within an Xcel Power Line easement. Written approval from Xcel Energy to allow this expansion in their easement must be provided to the City of Lake Elmo. Please contact me with any questions or additional comments to this review. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity May 17, 2011 John Nemec Larson Engineering, hic 3524 Labore Rd yki I r' xv; WVIJ hite Bear Lake, HINT 55110 RI : 1 }ro?),osed i tl`4', 11L'i t ., t?! : - Wb'.;i Z'''.. 7:..!;Stt #;:1 Dear Mr. Nenree: SWWD has reviewed your revised submittal dated N1ay 1 I; 2011 for the proposed Brenner Bank parking lot expansion. The project as eturently proposed meats SWWD standards. 'Iliank you for working to address our comments and demonstrate coriapliance. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 651/714- 3714 or11q €Tunis,'4ci.zi( b Sincerely, South Wash7gtol r iitat rsi�ed District _— -- , John Loomis / Water Resource Specialist Cc: Ryan Stempski /TKDA; Kyle Klan /Lake Idnio L:ADZreb�fimeni &cviowsihinsdiciionsVLpka Elnmirlrwucr 6ui!afi�t ^h'D Ite >p�ese_p? 19201 Ldocti 2302 Tower Dr a Woodbury, WINy 55125 a 651.714 -3720 � Nix 654-714-3721 ��� May 26, 2011 Mr. Klatt City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Ave. N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Re: City of Lake Elmo Site Plan Review Comments 2011 Parking Lot Addition Bremer Bank 8555 Eagle Point Blvd, Lake Elmo, MN LEMN Project No: 12106105.000 Dear Mr. Klatt, The following list is in response to the comments from your staff during the site plan review procedure for the Bremer Bank 2011 Parking Lot Addition. I have attached your comments at the end of this letter for reference. 1. The drainage calculations for the existing grass areas where the new impervious surface is to be placed, was revised to have a curve number of 58, for meadow conditions. 2. The proposed discharge rates for the 2, 10, and 100 -year storm events were changed to meet the existing condition rates. 3. The proposed discharge volume for the 2, 10, and 100 -year storm events were changed to meet the existing condition volume. 4. The details for the infiltration basin, infiltration trench, and permeable paver were revised . to show possible soil corrections to provide free draining material at the bottom of the excavations. Storage volumes table for the storm water facilities is provided, to show the drain dry times of each facility. 5. Seed mix designations were added to the plan legend and notes. 6. The infiltration trench will use the existing curb as an overflow outlet; this was discussed with Ryan Stempski, who mentioned a detail would not be required for this. 7. We are currently writing and obtaining easements for the storm water ,facilities and pipes. 8. We are currently writing and obtaining a storm water facilities maintenance agreement. Larson Engineering, Inc. 3524 Labore Road White Bear Lake, MN 55110.5126 651.481.9120 Fax: 651.481.9201 w Jarsonengrcom Larson May 26, 2011 Mr. Klatt City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Ave. N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Re: City of Lake Elmo Site Plan Review Comments 2011 Parking Lot Addition Bremer Bank 8555 Eagle Point Blvd, Lake Elmo, MN LEMN Project No: 12106105.000 Dear Mr. Klatt, The following list is in response to the comments from your staff during the site plan review procedure for the Bremer Bank 2011 Parking Lot Addition. I have attached your comments at the end of this letter for reference. 1. The drainage calculations for the existing grass areas where the new impervious surface is to be placed, was revised to have a curve number of 58, for meadow conditions. 2. The proposed discharge rates for the 2, 10, and 100 -year storm events were changed to meet the existing condition rates. 3. The proposed discharge volume for the 2, 10, and 100 -year storm events were changed to meet the existing condition volume. 4. The details for the infiltration basin, infiltration trench, and permeable paver were revised . to show possible soil corrections to provide free draining material at the bottom of the excavations. Storage volumes table for the storm water facilities is provided, to show the drain dry times of each facility. 5. Seed mix designations were added to the plan legend and notes. 6. The infiltration trench will use the existing curb as an overflow outlet; this was discussed with Ryan Stempski, who mentioned a detail would not be required for this. 7. We are currently writing and obtaining easements for the storm water ,facilities and pipes. 8. We are currently writing and obtaining a storm water facilities maintenance agreement. Mr. K1att 2011 Parking Lot Addition Bremer Bank May 26, 2011 9. A note was added to the plans indicating that only one construction entrance from Eagle Point Blvd is permitted, and shall have a rock construction entrance. 10. A note was added to the plan that a haul route will need to be submitted to the city by the contractor. General Comments: 1. We are currently working with Xcel Energy for written approval to constrict the parking lot with in the transmission line easement. 2. A note was added to the plans that a proposed construction schedule will need to be submitted to the city by the contractor. 3. A note was added to the plans indicating that the construction traffic must abide by the parking regulations of the city and that no overnight parking of construction equipment on eagle Point Boulevard will be permitted. Sincerely, Larson Engineering, Inc. John A. Nemec III Design Engineer 5 Larson 2 of 2 12106105.000 2011 Parking Lot Addition Bremer Bank Service Center Site Drainage ■ ♦ ► , f.: Introduction: The following report is submitted to the South Washington Watershed District and City of Lake Elmo for the purpose of providing a detailed storm water runoff analysis of the construction for the 2011 Parking Lot Addition, in Lake Elmo, MN. The stormwater analysis includes detailed maps of the existing and proposed runoff conditions, with charts showing rate comparisons and detailing water quality requirements for the proposed stormwater runoff. This project will consist of the construction of multiple new parking lot additions, infiltration basin, infiltration trench, permeable pavers, existing NURP pond modifications and related utilities. Existing Conditions: The existing site is currently an office building with landscaping and bituminous parking. The proposed parking will be located in the existing grass areas. The site has two drainage areas with NURP ponds on the west and south of the site, as indicated on the Existing Drainage Map. Subcatchment area I drains to the existing onsite storm sewer piping and into the existing pond on the property located south of the site. The remaining subcatchment areas drain to an existing northwest pond. This pond has evidence of overtopping and when modeled, a 100yr event will overtop the berm. The new parking addition drainage areas were modeled to the presettlement conditions, this information was used to design the infiltration basin, infiltration trench, and permeable pavers and meet the flow rate and volume of the presettlement conditions for the new parking lot additions. Existing Soils Conditions: The soil borings conclude most of the soils located near the infiltration basin include sandy lean clay in the top 2 feet; below 2 feet consists mostly of gravelly silty sand and silty sand, moist and dense (SP and SM) soils. The soils borings are attached to the end of this report. Analysis: The proposed BMPs and existing NURP pond were analyzed using the HydroCAD Version 8.0 storm water modeling software. SCS TR -20 modeling method, along with the Type 11 24- hour storm event were utilized in the modeling of the existing and proposed runoff conditions. The 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year rainfall events were used to model runoff conditions. Curve numbers used are as follows: 58 for meadows, 61 for green space, and 98 for impervious areas. Existing Conditions: The east parking area, north parking lot additions, and the parking additions along the drives were modeled separately to determine the change in flow rate and volume. The existing northeast pond was also modeled; this showed the berm to be overtopped during the 100yr rainfall event, with a high water level of 996.76 and an emergency overflow of 996.10 giving a runoff rate of 19.39 cfs. Proposed Conditions: An infiltration basin is proposed to collect the stormwater from the northernmost parking lots. The catch basins prior to the infiltration basin will be constructed with 3 foot sumps to collect sediment. A 4" PVC outlet pipe has been provided to insure the depth of water infiltrated is less than 2 feet, and larger events can be accommodated. The basin has a high water level of 1005.31 with an emergency overflow at 1007.00. As shown on the attached Proposed Drainage Map, the east parking lot will drain to a proposed infiltration trench, and overflow to the existing storm sewer system. The infiltration trench will infiltrate storm water to an elevation of 1012.20, where it will overflow the curb and flow into the existing catch basin. The parking lot expansion on the east will be constructed with permeable pavers, were the storm water will infiltrate during small rainfall events and a 4" perforated draintile, connected to the existing storm sewer pipe, will control larger rainfall events. The parking lot expansion directly north of the building will drain across the existing bituminous and curb and gutter and into the existing storm sewer pipe. With the parking directly north of the building and along the east drive draining to the northwest pond and since this pond has had overtopping problems in the past, we are proposing to extend the surrounding berm to 998.50, and increase the emergency overflow elevation to 997.50. These modifications decreased the runoff rate by 13.9 cfs to 5.49 cfs and decreased the runoff volume by 11 cf during a 100 year rainfall event. Proposed Outlets: The northeast pond will use the existing outlet size and elevation, but will be removed and replaced to increase the berm elevation. The infiltration basin will have a 6" PVC outlet at an elevation of 1004.45 with a bottom elevation of 1002.50. Smaller rainfall events will fill the basin and infiltrate through the modified soils. The infiltration trench will have a drainage gravel trench with a depth of 4.5 feet to an elevation of 1007. The trench will infiltrate storm water from the 2 year rainfall event, and larger rainfall events will overtop the existing curb and flow into the existing storm sewer system. The permeable pavers will i have a 4" draintile installed at an elevation of 1011, to provide infiltration in the bottom 0.48 feet of the drainage rock. As the inundation period is defined as the time the high water level in the facility is above the 0.2 feet from the bottom of the facility, the infiltration facilities drain down within 48 hours. The table located at the end of the proposed HydroCAD model illustrates this. Erosion Control & Water Treatment: All flared end outlets will be provided with rip -rap to slow the rate of discharge and provide further sediment removal. Silt fence shall line the grading extents of the project and erosion control fabric will be used on all slopes 4:1 or greater. The adjacent pavement will be swept daily to help control sediment removal from the site. Rate Comparison: The existing and proposed runoff rates and volumes leaving the drainage areas are listed in the tables below, along with high water levels. North Drainage Area 2 vear event 7 u year event Existing Rate Existing I Volume Proposed I Rate Proposed I Volume Outlet 1.65cfs 1 23 611cf 1.58cfs I 22 846cf 7 u year event 1 uu year event Existing Rate Existing Volume Proposed Rate Proposed Volume 1 Outlet 3.65cfs 49 931 cf j 3.52cfs 47 645cf 1 uu year event South Drainage Area 2 year event Existing Rate Existing Volume Proposed Rate Proposed Volume Outlet 19.39cfs 98,391cf 5.49cfs 98,380cf South Drainage Area 2 year event 10 vear event Existing Rate Existing Volume Proposed Rate Proposed Volume Outlet 0.06cfs 460cf O.00cfs 0.00cf 10 vear event 1001 vear event 77= Existing Rate Existing Volume Proposed Rate Proposed Volume Outlet 0.39cfs 1,534cf 0.02cfs 152cf 1001 vear event 77= Existing Rate Existing Volume Proposed Rate Proposed Volume Outlet 1 1.21cfs 3,942cf 1.24cfs 3,340cf am High Water Levels Infiltration Infiltration Permeable Northeast Basin Trench Pavers Pond Existing HWL 0.00' 0.00' 0.00 996.76' Elevation Proposed HWL 1005.27' 1012.34' 1011.03' 997.21' Elevation 2011 PARKING LOT ADDITION TAUS 8555 Eagle Point Blvd. lake Elmo, MN 55042 13re ai r 1 / FRAUENSHUHINC. 380 ST. PETER STREET, SUITE 150 ST. PAUL, MN 55102 T Title Sheet C0.0 Topographic Survey C0.1 Topographic Survey C1.0 Demolition Plan C2.0 Paving and Landscaping Plan C3.0 Grading and Erosion Control Plan C4.0 Utility Plan C5.0 Details E1.0 Electrical Plan E2.0 Photometric Plan t z 13re ai r 1 / FRAUENSHUHINC. 380 ST. PETER STREET, SUITE 150 ST. PAUL, MN 55102 T Title Sheet C0.0 Topographic Survey C0.1 Topographic Survey C1.0 Demolition Plan C2.0 Paving and Landscaping Plan C3.0 Grading and Erosion Control Plan C4.0 Utility Plan C5.0 Details E1.0 Electrical Plan E2.0 Photometric Plan Project Contact: John A. Nemec III Larson Engineering, Inc. 3524 Labore Road White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Tel: 651.481.9120 Fax: 651.481.9201 Electrical Engineer: Scott Rieger, P.E. Dunham Associates Inc 50 South 6th Street, Suite 1100 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Tel: 612.465.7550 Fax: 612.465.7551 Civil Engineer: Michael A. Murphy, P.E. Larson Engineering, Inc. 3524 Labore Road White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Tel: 651.481.9120 Fax: 651.481.9201 OPLLeEFOREYOU Oc Gopher State One Call .O.E .1111 LL 11. µL EXISTING DDOE ASO DODELLOSS SHOULD BE VEPiciEO By THE ESNTH iOa BEFORE UENSIPUUDON ti TO c r Np e TO 0c x dim ' Vic& m�� w JAM SO s 0 v z it Noz W V) wW�� z d`naQ. Lu w LL zIS >� S2J � E "g Z Of pmz2 Q ®rc °Ci a W Qww� W r m N, Y C 0 "g CV J `D e I nB,Bhr BeNirymecmre aloe. bymEarundOr reponweepeparee By me o, untlw my tlireR euperv6lon m xrollamaamr �sBmea PMressmRBl eRemee,onae�me Iowa of me Blal6 or runnesola. 4hanael A. MUryry�.E. DeE.2311 R'.NO.:42888 H— oam ceamptm Rojac(N: 12IDSID5 0—By: KBK Chedea Br: JAN Issue Daze: 052111 Sheet TWe: TITLE SHEET T SM1eet 1 d 10 ,v + + o- _ t prP" An, g 5 h` 3 V 0°e `O^ry o BAP N FA ME1YW FA On Ox 'A e, d +� �5 � EE B 02 ��1 R + dP + ^ 89 38 r2 1310 26 + n' ° t ,ad am Y >T` �s m ',_�_^' a- rwas dysT 9 %C` # S R v e ° VAI * "o, dP �s db' s' ce g ga. + + Ile ° #'s o s' f s' 1+ +o,ti n° oe ed9' ss m A to a * one s ry „- +,at°n g&a,vcCC -.cam r,f -w-�° 2 € ... <," s e- , °iTTt -, Sam— `,ma+ -P�.� �. .ca%e.- d-L s— - ` .,.��� + ,d' + "g' ,waP' sos A n_Icg + '> o, f 5. ry rv` + T, d ,oz' a ry , "Ix J '.,. _. "c yr.c ° - k wng +. tl#8 &a * rvz .`° o p9a1 V f.�„ * m° y 9` .< z oal ga `�-- -� ° + ° dP , LAKE ELMO. ac Hr c orw g'a� °•- _— s g c,. t, — * N <k .'.. a - o °r. + MINNESOTA 're .d + -+V,'e dpxIF *g,3 19 ,a' + °, + °v" y +` °�5 +ss .°` +s V "T ,o`+ +� -� ° +Poo ghr. fa-P' _ ;aa- _ _ - _ __ ,d PF iaxa� 1 �: IT i s �° �a'o,a�'� I e,a i� P ,o; TI h W 1% y °:° w Or, A, 063, w a a x l°0 tsI + x!re , a �'" a" ,a� +'oo° AND B Rte, ry __ a ,,rve - - p a,9 = N4AREA a ° Y Q5 g i JOHN NEMEC 11 Ex r s ,g° K ry TsLEPHO 'YS,7q. �x '. wv oeR *d .° � .�_ �.. -. °„ x _ 9 y CARSON ENGINEERING 85 eox - 6y !ia. ,a,3 " Pz+ ta- ,o;: - R', h 3524 Lahore Road N`0°j R m'�, �c �' sJ�' « y ", :� a®a� f�° White Bear Lake, MN RIM 0a. t,9 >O ;iHM Npus pzvEANp PAwcNC.w s Nv a .coal a>9.2 wvwooa.s g� I 55110 -5100 'J V la pWPAGKEO) Wtl. IE) ''�ryii C' + No - w.B) s , ° " N. Phone: {651) 481 -9120 � Pe, a >a + °rh °� 1 1 'o,a °u1 "c" �g I. ,daf y °1 CMe. °R 3 '"> HkgVER} `s, x 4's ay COUNTY: I'v I I 4 Im° cpn f * °sP x r � � R A +�I +g WASHINGTON BIi11MINOUS DRIVE PMfMYI CaC _ Sry N rv}o5ry ,, a ° + „9J $A`e _ v COIJ TITV VICINITY MAP:'. `� Re 1 ry a, ,,..� a' § °` ea I]! > a°” �\ A t nsrrcoa- W `: o" op? ,° ° °� .� +e el+ SEAL: �d \g...\ `fey `g�,y� nkfv vorao s -' a Tn +, °v' y 'JV %COK - rT)iT77]710 g} +S El TLI STATE OF v� EQUIREASEAL.INNFSOTA IS NOT KSA NC anR emv - > 1 e�. o - 69 i o e + II �` REVISIONS. �z� fin; t ° °�, ws. nasr none E.ce -.` °'° m lom sT N L w° ELEVT,Or.Z9 tv 3, t WIDE - - �I o T4 °.TA id+° "40 r s' DATE REVmoN }- ,'e + / / ////vvv�jj,�� -nH rncoR A� n +i R ax $GAW SITE' g *.� ,�� V +° e ,ry 9P4. A# £t£v=,D,ib S o ° 2 -23 -11 INITIAL ISSUE w A 1 t ° vs <N N rva rve ixa zs 4` °`' 1' 3 91 rR O �� / A. ^R. Y n ♦ Pa 1 R EL 77- c IX.s c �a� 1H, #gin (ERP N °. /1 EXISTING BUILDING ry ry y, SORB. Nv -�oe'o vm)iiT +I �avn a a o� .>� ,d+`1 goy } R $ , °eR r_ I�� Ec,�lc f f� '��-^, bCERTIFICATION vA,1EYOYER pgy1� Ip �3 >a , s0'° v «* IEUre6v ax-ry 1ma5.Plrvx.•, P,esa<� KK, �_�, �— 1 . '° *) °4 ,a�` + f nvm° ° xaa<r .a'1,'In rOAFI T i{ \1 la s"^' '" L' '� rl<,r l.m a amv L< a rA CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA. I rI d& 7 1� E E r o00 �s I k a n s �f Al If BDTA. } II a%I < , XI'D 1T rtooa 'io +qr m,�,- I to oh r EiE�lma,p FF.y, 4 Ste. I� LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ,a+' C `W aN 4 s" A��o 1 5 ^m .I bnGg .J r #. a<yl Boo xs znle O q frn eMxao `J l rouxp \'.' t< f ° + - G(o e�, W� �. pza: DZ za IO N. .� s Po o3 Lotl Blo<ki EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK 3RD ADDITION ,attgrdnq 1 G use p d eP J° a oLE y G v� k rotne for Waeraofeiea or recom'p tna offce of me Req -sear or sties . ! D '� // ° PROJECT LOCATION: 'ana forwasn ngmnCaunry Mnnesota (Per <erlfcate of rtle NO. a $'q %D + -- `° + ¢ Sal>)1 r�$ �I C lh Lp ° E1RSr IcpoR s Y RIN oe uMW Pwcwc AREA IM oloe '� °a +s I 1 lFV l0/J9 RIM o a, WILT_ Ep 1 N IM. ; c AND 5, °9 i I Q° i a Ole rsrvr MaTAL . / zll .�OK .3 },.y ff ax 4$' I �?r oi'o, ' I DELiR r, [p[p OUTLOT E. EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK END ADDITION, a¢Ordng [o it IN ff8a Iagyl` ry +° /V, pA.E. °9., ., EALEP ry ,o the la[ thereof fled of re cotl'n the office of the ftegixtrar of Ttles In QP �° G DINT BLVD. and for Washington[ OUnry . Minnesota. (Per Cert "cafe ofTtle NO o �E gl ° .+ s / 5945)) U.e e 11` � �� s 7.w 2 [ �'i�°,g`1 ell > N o' m PID #3302921410049 AREAS: y °r5 ' ° rgU Illy Tsa� #m ' > 5 .1°' u}o rz T MwcusoRlvEPNpoAItXIxcARE%,as, o q,ve zy .... ° Ia i` , ID #3302921420007 11 LOT AREA = 585.96254. FT./13.45 ACRES vgH -- �Y 8j &'rS10v t "a v 01l !ro uDl ( ��I rS I.°` {� X yep `fop �° I + OUTLOT E AREA = 63,746 S . FT/ 1.46 ACRES x n° xei°e� I °` s 7 °, P D 1 ARi,AnMH ,I( s '�' ;n I; �-1 I� L w T? �L ._ , � e' %r _ INVaar JiJ--- +++s -- .__may. a,,.. + -�S �4j ,gkF -.`F :_a�°�m3 T>a —� ,aY.. .dP Ia4S _. S sr6de3°,�Eo a'I+ + +/ is g i vSA9 r S ° °t. t rv° IX Gi rva %d DI §, 55 8 E�iccn edA "a •° s'° 0 dB'e s ,b kHG °° Suite #BiOO 3 , rzuMMOUS o ,� ° e + ♦ SLIIPxaler MN 55082 _ ,E g "'e,da d°, RlM loo >. wM IM 0 a fr s'' + �°k S� 4' � " ---T -N °�u IEp DKEOi� d" Q s 'Cppe +` sR '6 200 East Gnastnut Street A 1 'f i 'FE'S-- r !° �4 _ �. i3>.c p _ yEw IX c9 .X 1 y I Y .p 1 1 NV 003a �$i NORTH m f ! Rnt•faaa_ D "-- R -. �p, al 1 T 1 I � 1 1 i Try I I iI Y Phone fi51275b969 pp ,AC - PI In Fax 65t 275 76 o ao so ;� 4 a a',._ :� < - _.w= - <--� _ — .�,�-- �-- _ -: _ - - - - __ T s' m aaR ®paaNlvay f 1 I, ,d" s ry e+ .� C_.N 9 "38 02 "E a. 826.73 0C .net N<" '� >� >% �a4b ro ,a° as q�lp I°,o + H, ° VIA + °o s R 4 +° x, ; 0 e \ g e 3 i a gl 1 .g a ,os cP .:._.. ° ° e ° s io o .° RIM t FLOOD INFORMATION: SURVEY INCITES: f EASEMENT NOTES:�ry UTILITY NOTES LEGEND: a� f ° ° < BYE FLOOD PLOTTING ONLY, THIS PROPERTY IS IN ZONE "Y' OF FIELDWORK PERFORMED FEBRUARY 14 - 21, AND MARCH 25, p OWN R TO ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION EASEMENT PER DOG 2169] THE UNDERGROUND UTILITHE SHOWN HAVE BEEN CORNERSTONE 271630 335, DATED MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL 2011' SHOWN GRAPHICALLY. 0 AND MARKED 25718 TF1E /ELEC ROX 2]163C0335E D LOCATED FROM FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION/ AND MARKED RL5 iSTi B aa'�° 1' °� r �P � i i ls�ll 11 a ELECr0.1C METE0.IGA5 METIER e DENOTES FOUND ., GAS VALVE IANO SURVEYING, INC MONUMENT AS MARKED sELECTRC LINE .x WATf0. VALVES TELEPHONE LINE 4 HYDRANT _.___FIBER OPTIC LINE B0 CATCH BASIN /STORM MIT _yfgTER LINE 4 p CVLVERT /RCS, -..-- .STORM SEWER UNIT FILE NAME SVRVLE]3 A SANITARY MANHOLE -� SANITARY SILVER LINE 6 CLEAN OUT PAOIfC1'NO. LOT 073 -- SIGN CURB ° LIGHTPOLE � CONCRETE INT BOUNDARY/TOPOGRAPHIC ATED FEBRUARY 3, 2010. ZONE X IS AN AREA DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE THE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES WERE SHOT TO THE OF ATED FEBRUARY 3, 2010. ZONE X IS AN AREA DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE THE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES WERE SHOT TO THE OF 2)SUBJECT TO COVENANTS PER DOC. NO 1065503 AND AMMENDED BY EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO FLOODPLAIN ABWTIEB.INVERTS WERE TAKEN AS CLOSE TO THE BOTTOM OF DOG. NO. 1118152. NOT SHOWN. GUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES GUARANTEE MAT ULSUCHUTINDUTIILTHE THE STRUCTURE AS POSSIBLE. S 3HOWN,R TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PER DOG NO 1092260. NOT AREA, ERHERINSERVICE ABANDONED. THE BENCHMARK: LARGE SNOWWERE SITE. ADDITIONAL OOHS THIS SHOWN, SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE ITIES RANT UTILITIES AND /OR MAY MAY E%IST UNDER THE UNDERGROUND DUMB SHOWN ARE IN THE EXACT d SNOW COVER OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE. WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE. 4) 5U8JECT TO MONUMENT AND LANDSCAPING COVENANTS PER DpG NO. LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY MnDOTGEODEi1C DATABASE STATION #33426. VERTICAL 109a005. APPROXIMATE LANDSCAPE EASEMENTS SHOWN GRAPHICALLY. THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS CONTROL DISK STAMPED '8282 AD 1990' LOCATED IN TOP ELEVATIONS CURB LINES AVAILABLE POSSIBLE FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. MOST RAILING OF ADIO OF SOUTHBOUND CO. RD. ! 3 (RADIO DRJ BRIDGE 82843 DR.) 2 BLOCK THE ELECTRONIC GRWING .ASAPOINT BLOCK IN THE ELECTRONIC VERSION OF THIS DRAWING. SHOTS THIS 51 SUBJECT TO STO0.MWATE0. AGREEMENT PER DOG. 1110374. SHOWN. UTILITIES ARE SHOWN BASED ON MARKING LEFT ON IN OVER INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 94. ARE TO THE GUTTER LINE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. NOT THE GROUND IN RESPONS TO GOPHER ONE LOCATE ELEVATION = 1008.33 ADDITIONAL EASEMENTS Of WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY CXST TICKET #1104203 5 S. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT EXIST. PROJECT COORDINATES IN ELECTRONIC FILE ARE BASED THE I PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILTIES, a ppH }PoLE IFOOTCONI'pUR INTERVAL SURVEY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREIN PER CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NOS. 58177 ANp ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE PROTECT BENCHMARK SHOWN GRAPHICALLY AT SURVEY SITE. WASHINGTON COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM. 59457. MAY a )�1 ALpa — S87e20'2T'W 226.54 4 -_j,1_ A a $ S883 03 $ RPRAP ,e �' —IT -- ? e a _. —A for Washington COUnry, Minnesota. (Per Certificate Of Title No. 591]7) ti9 + $ 4p 78_ _ g ... (SOTTO scALO - -�.. ETH IT N - a ,ID p ciITEILL 3z _a2 e �uOT.IF.R ,. ,F) 6t dY' Ea8 O "aW" E, o ,w48 c... O Pit IF i R 0 al Ias, _ 3� VALLEY CREEH RO LOT 1 AREA = 585,962 SO. F7. /13.45 ACRES r �� T,1 e 00" ,a° x cl +aFtow tom a z _ x ♦� ... k' IS, 0+ 1 We e t TeRp6 +,4 10 1 ,�+ 11, apt Wt I r iosw, q a RIPAOP I r o =e w,v�eo1 �'� 0 +. , \ ,6+ 'Er 8 gA °.. Y #e eysf 9� s ^, + +° � 'Ada so r a W. �„ , - ne. -aV .or +,d`. - + _.d "e iaoa )�1 ALpa — S87e20'2T'W 226.54 4 -_j,1_ A a $ S883 03 $ x E + a ' e use ? e a + 1 A *,,a for Washington COUnry, Minnesota. (Per Certificate Of Title No. 591]7) ti9 + $ 4p 78_ AND (SOTTO scALO - -�.. ETH IT N - a ,ID p ciITEILL 3z dY y, �I I + `V, c', ;A I v { E \ IXlH` On glia ° cote`) w ) qs "E" ke NW KIP 'Y NO FAR ON Q: canal rvERT EA cu L °X; "P� id o / I lee ,0, .e, VICINITY MAP: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: $ A $ /FFT 3011 Lot 1, Block 1, EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK 3RD ADDITION, according to AND ED AXD MARKED CS $5716 the plot thereof filed of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and a p�'1 for Washington COUnry, Minnesota. (Per Certificate Of Title No. 591]7) \ i Q' IY 4 AND (SOTTO scALO - -�.. ETH IT N - a ,ID p ciITEILL 3z natter E, EAGLE of POINT Read in offs PARK othe ADDITION, accprtlin and the the Registrar Of Title, and for e -YQ Washington CournfrMinnes Minnesota. C rt WasM1ingron COUnry, Minnesota. (Per Certificate of Title N0, 594i>) 5945 pp-& 94 J 12 `s A O Pit IF i —,. —STORM SEWER LINE 0 al $AREAS: I 3� VALLEY CREEH RO LOT 1 AREA = 585,962 SO. F7. /13.45 ACRES r �� OUFROTEAREA � 63,746MEFT./ 1.46ACRE5 e CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA. CONCRETE FLOOD INFORMATION: BY GRAPHIC PLOTTING ONLY. THIS PROPERTY IS IN ZONE "X" OF THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL 27163CO335E DATED FEBRUARY 3, 2010. ZONE XIS AN AREA DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE THE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODPLAIN BENCHMARK 4 KNOOT GEODETIC DATABASE STATION 133426. VERTICAL CONTROL DISK STAMPED '8282 AD 199 ' LOCATED IN TOP Of RAILING OF SOUTHBOUND CO. RD. 13 (RADIO DR.) BRIDGE 82843 OVER INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 94. EV ELATION = 100833 PROJECT BENCHMARK SHOWN GRAPHICALLY AT SURVEY SITE. SURVEY NOTES: a FIELDWORK PERFORMED FEBRUARY 14 - 21, AND MARCH 25, 2011. TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES WERE SHOT TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITIES. INVERTS WERE TAKEN AS CLOSE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE STRUCTURE AS POSSIBLE. LARGE PILE OF SNOW WERE PRESENT ON THIS SITE. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES AND /Oft PAVEMENT TRANSITIONS MAY FREE UNDER THE SNOW COVER OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE. SPOT ELEVATIONS FOR THE CURB LINES ARE AVAILABLE AS A POINT BLOCK IN THE ELECTRONIC VERSION OF THIS DRAWING. SHOTS ARE TO THE GUTTER LINE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROJECT COORDINATES IN ELECTRONIC FILE ARE BASED THE WASHINGTON COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM. EASEMENT NOTES ll SUBJECT TO ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER DOC. 21697 SHOWN GRAPHICALLY, 2) SUBJECT TO COVENANTS PER DOG NO 1065503 AND AMMENDEO BY DOC. N0. 1118152. NOT SHOWN. 3) SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PER DOC, NO 1092260. NOT SHOWN, 4) SUBJECT TO MONUMENT AND LANDSCAPING COVENANTS PER DOC, NO. 1094005. APPROXIMATE LANDSCAPE EASEMENTS SHOWN GRAPHICALLY. 5) SUBJECT TO STORMWATER AGREEMENT PER DOG 1110374. NOT SHOWN, DOC. REFERS TO FORCING EASEMENT TO THE CRY OVER ALL OF OUROT E, THOUGH A SPECIFIC DEDICATION OF SUCH WAS NOT NOTED. ADDITIONAL EASEMENTS OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST. INFORMATION SHOWN HEREIN PER CERTIFICATE Of TITLE NOS. 50177 AND 59457. UTILITY NOTES THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED FROM FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION/ EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPROMISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ABC IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. MOST UTILITIES ARE SHOWN BASED ON MARKING LEFT ON THE GROUND IN RESPONS TO GOPHER ONE LOCATE TICKET #I T 0420356. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES Of WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST. 6P° Il E0' a' + + lace app, loos b ®PAYS pmra i CALL BEFORE YOU DIGI TIt.D(YARFA 651 -454 -0002 TOLLFREE: I-RW -E52 -1166 LEGEND: "Ors A ONE /FFT DEFROTES UMENTSET TELE /FEEL ROX AND ED AXD MARKED CS $5716 d m ELECTRIC METER /GA$ METER a DENOTES FOUND GAS VALVE MONUMENT AS MARKED M88 39 03 E u,I 157,44 ..,..— _TELEPHONE LINE e HYDRANT HYDRANT @ pp-& CATCH BASINIyTORM MH `s A CULVERT /FIS. —,. —STORM SEWER LINE b ®PAYS pmra i CALL BEFORE YOU DIGI TIt.D(YARFA 651 -454 -0002 TOLLFREE: I-RW -E52 -1166 LEGEND: O DEFROTES UMENTSET TELE /FEEL ROX AND ED AXD MARKED CS $5716 d m ELECTRIC METER /GA$ METER a DENOTES FOUND GAS VALVE MONUMENT AS MARKED -� „— .-..ELECTRIC LINE ..,..— _TELEPHONE LINE e HYDRANT HYDRANT -< — NRE.ONE LINE 0® CATCH BASINIyTORM MH Iyq TDt ONE A CULVERT /FIS. —,. —STORM SEWER LINE 0 SANITARY PARTICLE _....._— SANITARY SEWER LINE I CLEAN OUT FENCE r SIGN CURB e UTILITY POLE CONCRETE a LIGHT POLE 1 FOOT CONTOUR INTERVAL BF,EM ER SERVICE CENTER LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA CONTACT: `JOHN NEMEC LARSON ENGINEERING 3524 Labore Road White Bear Lake, MN 55110-5100 Phone: (651) 481 -9120 COUNTY: a WASHINGTON coUNTv SEAL: 4 THE STATE OF MINNESOTA DOES NOT REQUIRE A SEAL REVISIONS: DATE REASION 2 -23 -11 DOLTOWE 3 -30 -It ApOLTOPO CERTIFICATION: I neaW amfy toot nt I P xd Irvine a, aade, covet .. zoe nave moa6op Lie 4La . 6w nne.r,Ia larva arm - Mx EwrA oanrci Rey A : No. zsna Date: 0$_33_10 PROJECT LOCATION: a cc EAGLE POINT BLVD. PID #3302921410049 PID #3302921420007 $ Suite BEHIND 200 East Chestnut SRO A \ Stillwater, MN 55082 den BROPR Ivey net CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING, INC FILE NAME SGAVLE>3 PROJECT NO. LE010]1 BOUNDARY /TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY DEMOLITION NOTES O1 SAWCUT, REMOVE, AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, O2 SAWCUT, REMOVE, AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION. 03 SAWCUT, REMOVE, AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION, © PROTECT EX ISTING ELECTRICAL POLE AND LINES DURING CONSTRUCTION PER XCEL ENERGY GENERAL TRANSMISSION LINE ENCROACHMENT GUIDE LINES -1ISM/ O REMOVE, AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING SHRUBS AND LANDSCAPING. © REMOVE, AND SALVAGE EXISTING TREES, TO REPLANT AFTER CONSTRUCTION. O REMOVE, AND SALVAGE EXISTING RIP RAP TO REUSE AFTER GRADING IS COMPLETE QS REMOVE, AND SALVAGE EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE AND FLARED END SECTIONS. SYMBOLLEGEND D REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMEN BECTON D CONCRETE AND DISPOSE OF SECTION NG 4 REMOVE AND PAVEMENT DISPOSE SECTION 5 ISIS 5 91 5 L' S ` (1i 1 6a i Y 6 P OF r 8 n n �. 1 i� e L. i i I.� L 1 'rl. fj S c e rc g�8 a vp d 6 C a m qL� mm� m dw�ie� q U Z E O_ N � � Z Z (�//�� W W VJ Z W N a o ~ m i LL CD z V _Z O ° g Y (—Z L p mog d rap Ww� Q J J W 0 m 1, C ® g N J a lnarenyaarery neums Rlan. P a inns o tl eraparee cy a ra reu.w -Iw, emua aNl a Rw Pmf IEg tl tl,alawa arure alum rvd aeaa,a. Michael A. MU @M1�.E. Datr: 0523,11 Reg. NO.: 92808 Daa OsaanWw. P.,.. #: 12106105 Orewn By: MEN CX,MNd By: AN Issue Oala: 05.23.11 SheaIT81a: DEMOLITION PLAN C1.0 snaN: n ur 10 4 i 0 i Y 6 P OF r 8 n n �. 1 i� e L. i i I.� L 1 'rl. fj S c e rc g�8 a vp d 6 C a m qL� mm� m dw�ie� q U Z E O_ N � � Z Z (�//�� W W VJ Z W N a o ~ m i LL CD z V _Z O ° g Y (—Z L p mog d rap Ww� Q J J W 0 m 1, C ® g N J a lnarenyaarery neums Rlan. P a inns o tl eraparee cy a ra reu.w -Iw, emua aNl a Rw Pmf IEg tl tl,alawa arure alum rvd aeaa,a. Michael A. MU @M1�.E. Datr: 0523,11 Reg. NO.: 92808 Daa OsaanWw. P.,.. #: 12106105 Orewn By: MEN CX,MNd By: AN Issue Oala: 05.23.11 SheaIT81a: DEMOLITION PLAN C1.0 snaN: n ur 10 u� ta po \ BO — � A GBULKHEAD CURB DETAIL 2' NOT TO SCALE ummlm.WM.m- sa—,se,- e�..,a.m PN eN�n�,. i... a.�.c. D.so.a�..i.d lm n. at1A ..,sn CLASS 5 BASE AGGREGATE Ka .. Centradm must submit a cdnstabsHou schedule and had route dagrsm td the city of Lake Elmo Fuel to cood'ad n. 2. ConsWglon vanede paM'ng on Eagle Point Badeved sbell not eaten ovemight and shag abide by Ideal mgula&ms. WHERE APPLICABLE, DIMENSIONS ARE FROM BACK OF CURB TO BACK OF CURB OR BACK OF CURB TO END OF STALL LINE. tY VOIDS WITH 3/B" 'ROCKIGRANITE CHIPS APPROVED SUBGRADE SOIL a— REMOVE NON,FREE DRAINING L- 4'PERFORATED SOILS AND REPLACE WITH SAND PE CHAIN PIPE TO A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF 5 FEET. PERMEABLE PAVER CONSTRUCTION DETAIL z" NOT TO SCALE (WASHED Sm. CHIPS) SYMBOLLEGEND 2,5' TUMINO BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT NEW OVER 7- AGGREGATE BASE SEE DETAIL 1105.0 PERMEABLE PAVERS OVER 2P' v DRAINAGE ROCK FLUSH CURB SEE GETAIL 2JC2.0 NEW /3 6- AGGREGATE BASE 6' AGGREGATE BASE 2 TA � SEOVER SEE DETAIL 2/C60 SHORT MIXTURE WITH WILD FLOWERS WITH WILD FLOWERS REPLANT SALVAGED TREES WITH TREESPADE, DSEED MIX 320 c .� \ /�"f / ✓�� /BULKHFAO ��'�iiii%% 3 "p "'•'✓ '�f� "' / B y r\ 6. A is FUTUREBUILDIN I VOIDS WITH 3/B" 'ROCKIGRANITE CHIPS APPROVED SUBGRADE SOIL a— REMOVE NON,FREE DRAINING L- 4'PERFORATED SOILS AND REPLACE WITH SAND PE CHAIN PIPE TO A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF 5 FEET. PERMEABLE PAVER CONSTRUCTION DETAIL z" NOT TO SCALE (WASHED Sm. CHIPS) SYMBOLLEGEND CURB 812 CURB \. ,1 / 44 i t I i 3. ®g FLUSH 11 1`I CURB I.Iy \ II 1 5 SIGNS I'I \ 1 / ✓� ✓ c SX u�I r�4 "t/.^ �' II vv NORTH 0 20 40 fie ALL exlsTldVIT[usAddchbil) —s exdVN BE VERIFleo uv—cov IVK alum cdxelwCndu ti c as I � C z 0 c Cc d p m Son Lp C $ m m q J W oh en U Z 2 W W O D O Z T � Z I_ -j V J W —j Z a a w a O NQ m LJ� � V Z 0 N Y LL� i v S r Z QC ®<ZZ Q a O Q ¢ w r i 0] W W O0 "5 N J t l te— Woemfy met mN plan. a,so.orded p p e paretl ano emuntle mytl' ci of tsdeshe tld1e ed ,fdabiadie ee , Itle lava of llrestefa of Mhrwso�a. Michael A. Mmp�,E. Dafe: bv.23.tt Rag. Na.: <2BOB Bea. dam oosmplan Plojavt M'. 12106105 D.—By: KBK Checked By: JAN Ilsae Dew: C523,11 Sheet Tme', PAVING AND LANDSCAPING PLAN ® shee: 6 of IS 2,5' TUMINO BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT NEW OVER 7- AGGREGATE BASE SEE DETAIL 1105.0 PERMEABLE PAVERS OVER 2P' 3 I DRAINAGE ROCK FLUSH CURB SEE GETAIL 2JC2.0 NEW /3 6- AGGREGATE BASE 6' AGGREGATE BASE 2 TA � SEOVER SEE DETAIL 2/C60 SHORT MIXTURE WITH WILD FLOWERS WITH WILD FLOWERS REPLANT SALVAGED TREES WITH TREESPADE, DSEED MIX 320 c CURB 812 CURB \. ,1 / 44 i t I i 3. ®g FLUSH 11 1`I CURB I.Iy \ II 1 5 SIGNS I'I \ 1 / ✓� ✓ c SX u�I r�4 "t/.^ �' II vv NORTH 0 20 40 fie ALL exlsTldVIT[usAddchbil) —s exdVN BE VERIFleo uv—cov IVK alum cdxelwCndu ti c as I � C z 0 c Cc d p m Son Lp C $ m m q J W oh en U Z 2 W W O D O Z T � Z I_ -j V J W —j Z a a w a O NQ m LJ� � V Z 0 N Y LL� i v S r Z QC ®<ZZ Q a O Q ¢ w r i 0] W W O0 "5 N J t l te— Woemfy met mN plan. a,so.orded p p e paretl ano emuntle mytl' ci of tsdeshe tld1e ed ,fdabiadie ee , Itle lava of llrestefa of Mhrwso�a. Michael A. Mmp�,E. Dafe: bv.23.tt Rag. Na.: <2BOB Bea. dam oosmplan Plojavt M'. 12106105 D.—By: KBK Checked By: JAN Ilsae Dew: C523,11 Sheet Tme', PAVING AND LANDSCAPING PLAN ® shee: 6 of IS I 3 I I FLUSH CURB " /3 2 TA � �J vv NORTH 0 20 40 fie ALL exlsTldVIT[usAddchbil) —s exdVN BE VERIFleo uv—cov IVK alum cdxelwCndu ti c as I � C z 0 c Cc d p m Son Lp C $ m m q J W oh en U Z 2 W W O D O Z T � Z I_ -j V J W —j Z a a w a O NQ m LJ� � V Z 0 N Y LL� i v S r Z QC ®<ZZ Q a O Q ¢ w r i 0] W W O0 "5 N J t l te— Woemfy met mN plan. a,so.orded p p e paretl ano emuntle mytl' ci of tsdeshe tld1e ed ,fdabiadie ee , Itle lava of llrestefa of Mhrwso�a. Michael A. Mmp�,E. Dafe: bv.23.tt Rag. Na.: <2BOB Bea. dam oosmplan Plojavt M'. 12106105 D.—By: KBK Checked By: JAN Ilsae Dew: C523,11 Sheet Tme', PAVING AND LANDSCAPING PLAN ® shee: 6 of IS EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. Ownerantl COntradwsM1all obtain MPCA -NPOES permit CoMre ecl urali be rhumarb ible for all fees pertaining to this PertniL The SWPPP shall be kept onside at all Omes. 2. Install temporery erosion cons, measures (Intel pme. , silt bum, antl sock Ampmdion emaneaa) Prtarm baginning any excavanen or aemonlmn work at to site 3. Erosion conlmi measures all— ed the emaum bAJ plan are the alleged ,p, The connector shall Insfall lempo2ry each dtke& sediment traps or basins, additional seAtion Wncing, ani d$k Tre soil parallel to me contwrs as deemed necessary To'uil sman, sme, All changes shall be remMed In the SWPPP. 4, The tae aNe sin fence shat be Irenahed m a minimum of 6t The bemo backfin shoe be sompaded with a vSal Plate comPand, 5. All gating cloppreas sholl b conducted in a manner to sole lnze the pdenne, for dtesmch, Sediment conards Prepaccus most - a. humeri on all down gaaient pldmetes before any up 92tl ent land duffel surfaces begin 6. All exposed soil areas must be Nomillzed As soon As possible to emit soil andabi but in be case Wffir Ihed i do, after the sonstmdion activity in that portion of the site has temparzdly Or partnanri ceased Temporary stndpiles wimout significant silt, day a organic components (cog., clean aggregale stockpiles, demWition cam ound stockpiles, sand dw.kpilas) aM me wnsWded base components of roads, parking Into and similar detains are exempt hoer this requirement. T, Ptlas entlek must be pmvitled wim energy aissi,ed.., within 24 hours of mnneotion to surtace 81 All oprap Than be mstanea wim a floor Imperial or soli separating fabda and comply simile Minnesota Deparment of Transportation Standard Spe fit bons. 9 All storm sewer batch phase dt decided for Re dramatic duffor, pormarmoubJer shall be wvered co Proved maeff from eded, the yound ., system, occur b neceesary for Is du gage dairy mnsWal on shall be pmvded wim inlet protection, 10. In areas whe. c[neentrul flows ,sour (such as swales and areas In front of storm cai basins and Imply e) the erosion sonVOl delays shall be backed by stablllzanon snucNre to protect Nine fadllties from the mnsenbatetl fivers. tt ms ed me wnslmcnan ai Thai a p [e man once days forms, a diveconstrvhairhe and wimin 24 the SWIPPrainfall evenlgreafer than 0.6 mchesN 24 hours. AH inspedlons dhoti be recortlea in the SWPPP. 12. All Silp fences most be repaired, replaced, at supplemented when they become nonfunctional or the sediment raaMes 1l3 of the height of Ne fence. These repairs most be made wlibm 24 boom alscwery, or as soon As Lela aonbillons allow access. All repairs shall be recoMed In me SWPPP, 13. If sediment escapes They construction Tote, Perot. accumulatrons M seaimenl must be removed In a manner and at a tender, sumchnt to mNMlz. ffill impacts. 14, All sdls backed onto pavement shell be normal tidily. 15. All ifll f most be' offiffecrund t , that be seamen from degang aonsWd'on lexchy is rebound The 'nfll l' area and these areas are pmteciea from compaction due to wnstvcVan egdpmenl ad-rig across the 'Trel on area. 16. Colleted sediment asphalt and wndete millings, ff-T 0ebns, papep plascq tabnq persWdlon and meal icon match ON oMer wash. must be disposed of properly and must comply with MPCA disposal requirements, rJ lFw �_ 0 - 101t606 J 100]600 400p 1 v 1008 >6 TG p 101210 -c W�+OVERP[DW. 1 t0o628GL r0 3 t012 C Y � 400)003 � I AftR� � Oct � C 101203 GL Q ' B I m11 se Tc �� W _ 10 SIP RAE ill G Q _ / l 1R106gG (� (IYPIGEL) - ooe 64m m z 1Thi Sgt tOfl za cL Oo8 o-0 PC .et loll81TC Cn� ^..bay �}},,�.. $ �1CW SO GL' 17 101CA7TC WW LE t.. T"'``� \ _ INFILTRATION BASIN e 1011,67 GL .. F tooip G p ,v \' \ BOG 1 15 SILT FENCE s. TYPICAL) - 11 1� ) 1 x Z_ rs.' Goal "1 0G +, s - J�f�' � ✓ // / /' // I W 982603 A` so G GRADING NOTES wEtOVERFLOW [�x[ ] 1. T pr t : No 'su g f wrence nr safety Mere We a at the dry In. h IlTo1 pia P I beg, IagaPygaang uraemdN rk Ith dte 1 All alevaeons will an expainalk l) shat be hold veaficd, if olevafons very 9twtry, notfy idle Engm¢er far formal /,/ 3. G ce shown In paved areas apre Ifi'bel dad / 4. ReslOro all dsWNed areas am 4" of 9cW puality foods, aM hyamseed with / MNOOT Seed Module 260. / s. All substitution Than be Performed in accordance with state and lobal standard apemNacons her candWCeoc / IT Slopas 41 and 9.far shall be dvead with erosion central fabric. / 1, Only due cons dichad bufers. of Eagle Point BOWevadi is acceptable antl '" °n tvac�are pout abroad a cook oonstludion enlace, 17. Oil, gasallne, paled antl any baz edmind s OaWnaes must be pmpaay stored, Iffore ing secondary romainmen( to musem spills, leaks a, that do.",.. ftesbided amass to stodge areas must be poviaea to prevent verecism. Stodge and disposal of happening waste must be in wmpl'ance wW MPCA regulations, 18. EMemal washing of WCks and [lbe, consoff dry vehT. Wa must be limited:, a dem. area o` the site. Runoff must be contained and Waste pmpaay disposed pf. No engine degreasing is All ansite. 19. NJ Tool and sold Wastesgerecomei by concrete wasbout ope2eorw must be sentence in leak -Pmof ccntainmentfedury cr Impermeable liner. A compacted clay liner that aces nod ether washout liquids to enter ground water is duchum ma ad ampermseble Ic ar. The liquid and could wades must nit coMad to gmuad, antl there must not be pound from me modal, washout Opeaionscrareaa Liquid ands Mud steady must be disposed ofpmperly and b compfandil MPCAo ulannns A IT, boost b teed TIN. by .I madeh washout Picchi iddinm conareW equipment operetors to u011ze to proper fadll0es 20. Upon completion of me project and sWbllesiden of all graded ateae all mmpper, erosion sonlyd faciiices (sit relays, hay bares, elc.) shall be remwea form rice Tim. 21. ContaMr shay submlt Notice of Termimdlon ice MPCMfli poffee wnhtn 30 days after Feel Submiemtion, 1cj SILTFENCE -' 5 (TYPICAL) ore F � �p141 v0d inlfol a INLET PROTECTION' (ttPICAL) .__ ROCK CONSTRUCTION n ENTRANCE 3' NOT TO Sf SPOT GRADES ,, N\ B= BITUMINOUS GL= GUTTER LINE TC =TOP OF CURB BR = BOTTOM OF RCCK TR =TOP OF ROCK , A ' FIELO VERIFV o ti p C co ITT [e CaE�o a 6 K q as I d m Le C It m N mIt 77i IN c le eJW m s 3e U Z 0 W W O do ir Z vJ W = J Z W NNd O N m _ � M CD Z Z ® j 0 �I—z a, � p go Q Sao ^ W W Q W X W rm W Y C O B, 5 d Uri a I hereby, mrlill' matevsplan pM`1`ddcnT.1 rayrl was papaaa by as or under f, aired culls ill and floor am A duty ewcnt. Peffncoural Pri,ou t, urchins, says of Nader Of M'vinesota. Michael A MwpM1�.E. Date'. 0523 tt Reg, Ni 4M. Bev, Des Dettrlpton P.B.J, 121,.1,5 tricem By: KBK Checked By: JAN Issue Ded 0523.11 Shed Tord GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN Sheet 6 IN ID ' x coo ® SILT PER ' Z� y ypy 'r O Oob411 1 loori tC 101140 TL I I ..,°,_ j,0$]SSTL. _ _ .. F tooip G p ,v \' \ BOG 1 15 SILT FENCE s. TYPICAL) - 11 1� ) 1 x Z_ rs.' Goal "1 0G +, s - J�f�' � ✓ // / /' // I W 982603 A` so G GRADING NOTES wEtOVERFLOW [�x[ ] 1. T pr t : No 'su g f wrence nr safety Mere We a at the dry In. h IlTo1 pia P I beg, IagaPygaang uraemdN rk Ith dte 1 All alevaeons will an expainalk l) shat be hold veaficd, if olevafons very 9twtry, notfy idle Engm¢er far formal /,/ 3. G ce shown In paved areas apre Ifi'bel dad / 4. ReslOro all dsWNed areas am 4" of 9cW puality foods, aM hyamseed with / MNOOT Seed Module 260. / s. All substitution Than be Performed in accordance with state and lobal standard apemNacons her candWCeoc / IT Slopas 41 and 9.far shall be dvead with erosion central fabric. / 1, Only due cons dichad bufers. of Eagle Point BOWevadi is acceptable antl '" °n tvac�are pout abroad a cook oonstludion enlace, 17. Oil, gasallne, paled antl any baz edmind s OaWnaes must be pmpaay stored, Iffore ing secondary romainmen( to musem spills, leaks a, that do.",.. ftesbided amass to stodge areas must be poviaea to prevent verecism. Stodge and disposal of happening waste must be in wmpl'ance wW MPCA regulations, 18. EMemal washing of WCks and [lbe, consoff dry vehT. Wa must be limited:, a dem. area o` the site. Runoff must be contained and Waste pmpaay disposed pf. No engine degreasing is All ansite. 19. NJ Tool and sold Wastesgerecomei by concrete wasbout ope2eorw must be sentence in leak -Pmof ccntainmentfedury cr Impermeable liner. A compacted clay liner that aces nod ether washout liquids to enter ground water is duchum ma ad ampermseble Ic ar. The liquid and could wades must nit coMad to gmuad, antl there must not be pound from me modal, washout Opeaionscrareaa Liquid ands Mud steady must be disposed ofpmperly and b compfandil MPCAo ulannns A IT, boost b teed TIN. by .I madeh washout Picchi iddinm conareW equipment operetors to u011ze to proper fadll0es 20. Upon completion of me project and sWbllesiden of all graded ateae all mmpper, erosion sonlyd faciiices (sit relays, hay bares, elc.) shall be remwea form rice Tim. 21. ContaMr shay submlt Notice of Termimdlon ice MPCMfli poffee wnhtn 30 days after Feel Submiemtion, 1cj SILTFENCE -' 5 (TYPICAL) ore F � �p141 v0d inlfol a INLET PROTECTION' (ttPICAL) .__ ROCK CONSTRUCTION n ENTRANCE 3' NOT TO Sf SPOT GRADES ,, N\ B= BITUMINOUS GL= GUTTER LINE TC =TOP OF CURB BR = BOTTOM OF RCCK TR =TOP OF ROCK , A ' FIELO VERIFV o ti p C co ITT [e CaE�o a 6 K q as I d m Le C It m N mIt 77i IN c le eJW m s 3e U Z 0 W W O do ir Z vJ W = J Z W NNd O N m _ � M CD Z Z ® j 0 �I—z a, � p go Q Sao ^ W W Q W X W rm W Y C O B, 5 d Uri a I hereby, mrlill' matevsplan pM`1`ddcnT.1 rayrl was papaaa by as or under f, aired culls ill and floor am A duty ewcnt. Peffncoural Pri,ou t, urchins, says of Nader Of M'vinesota. Michael A MwpM1�.E. Date'. 0523 tt Reg, Ni 4M. Bev, Des Dettrlpton P.B.J, 121,.1,5 tricem By: KBK Checked By: JAN Issue Ded 0523.11 Shed Tord GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN Sheet 6 IN ID ' ti p C co ITT [e CaE�o a 6 K q as I d m Le C It m N mIt 77i IN c le eJW m s 3e U Z 0 W W O do ir Z vJ W = J Z W NNd O N m _ � M CD Z Z ® j 0 �I—z a, � p go Q Sao ^ W W Q W X W rm W Y C O B, 5 d Uri a I hereby, mrlill' matevsplan pM`1`ddcnT.1 rayrl was papaaa by as or under f, aired culls ill and floor am A duty ewcnt. Peffncoural Pri,ou t, urchins, says of Nader Of M'vinesota. Michael A MwpM1�.E. Date'. 0523 tt Reg, Ni 4M. Bev, Des Dettrlpton P.B.J, 121,.1,5 tricem By: KBK Checked By: JAN Issue Ded 0523.11 Shed Tord GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN Sheet 6 IN ID ' CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 41 MAX PER PLAN 1) THE INFILTRATION AREAS SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM CONSTRUCTION PLACE 2' OF COMPOST (MNDOT GRADE 2) TRAFFIC, AND i" OF TOPSOIL THEN BLEND fi DEEP 2) ONLY LOW IMPACT EARTH MOVING IF INTO EXISTING SANDS. EQUIPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED IN THE INFILTRATIONAREAS. L, _ 3) THE INFILTRATION AREAS ARE NOT TO BE EXCAVATED TO FINAL GRADE UNTIL EXISTING SOILS THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND FULLY STABILIZED. REMOVE NON -FREE ORAINING SOILS AND REPLACE WITH SAND TO A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF 5 FEET. QINFILTRATION BASIN DETAIL 4' NOT TO SCALE s.�. . LU ii J Y r _ -n 03 S _ �+'� e8 MITERED END — 'MITERED CRATE 1 ..... - ���. ��� .,., GRATE 2 5 INV100440 INV�W�4 t• 2t0F ®0255 ' 1 L 8LF4 "PERFORATED R DAINTILE ®11.5 a C NEW DRNE 6 � OVER CASTING I r BO��C� LU 1. Z O Fea2 LU in f /-� 6' OF PEA GRAVEL ABOVE FABRIC PEA GRAVEL NON -WOVEN SOIL SEPARATION FABRIC - "MIRAFI 170N OR EQUAL" REMOVE NON -FREE DRAINING SOILS AND REPLACE WITH SAND TO A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF 5 FEEL. n INFILTRATION TRENCH NOT TO SCAtF 4 50)0 PE� _ — a F --B X206 LF 12'NOPE (Ri EB% < 632LF 12'l CIM CS-2 LF IYHDPE RIM 1o0]54Q RIM a01f31Q _ /s mw�,.. ua4wm- m�mm�m ,osanwam,eawareaid..,.memme. o...mmmuiwraoLCemsmdrq RIM 101291 UTILITY NOTES I . it -s me responsibility of line detractor to perlmm or coordinate all necessary WVV, neatens and dichoMVe Ron oristig WD4 beelfess to the pmpoaed chers risaVday. these cennections dude but ace me forded IF wafer aaniary sewer, onceVf telephone gas electric site lighting, et 2, All service ronnerned shall be perfotmetl in assistance With state and kcal standard 'heressUP sforconer,com , 3. The conVador shah notify all appropriate eeaineeog depeNnenLS aM Wtry belpantes'2 hours onorto deremndlort Al necessary pletauteds shall be made 10 avoid damage to eusling utllltlea. 4, Theconf., shall yeah, he reVemkm pipe eleva[on Inner many utility mark. ll iifierent Ines shown Parry me Englneerimmadiafely 5. See Pmjec( Sponsored., for beddr,mar rremenls. _I. 6 1 — rv. I L 8LF4 "PERFORATED R DAINTILE ®11.5 a C NEW DRNE 6 n 1 ^ OVER CASTING I r LU 1. Z Fea2 LU 1 % } INV9Bq 60 5 t. f /-� / 43 Or a16 FE93 ®49% INV90250 a / $0 / VV /. y / E [ V 1 1 � 1 z' i i mw�,.. ua4wm- m�mm�m ,osanwam,eawareaid..,.memme. o...mmmuiwraoLCemsmdrq RIM 101291 UTILITY NOTES I . it -s me responsibility of line detractor to perlmm or coordinate all necessary WVV, neatens and dichoMVe Ron oristig WD4 beelfess to the pmpoaed chers risaVday. these cennections dude but ace me forded IF wafer aaniary sewer, onceVf telephone gas electric site lighting, et 2, All service ronnerned shall be perfotmetl in assistance With state and kcal standard 'heressUP sforconer,com , 3. The conVador shah notify all appropriate eeaineeog depeNnenLS aM Wtry belpantes'2 hours onorto deremndlort Al necessary pletauteds shall be made 10 avoid damage to eusling utllltlea. 4, Theconf., shall yeah, he reVemkm pipe eleva[on Inner many utility mark. ll iifierent Ines shown Parry me Englneerimmadiafely 5. See Pmjec( Sponsored., for beddr,mar rremenls. FUTURE BUILDING A ) HUN TRENCH .00 00 m1 A 0, mr NORTH 1 20 90 BO -- 'a'inu —c —n wnw uuro snuuu etv[vuPao 6v ME CoMaginde Into coMSmUTen V C be rea�oPo z ® "L Is g I Oi _ L C d In O �j e N j m3: no Q U z Ud T W L W o D � Z W U^) e- W L+ )W H J z LLB u~ m as LL is O j _z®_ >N J Y CG - N ry Q Z Z I L Q m p2 ^ Q x w 0 6JJ— < Mw J E W C m h Y O O N J N _j F m In. helebyceNLymatllispre sPe�do lore de ytl P rtI p ausp is Dn by and and l be dot, common P 1 ssauVi Enturnmer under Vie Iowa efm siatea M nesoW M:cM1eel A. MUry�E. ORIe, 05.2311 Reg, Ne.: g2N8 kev Dine Scimitars PmeGN: 12106105 02ws By: KGK Chided By JAN Issue DRIS 0513,11 Snaa Tie. UTILITY PLAN ■ SheeC 1 01 10 _I. 6 1 — rv. I L 8LF4 "PERFORATED R DAINTILE ®11.5 a C NEW DRNE 6 n 1 ^ OVER CASTING I it FUTURE BUILDING A ) HUN TRENCH .00 00 m1 A 0, mr NORTH 1 20 90 BO -- 'a'inu —c —n wnw uuro snuuu etv[vuPao 6v ME CoMaginde Into coMSmUTen V C be rea�oPo z ® "L Is g I Oi _ L C d In O �j e N j m3: no Q U z Ud T W L W o D � Z W U^) e- W L+ )W H J z LLB u~ m as LL is O j _z®_ >N J Y CG - N ry Q Z Z I L Q m p2 ^ Q x w 0 6JJ— < Mw J E W C m h Y O O N J N _j F m In. helebyceNLymatllispre sPe�do lore de ytl P rtI p ausp is Dn by and and l be dot, common P 1 ssauVi Enturnmer under Vie Iowa efm siatea M nesoW M:cM1eel A. MUry�E. ORIe, 05.2311 Reg, Ne.: g2N8 kev Dine Scimitars PmeGN: 12106105 02ws By: KGK Chided By JAN Issue DRIS 0513,11 Snaa Tie. UTILITY PLAN ■ SheeC 1 01 10 BITUMINOUS n CONSTRUCTION DETAIL 5' NOTTO SCALE CONCRETE n CONSTRUCTION DETAIL 5' NOT TO SCALE G� OI'f MITERED DRAIN GRATE (MV3) ATRWJJWMTEPEDDMIN,COMITE (70])620-0806 =v / �2A PIPE FLOW W eCOPENOTT BASE EGATE kCFF0 tt2O 'YM �,nP B COUPLING FDA MpUNF'P EO �N.E SLOPE NOT TO ry EXCEED1:12 ref MITERED END GRATE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE mem ®e ®em Bm ® e®m®rs ®BB® a ®e ®e9e m®BBP meta 8, Beg ® ®q (ELEVADON,SEE PLAN) 0 ACCESSIBLE RAMP DETAIL _ �sl WITH TRUNCATED DOMES 5' NOT TO SCALE MANHOLE FRAME & 'OVER : NEENAH R -2540. TYPE C GRATE MINIMUM OF AD 2, MAXIMUM OF 5 CONCRETE JUSTMENT RINGS WITH FULL BASE BED OF MORTAR BETWEEN EACH AND GGREGATE A 4- COLLAR ON THE OUTSIDE. NO SHIMS OF ANY MATERIAL ALLOWED, B612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DETAIL 5 NOT TO SCALE BACKFILL WITH NEW CEMENT CONCRETE GOOD QUALITY 18" NEW 81TU TOPSOIL AND SEED Y FLUSH CURB DETAIL 5' NOT TO SCALE m.. w, o; cmwrgeu. zo�m�z� «iosemm.�wneyszewu,rtw`,. sa,a<.owenwremmarv..z� «z «cs a.z CATCH BASIN / n MANHOLE FRAME DETAIL 5' NOT TO SCALE GATE PLAN AGGREGATE MwOOT class m 12" NEW RIP -MP GRANULAR wT BACKFILL SECTION AANHOLE FRAME & COVER: YEENAH R -2501, TYPE C GRATE 4EENAH R3087 , TYPE L GRATE (HIGH FLOW) MINIMUM OF 2, MAXIMUM OF S CONCRETE ADJUSTMENT RINGS WITH FULL BED, OF MORTAR BETWEEN EACH AND A 4" COLLAR ON THE OUTSIDE. NO SHIMS OF ANY MATERIAL ALLOWED. 6" PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB. SEAL WITH 2 BEADS OF PAWNER, ALL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE '0' RING RUBBER GASKETS. PRECAST CONCRETE SECTION WATERTIGHT CONNECTION (SOOT. TYPICAL) • MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS. • MINIMUM DIAMETER PRECAST CONCRETE SLAB, REINFORCED WITH M SPEAR @ W E W CATCH BASIN DETAIL C'y NOT TO SCALETO SCALE J�Ot]�EXTENO FABRIC 1 FOOT —I BEYOND OMITS OF GEOTEXTILE FABB � O RIP RAP WITH MINMUM FOOT OF COVER(TYP,) PLACE RIP RAP ON 'A 61NCHES OF 2INCH ROCK BEDDING OVER 20 GEOTEMRE FABRIC PLAN L OL 0 RIP RAP -- SECTION AA 00.1ES MOUND LAST 2 FEET (EOF -sEE PLAN OF RIP RAP i FOOT DEEP — -- (TOP OF RIP RAP SHALL BE LOWER THAN OVERFLOW ELEVATION) GEOTEXTILE FABRIC CE RIP RAP ON ICHES OF 21NCH EXTEND FABRIC 1 FOOT CK BEDDING OVER BEYOND LIMITS OF JTEXRI.E FABRIC RIP RAP WITH MINIMUM RIP RAP : FOOT OF COVER QYPU SECTION B -B TYPICAL RIP RAP n WEIR OVERFLOW 5' NOT TO SCALE WOVEN FILTER FABRIC M WOOT CLASS III RIP -RAP 1 12" ro� M — 1411¢[ MAINTENANCE NANCE PARKING ONLY SIGN DETAIL ; y NOT TO SCALE 25 LBlFT. FLANGED CHANNEL SIGN POST (MNDOT 3401) P� PARKING VEHICLE 10 REQUIRED UP TO $200 FINE FOR MOIATION ACCESSIBLE PARKING Ta SIGN DETAIL 5' NOT TO SCALE PROFILE 042 fi 1 9. Cry LE 45 LDS R .LY AND ,ENT 1642AND OR EQUAL INFRASAFEINLET pia 14 (OR EQUAL) �J NOT TO SCALE WIRE MESH REINFORCEMENT (OPTIONAL) METAL, WOOD POST, OR STAKE. 4 MAX. SPACING, 2 INTO GROUND. OF NATURAL SOIL ENGINEERING FABRIC FABRICANCHCRAGE TRENCH. SACKFILL WITH TAMPED NATURAL SOIL NOTE: DEPENDING UPON CONFIGURATION, ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE MESH WITH HOG RINGS, STEEL POSTS WITH WIRES, OR WOOD POSTS WITH STAPLES. SILT FENCE n INSTALLATION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NL 111AGI... OPiO 6 I MlLDREVEIH. av TNECOk<MCTOR C e y r 0= Sets d d m o E •�JmeR � w 0 z W W O h S Z rr/^� ED W g VJ W ~ ZOIL I ED ¢ W m ° N M _ LL z ® �N Y Y m N E N Q Z Z LL ® an a p d W ® d CL E ED m W J J W r Y C ® t0 J I hereby a Wy InN thm Plan. spadfl 1 ns mrepoe was pre and ev me or unem my aver[ _PV, BlO aRe gnarl amaealy lleeosee Pmfessioaal EngineatuMertne laws INNe sale of Minnesota. MlcM1ael A. MUryM1�.E. Date: 0523.11 RN. Nw: 42808 Rov as0 oa.moe P.,Pa1 : 12106105 O2wh By: KBK Cneckee BY JAN Issue Date' CE2311 Sheet Ull. DETAILS aft ■ $I.. B., 10 MwOOT class m a RIP -MP Q' S0 (10'MIN) 2' WOVEN FILTER SECTION A -A FABRIC NOTE: FW300 MIRAFI FABRIC OR EQUAL RIP -RAP AT OUTLETS D 5' NOT TO SCALE SACKFILL WITH NEW GOOD QUALITY 18" 6" PORTLAND TOPSOIL AND SEED —'� CEMENT CONCRETE NEW N « PAVEMENT —BASE AGGREGATE 12. NEW GRANULAR BACKFILL FLUSH CURB DETAIL 5' NET TO SCALE 1 12" ro� M — 1411¢[ MAINTENANCE NANCE PARKING ONLY SIGN DETAIL ; y NOT TO SCALE 25 LBlFT. FLANGED CHANNEL SIGN POST (MNDOT 3401) P� PARKING VEHICLE 10 REQUIRED UP TO $200 FINE FOR MOIATION ACCESSIBLE PARKING Ta SIGN DETAIL 5' NOT TO SCALE PROFILE 042 fi 1 9. Cry LE 45 LDS R .LY AND ,ENT 1642AND OR EQUAL INFRASAFEINLET pia 14 (OR EQUAL) �J NOT TO SCALE WIRE MESH REINFORCEMENT (OPTIONAL) METAL, WOOD POST, OR STAKE. 4 MAX. SPACING, 2 INTO GROUND. OF NATURAL SOIL ENGINEERING FABRIC FABRICANCHCRAGE TRENCH. SACKFILL WITH TAMPED NATURAL SOIL NOTE: DEPENDING UPON CONFIGURATION, ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE MESH WITH HOG RINGS, STEEL POSTS WITH WIRES, OR WOOD POSTS WITH STAPLES. SILT FENCE n INSTALLATION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NL 111AGI... OPiO 6 I MlLDREVEIH. av TNECOk<MCTOR C e y r 0= Sets d d m o E •�JmeR � w 0 z W W O h S Z rr/^� ED W g VJ W ~ ZOIL I ED ¢ W m ° N M _ LL z ® �N Y Y m N E N Q Z Z LL ® an a p d W ® d CL E ED m W J J W r Y C ® t0 J I hereby a Wy InN thm Plan. spadfl 1 ns mrepoe was pre and ev me or unem my aver[ _PV, BlO aRe gnarl amaealy lleeosee Pmfessioaal EngineatuMertne laws INNe sale of Minnesota. MlcM1ael A. MUryM1�.E. Date: 0523.11 RN. Nw: 42808 Rov as0 oa.moe P.,Pa1 : 12106105 O2wh By: KBK Cneckee BY JAN Issue Date' CE2311 Sheet Ull. DETAILS aft ■ $I.. B., 10 w CL CL H j .. L GI L Or a BAR 25 29 29 ❑ 23 25 29 25 2]2 29 4 25 7 29 PA229 Pwi m AA2 ALL A EI �. YJ f 4 S ,, ., 29 AX ad �/ / L L l fFj' / _. 1 / �.. L r 1« � A \`\ l \� '` A F% / / % y LP L _ //--, T/ \ -11 \ «x..v c/ \ j �g ARK- `A, 'l Yu ��✓ „), ❑ 'V/ FUTURE BUILDING ,TC *��L/ nza z9'i''— 's,zi29 77 7 °,` \% \�l \ }ice �� \ //25.2229 t 3a /� F AD2> AI : e ., ,/ .'�\ \ii. //\ / ,%/ 11 0 M1 01 \ III L/ FF \ 1 /i N "n ; / I IF GNCI EPA 1J III �T 'LF, / \ OF _. IT Tf� �L 1 /L S �� // dill �� �..� 7?,23 N: ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN. NORTH (3 � r o.raA�` = B� � G"a4 m - (OCNs< s J uj LIDR u Z w o 2 :D N o y W z L u N m a D o U LL � Z O 5 N S r Z h z ® m Z z 0 d EDao W W 4 J g oJ W f m Ou Y O O ME K a ,ADIM OP, rNpareW pecl IALO P rt I P d anmaorwa dURIM l Pe amali em awye: sae .INN nal & NEMerlM1B laws Sootl RUPEE, P / Oafs C51211 Raa No 45412 F. o RAN Pmec[ #: 04 -11135 Cmws By: RE CIreMSa By: OCIElt Issue Dale: 05,1211 APPANTllle: ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN Elmo M1sef.. AT LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE HARE 4107/ 24' SHARE B 48 AS SINGLE HEAD STEEL EOCU, 1 400HP5 FLAT C.FAR �MPEREA SI CITATION CTM SERIES BLACK PIN SH FOR HEAD AND POLE. 1 LIGHTING ?0 E GLASS LENS MUI(i-iAP BALLAST PE III DISTRIBUTION, SQUARE BASE COVER 410% 24' BOUARE.... AA2 DUAL LEAD 277 STEEL POLE 2 400HPS FLAT CLEAR TEMPERED ISI CITATION #C'M SERIES BLACK FINISH FOR HEAD AND POLE t LENDING POLE GLASS LENS MULTI -TAP BALLAST, (1) TYPE III DISTRIBUTION SQUARE BASF COVER (1) TYPE IV DISTRIBUTION 48G/ 15' SQUARE - - - 89 SINGLE HEAL 217 STEEL PO 1 0HPS FLAT CLEAR TEMPERED MCGRAVf CDISON JGSS SERIES BLACK FINISH FOR LEAD AND PO T i FIGHTING PCLE GLASS LENS EXTERNAL HOUSE -SIDE SHIELD TYPE H DISTRIBUTION MULTI -TAP BALLAST SQUARE BASE COVER i SEE LIGHTING SPFCIFlCATON SECTION FOR ADDITIONAL LIGHT RATHER RECUIRFMTMS 1. SEE DETAIL 1 R15 SHEET FOR POE BASE 2 ANY CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE MANUFACTURER'S CATALOG NUMBER AND THE ATLENTION OF THE ENGINEER. DESCRIPTIONS, SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE INFORMADON ALL FLUORESCENT HXTURES WILL BE SUPPLED WITH PROGRAM HART FLECLACHIC RALLAST UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. 4, TO INSURE MATCHING COLOR AN0 APPGRANCE, ALL LAMPS SHAH BE FROM THE SAME MANUFACTURER. .11 SHALL HAVE COLOR TEMPERATURE FLOCK, 5. LUMINARCS VPTH TS OR SMALLER WITH CPI OF 85 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. COMPACT FLUORESCARI LAMPS SHALL HAVE BAI.A LAMPS WrtH END OF LIFE POWER UNIT 6. UNLESS A SPECIFIC CATALOG NUMBER OR SERIES IS NAME4 TIE MANUFACTURERS NAMED AS ALTERNATES MUST SUBMIT CATALOG CUT IES LARMATTED PHOTOMETRIC POPPET TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL of I.GS. 10 DAYS PRIOR i0 THE BIO DATE. CNNNE, THE ENGINEER MAY REQUEST SAMPLE OF FIXTURE TO BE SUPPLIED. I IF GNCI EPA 1J III �T 'LF, / \ OF _. IT Tf� �L 1 /L S �� // dill �� �..� 7?,23 N: ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN. NORTH (3 � r o.raA�` = B� � G"a4 m - (OCNs< s J uj LIDR u Z w o 2 :D N o y W z L u N m a D o U LL � Z O 5 N S r Z h z ® m Z z 0 d EDao W W 4 J g oJ W f m Ou Y O O ME K a ,ADIM OP, rNpareW pecl IALO P rt I P d anmaorwa dURIM l Pe amali em awye: sae .INN nal & NEMerlM1B laws Sootl RUPEE, P / Oafs C51211 Raa No 45412 F. o RAN Pmec[ #: 04 -11135 Cmws By: RE CIreMSa By: OCIElt Issue Dale: 05,1211 APPANTllle: ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN Elmo M1sef.. AT A , a _ -6 =a. 5 a< I 2A- ze 1� as .> - -.<. e, ->, z .. - -- a o n x 1. a xe +s ,o a 21 1, ze I i6 $ $,5 sa ,es +oz e• 9a 5> ,m ,ea , l r 'I1 z e:4s 'a.> 5 we' ,52 55 ',4a LI ea d ao 0 ra 55 5o sa ae za <> so sa ns +5.5 a.a v , as. ,. ¢ s. ra Al ' n :o Ke aT < w a, o sa rs 5> m5 ze +> a re ,o o5 oz oz o, o, oa so °o 0 ax 5, o. .zx d + se e ,z , f +a ' +., az 'ae 3, ma +u'$n -,z, '. ns's sz se a as >o ,o> a o° a � a , sari ez -ea ae a> ,aa. a5 .a , o.e po as �, x> 'e.5 'a, s. >.z . . . . ' . a. e3 s.a ea a - ex an se a> <- 5 a> s < 55 x se 55 ea of } s- o a. 55 as x- + >n as cn A _ a o. 1 oo o y a va 5 .z 45 as mz ao na a., 5.a az so ., as a< ae sa a 55 +ae an> ea o, ss s> a ao Sa s. 54 e, z a " - a , II 'I, , A' n A I I a �,A, q n I 4il 1. u 5 'xn ' r.g 4 is a '\ , z u ,x o \ . . o- , ,,p�', �;�� A> n A Jav •'1 „. {„{ v u . . AA it. . 'a ' u <a T” x ag> s. 4 , a - 114 5G a .a> ov 17 CA `s xl a s o.�a o s `aa -o o, iIII 11 12 IL e ( a e y . i A> ! IP A. v � ` s, za e x uo"a s% z as as � + s - \ r "s < „ �s o” "„ zw c � 4, ao oo a o 1 A. z sa O IT e> as rs n 51 m >a n e a zc se z , z, e x zx ,z v <o ,, 54 >e 4a o za z se z n qu 5 11 A r T 1 1 1\ A, III G _ �e t t a' ae a `' a o- o A a x< ,a y o a 5 a, , 5 a. a: as a . a Ia x a a, zn Y, a x, zo ,5 ,z �ne a; s \ a * v x u e z, , z , �.� { os sae xi d e j . ilk' r x s , A l' f §S tA'SA r & ax t3 9 \a` 5 A I, { J. 1 15� 11 1 o3 4 16 A, IT L? b it, 16 14 1. �< d AIL 2 § £ /\ A a u xi'• yr r I I T IT <, 5. � 4 x, a a. a a, a Ra a xD /Ae 1, = h 9, , ,T ELECTRICAL SITE PHOTMETRIC PLAN T/32• _ „_d:: ALL q 2: mn &Y 0 NORTH C II ��9gma P ®d $ co rc w L(D Tt` ! ° vlW n3m U Z Z W D N o U) W J L ~ a L!J °m N [.L \z 0 N L Z N <ZZ a® w w O Q � J LL� W o O J N J m HE m g 1 here0y UaHy Ihet Ih'9 plan speaecauoa5m report u,aa Papz,ea anma ar aaa ayo +suparv' a ma,l amaauW «ensea ,,ITH. wI.E,gireer,maerme mu,a olme I. o(Minneaole. s.d Rie6ar P.&AAi- Date:05,12.11 Reg No 65612 6N OdaOlbn PmIIIEL. 04.111% Omwn Cy; SIR CheMetl B, 0512.11 Issue Date: 05.1511 Bnen,nna: ELECTRICAL SITE PHOTMETRIC PLAN ■ ham of oa 0o u, At TI IT a+ It o. o.r onaar A TM. 1+ a o< os a 'R3. —.P6. . ,. 1z ,. T, . : 'o s s AY az „p L.,v Qi .o.$ pi a'i .0.',_aa_ ox o� 05 05 oe ae oa ,. -s ,n ,r 1s r f> ,e- 1 T ,a ,a 11 t4 1s nf _a IA A a aT '° &3 ! k p+. qa o? 4 i oi— a oa as op o on w aa' oz oa w 5 `oe os a a< os 4z as a o3 as i a a , ra ,o ,5 '1s v az e +, +a , e s < ,< ,. i T ol o< is a> as o oz a . ,n 11 -. ;,P1 _ e - - ° '.D A. Ito - - -- " 4b{i o 16 eu H. A , a _ -6 =a. 5 a< I 2A- ze 1� as .> - -.<. e, ->, z .. - -- a o n x 1. a xe +s ,o a 21 1, ze I i6 $ $,5 sa ,es +oz e• 9a 5> ,m ,ea , l r 'I1 z e:4s 'a.> 5 we' ,52 55 ',4a LI ea d ao 0 ra 55 5o sa ae za <> so sa ns +5.5 a.a v , as. ,. ¢ s. ra Al ' n :o Ke aT < w a, o sa rs 5> m5 ze +> a re ,o o5 oz oz o, o, oa so °o 0 ax 5, o. .zx d + se e ,z , f +a ' +., az 'ae 3, ma +u'$n -,z, '. ns's sz se a as >o ,o> a o° a � a , sari ez -ea ae a> ,aa. a5 .a , o.e po as �, x> 'e.5 'a, s. >.z . . . . ' . a. e3 s.a ea a - ex an se a> <- 5 a> s < 55 x se 55 ea of } s- o a. 55 as x- + >n as cn A _ a o. 1 oo o y a va 5 .z 45 as mz ao na a., 5.a az so ., as a< ae sa a 55 +ae an> ea o, ss s> a ao Sa s. 54 e, z a " - a , II 'I, , A' n A I I a �,A, q n I 4il 1. u 5 'xn ' r.g 4 is a '\ , z u ,x o \ . . o- , ,,p�', �;�� A> n A Jav •'1 „. {„{ v u . . AA it. . 'a ' u <a T” x ag> s. 4 , a - 114 5G a .a> ov 17 CA `s xl a s o.�a o s `aa -o o, iIII 11 12 IL e ( a e y . i A> ! IP A. v � ` s, za e x uo"a s% z as as � + s - \ r "s < „ �s o” "„ zw c � 4, ao oo a o 1 A. z sa O IT e> as rs n 51 m >a n e a zc se z , z, e x zx ,z v <o ,, 54 >e 4a o za z se z n qu 5 11 A r T 1 1 1\ A, III G _ �e t t a' ae a `' a o- o A a x< ,a y o a 5 a, , 5 a. a: as a . a Ia x a a, zn Y, a x, zo ,5 ,z �ne a; s \ a * v x u e z, , z , �.� { os sae xi d e j . ilk' r x s , A l' f §S tA'SA r & ax t3 9 \a` 5 A I, { J. 1 15� 11 1 o3 4 16 A, IT L? b it, 16 14 1. �< d AIL 2 § £ /\ A a u xi'• yr r I I T IT <, 5. � 4 x, a a. a a, a Ra a xD /Ae 1, = h 9, , ,T ELECTRICAL SITE PHOTMETRIC PLAN T/32• _ „_d:: ALL q 2: mn &Y 0 NORTH C II ��9gma P ®d $ co rc w L(D Tt` ! ° vlW n3m U Z Z W D N o U) W J L ~ a L!J °m N [.L \z 0 N L Z N <ZZ a® w w O Q � J LL� W o O J N J m HE m g 1 here0y UaHy Ihet Ih'9 plan speaecauoa5m report u,aa Papz,ea anma ar aaa ayo +suparv' a ma,l amaauW «ensea ,,ITH. wI.E,gireer,maerme mu,a olme I. o(Minneaole. s.d Rie6ar P.&AAi- Date:05,12.11 Reg No 65612 6N OdaOlbn PmIIIEL. 04.111% Omwn Cy; SIR CheMetl B, 0512.11 Issue Date: 05.1511 Bnen,nna: ELECTRICAL SITE PHOTMETRIC PLAN ■ ham of DATA GROSS AREA 110.384 AS LESS STREES ONLY 1PAVWGI 3.6 AC,/- Iimpervilus surlacel _ 16 A_G_ x 25% = 26.7 AC +/- 105.784 AS, 50' BUILDING iETBACK GREEN AREAS ESTABLISHED 15.52 AC. BOULEVARD fit STREETS +1.8 AD -- _17.62 AC. B9.164 AC. X 25% = 22.29 AC. ,17 62 A6. 50' LANDSCAPE 39.91 AC. BUFFER 106.784 DIVIDE 39.91 = 37,4% GREEN AREA GREEN SPACE ONLY i 75' NSP EASEMENT 2.28 AC. 50' BERM 1.86 AC. TRIBUTARY GREENWAY �ticeceT (25 either side) 1.95 AC. MISC. AREA (2) +1.26 AC. T33 NC. PROPOSED POND AREAS _ ±8.49 AC. RURAL ESTATE 15.62 As. DEVELOPMENT Ilk NORTH SCALE 1 "- 100' -O" POPE ASSOCIATES INC SH, firs, ai�wim U^l Ns�FVnmic,'a svwsna R�&pApi .�. �. EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK LAKE ELMO MINNESOTA wPU a Eua.anxples 'Al"THzs �ticeceT cre ear osx�ss 'SHEET 3 Al 5 PROTOTYPICAL SECTION FIVE EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK Planning Commission Date: 6113111 Business Item Item: 50, ITEM: Southern Lake Elmo — Process Update and Vision and Goals Review. SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is being asked to review a drafted Vision Statement and Goals for the Southern Lake Elmo area. The draft was first reviewed and revised by the Southern Lake Elmo work group which then went to the larger stakeholder group. After a good discussion, the stakeholder group reviewed and commented on the wording and made suggestions that are provided in the right column of the attached handout. Staff is asking the commission to review the document and provide guidance on the incorporation of suggested comments and any additional thoughts or changes. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is asking the Planning Commission to review, comment and recommend forwarding on the Vision Statement and Goals to the City Council. ORDER OF BUSINESS - Introduction ............................................. ............................... Kalil Matzek, City Planner - Report by staff ........................................ ............................... Kelli Matzek, City Planner - Questions from the Commission .... ............................... Chair & Commission Members - Call for a motion .................................................... ............................... Chair Facilitates - Discussion of Commission on the motion ............. ............................... Chair Facilitates - Action by the Planning Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vision Statement and Goals Worksheet ° O U o U ca O a aj u U N v� O cu O U i- ❑ w ° Q-t Zi N O c�C m O ct a U b . y ,yam N clq \ -D » d ® �\ \ \ 9 � ®ea \ s \ /�G . . / \ \ / — %\ \ ® ƒ% \ \�� C) ; \ a ƒ g \ c 5 \ot 2 J , ƒ/\ )\ \« e /j \ _ ® e ^ ®3 \ 3 ct \ 5/ \ \ \% ¢% ; \\ aVm \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ ƒ \ \\ \ ` � � k ) v\ -0 a) 07 § \ { ( 2 : / \ z / \ ",a \ [ & Qa/ Ci / C \ 0 \ \ / E \ \ \»gib x % ya \a3 E U 7 \a \e _ _% &g& «) � ( / ) \ \ \ � \ t \ \ ( ri § .a \ a / ee @/ [ CL ,_o ° }) 3 Q CL It 0 � 2 / / � \ e e \» \ C E 2 a \ \ / E � \ < \\/ \� �4 CIS ,22a � § $./ (/g / cz g u M — 52 \53Z 3 \ \ %_ \ \ % = Eaj \ < 2 \s \� . \#ok 33t \ /\ \a . °a5%» g z cz \ \ /{\ o g ° a \ \ \SE \ \ L, Q CJ ®�- \ &ƒa /RS N ca Y ^^ I cu r aya�i o Q)i o CL -o m , a ^m. N Y .fl ..O O O •'r,C O O = � O': � by by cd c wha... p v:^c cl <° cz o o @ 3 O cfS U ,.L N N � N rr�-1 Cn ba 'a r� 9 Y µJ NN N •n Fn vO+l y A O � U � � •� U U o So:� O U N Aa�3 � C �x•�� .� sU., �� o;+ z zz o O s x CZ bA P o b a 3 0 N U O r '-I Y a p N F Y o•,,Uv�r�U 0 �Q `� Q � � O U cz w N ccz p M V � N Q Q �i N r 'y p � Y Y O o � z. S� O ct ct c N Q p 5-1 y v Y ccz O U U y p O U cd Q U �i (C rte+ cd O p p O 9 C R. . 3• cz z zz o O x CZ bA P o b a 3 N U O r '-I Y CL k p N F Y o•,,Uv�r�U �Q `� Q � � O U cz w N ccz p M V � Q Q N 'y p � Y O O o � Planning Commission Date: 6/12/11 Form -Based Code (FBC) Discussion Business Item: 1. ITEM: Discussion concerning possible creation and integration of form -based code (FBC) SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, Planning Intern REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is being asked to spend a brief amount of time at its next meeting discussing the possible future integration of some type of FBC into the Lake Elmo zoning code. As a follow up to prior discussion at the Planning Commission meeting on 5/9/2011, the Commission is asked to review several case studies in which FBC has been utilized in various planning initiatives. The purpose of this research is to evaluate how the observed benefits of FBC could be applicable in the case of Lake Elmo. Given this review and discussion, the Commission is asked to make a recommendation regarding the potential integration of FBC in future Lake Elmo planning initiatives. In order to ensure an overall understanding of the components of FBC, the Staff felt it would be important to provide a summary of the principles of FBC. To reiterate, the purpose of FBC is to create public spaces that maintain and enhance the character of the particular neighborhood, zone, or city, as well as promote a human and pedestrian scale. In order to achieve this purpose, FBCs are based on spatial organization with zones ranging in intensity from rural to urban. These zones are known as transects, which govern the allowable uses and performance standards for each zone. Ranging from rural to urban, the transects generally fall in the range T1 (Natural) through T6 (Urban Core). The process of implementing FBC involves three major components: the regulating plans (transects), the public space standards (building standards, street standards, etc.), and the administration (project application and review process). Beyond these basic components, cities may tailor their FBC to meet specific needs and goals, such as staff review requirements or other elements. This aspect of the process remains critical in terms of how successful the code is in achieving the desired results. Based upon the Planning Commission's response after watching the introductory video about form -based code at the previous meeting, it is clear that there is interest into possible implementation. Throughout the discussion, the members of the Planning Commission expressed the need to evaluate other examples of FBC in practice. These examples and the lessons learned from their implementation may prove critical in deciding whether FBC can be applied and benefit the city of Lake Elmo. Staff has completed research on the following case studies: • Petaluma, CA o Implemented FBC in 2003 into its revitalization plan for the river district of the city, adjacent to the downtown area. o Established a zoning map ( transects and special districts), building function standards (allowed building functions and permit requirements), urban standards (building placement, fagade design, types of civic spaces to be located there), thoroughfare standards (design of the streets and other public ways), landscaping and utility standards, parking standards, historic preservation standards, and a design review process. o Lessons learned: the Petaluma, CA planning staff noted that the largest challenge remained the period after implementation, in which developers had some difficulty adjusting to the new standards. However, after this first initial period, efficiency in terms of reviewing development proposals increased due to the property owners and developers having a better understanding of what is expected by the city and knowing what will be approved. • Columbia Pike (Arlington, VA) o The FBC of Columbia Pike was focused on three main components. • Regulating plans • Building envelope standards • Architectural and streetscape standards o FBC applied as an overlay option to the existing zoning districts, in which developers are incentivized to utilize form -based code. Potential incentives include: • Expedited permitting and review process • Potential for increased densities with adherence to the code • Financial incentives (modified tax - increment financing (TIF) and tax credits) • Relaxed parking requirements o Lessons learned: Columbia Pike is an important case study because it illustrates how to implement FBC as an overlay option. Planning Staff attempted to obtain further testimony regarding challenges of the process, but was unable to solicit a response from the planning staff of Arlington, VA. • Benicia, CA o Crafted a public participation process to seek input and ideas for future building form standards and help define the form -based zones or transects. o Modified the idea of transects by creating various sub groups within the larger transact groups. For example, T3 (Neighborhood General Zone) could be broken into an open (T3 -0) or residential (T3 -R) category. Open categories take a more market approach and allow a mix of uses within the zone. o Lessons learned: the creation of sub groups proved to be a useful tool to guide development in particular areas in the desired way. Once again, Staff did not receive a response from the Benicia planning staff after personal inquiry. ® Grass Valley, CA o Designated form -based zones (downtown, two historic residential areas, and a commercial corridor) to enhance and preserve existing character. o Lessons learned: FBC had less flexibility because it was incorporated after the general land -use plan had been updated. Updates to general plan and integration of the FBC should be done in parallel to maximize its effectiveness. Review of these cases will provide valuable lessons that could assist the Commission and the City in crafting some type of FBC that would address the unique needs and goals of Lake Elmo. Staff has discussed these examples and has pinpointed elements that could prove useful for Lake Elmo moving forward, particularly in the planning for future development in the village and 1 -94 corridor areas. These elements include: • Integration of FBC as an overlay option to existing zoning, buttressed by incentives to encourage utilization of the form -based code. • Adoption of transect zones, or zoning districts. These transects could include sub - groups, as was implemented in Benicia, CA. These zones may help ensure that the character of the particular neighborhoods selected remain intact and are not drastically altered by new development. • Implementation of FBC should be done in parallel with zoning code updates, not after the fact, as was the case in Grass Valley, CA. Given the potential for large -scale development in the village and the 1 -94 corridor, FBC should be integrated at the beginning of the process as apposed to later when it will be more difficult to implement. Staff feels that these specific points are applicable and beneficial for the City of Lake Elmo and ask that the Commission evaluate their potential. RECOMMENDATION: This is an informational item intended to generate discussion from the Planning Commission. Moving forward, the Staff is looking for direction regarding which course of action to take in relation to FBC. ATTACHMENTS: (None) ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction and Presentation by Staff . ...........................Nick Johnson, Planning Intern - Questions from the Commission .......... ..........................Chair & Commission Members - Planning Commission Discussion ............................... ..........................Chair Facilitates