Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-04-19 PC PacketMOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA April 19, 2023 — 6:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Special Order of Business A. Oath of Office, Commissioner Amber Urlacher 4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the record.) 5. Planning Cases A. Resolution 1159-23, Recommending Approval of the Preliminary Plat, and Final Plat of Long Lake Cove, 7700 Long Lake Road. B. Resolution 1158-23, Recommending Approval of Ordinance 999, Amending Mounds View City Code Chapter 161, Signs and Billboards. 6. Other Planning Activity A. (none) 7. Approval of Minutes: A. February 15, 2023 8. Reports A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity B. Staff Updates C. Council Updates D. Planning Commissioner Reports 9. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. Wednesday, May 3, 2023 B. Wednesday, May 17, 2023 10. Adjournment Mounds View Planning Commission Oath of Office I, Amber Urlacher, do solemnly swear, to support the Constitution of the United States, and of this state, and to discharge faithfully the duties, devolving upon me as a Planning Commission member of the City of Mounds View, to the best of my judgment and ability. Commissioner Amber Urlacher April 19, 2023 Witness: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director Item No: 05A Meeting Date: April 19, 2023 MOLlyis VIEW Type of Business Planning Case Planning Case City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Planning Commission From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 1159-23, Recommending Approval of the Preliminary/Final Plat of Long Lake Cove, 7700 Long Lake Road Introduction: The applicant, Twin Cities Holding Company LLC, requests approval to subdivide 7700 Long Lake Road into three single-family lots (one existing home). Discussion: A Concept Plan for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) with duplexes (6-8 units total) was presented to the City Council on August 1, 2022, and to the Planning Commission on August 3, 2022, and January 18, 2023. The Commission's comments included; turnaround for delivery trucks, additional yard space (vs. stormwater infiltration basin), units facing Long Lake Road (vs facing internal driveway), additional landscaping, and support for R-4 zoning vs. PUD. The project has been redesigned to preserve the existing home, and add two single-family lots (3 units total). The previous City Council and Planning Commission comments are no longer applicable to the current plan for single-family lots. Accessory buildings (kennel, screen porch) will be removed. A commercial kennel has been located on this property since 1948. The plan set, dated March 2023, incorrectly shows duplexes on Lots 1 and 3 (if duplexes, this would require amending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map). The plat will be corrected to show single-family, to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and current zoning. Staff's review is ongoing, but Staff feel comfortable enough to forward the plat to the Planning Commission, if corrections can be made prior to City Council approval. A Public Hearing is tentatively planned for May 8, 2023. Analysis: Comprehensive Plan Single -Family Detached, 1-5 units p/acre Zoning R-1 Single -Family Residential Floodplain Zone X, 0.2% annual chance flood hazard, areas of 1 % annual chance flood with average depth less than 1' or with drainage areas of less than 1 sq mi. Wetlands None Stormwater Management Under review. An infiltration basin is on Lot 3 (NW corner of plat). The rviuunus view vuiun A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05A Page 2of7 Existing Use Proposed Use Access Lot Dimensions Building Setbacks Single -Family Residential Single -Family Residential Lots 2 and 3 will have a shared driveway opening. Access has been approved by Ramsey County. Area Lot Width Lot Depth Req Prop Req Prop Req Prop Lot 1 11,000 13,214 75' 84' - 157' Lot 2 12,500 16,940 100' 157' 100, 107' Lot 3 11,000 14,359 75' 75' - 191, Lot 1 proposed front setback is 30', whereas 46' is required, consistent with setbacks of existing homes on Long Lake Road. 1 2 Tree Preservation Landscaping and tree preservation standards are exempt in the R- 1 district. The property is heavily wooded. Most trees on Lot 2 (existing house) will be preserved. Trees on Lots 1 and 3 will be removed. Outside of the R-1 district, the City Code empathies preserving High Value, and Specimen trees. Of the trees to be removed, only one is identified as High Value. Most trees on Lot 2 (existing home) will remain. Staff recommends that as many trees as practical be preserved, but the City Code does not require this. Consideration should be given to require custom grading the house pads on Lots 1 and 3, in order to preserve trees in the front yards. OTHER There are several minor corrections needed to the plan set, dated March 2023, most notably removal of duplex building pads on Lots 1 and 3; and changing the front yard setbacks along Long Lake Road. Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Townhomes & Condos that are more financially appealing than single-family homes or apartments: Identify and set aside strategic lots within the City like the Sham O Kennel lot, Ardan Park Redevelopment area, and MV Square. Ensure townhomes are integrated into the neighborhood with proper style and landscaping. 1 City Code §160.055(C)(1) (Setbacks for principal buildings) 2 NOTE: In reviewing files for 7700 Long Lake Road, at the time Bayport Acres was subdivided (1979), building setbacks were also an issuing, noting the least setback on Long Lake Road was 49.3' (7750 Long Lake Road). At that time, 7740 Long Lake Road was not built (survey, May 14, 1986). 3 City Code §160.418(A)(2) (Tree Removal on Lots with Construction or Grading Activity) 4 City Code §160.416 (Definitions); SIGNIFICANT TREE. Any live healthy high value tree measuring eight inches in diameter or greater, measured at four and one-half feet above the ground. A "High Value" tree is defined in the City Code among a list of specific tree species. The rviuunus view vuiun A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05A Page 3 of 7 NOTE: The Strategic Plan specifically notes this property (Sham O Kennel) as being desired for townhomes and condominiums, which is not aligned with the proposed single-family development. A more intense development has proven to be cost prohibitive. Financial Impact: None Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. Respectfully, �eQx Jon Sevald, AICP Community Development Director ATTACHED Aerial Photo Zoning Map Site Photos Resolution 1159-23 Plan Set Application Submitted Complete Planning Commission City Council (tentative) Deadline for City Action Preliminary Plat Mar 24, 2023 Mar 24, 2023 Apr 19, 2023 May 8, 2023 Jul 21, 20235 Final Plat Mar 24, 2023 Mar 24, 2023 Apr 19, 2023 May 8, 2023 TBD Stormwater Management Permit Mar 31, 2023 Mar 31, 2023 May 8, 2023 May 31, 2023 5 City Code §158.020(D)(1) (Council approval or disapproval) The rviuunus view vimun A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05A Page 4 of 7 1�1 i 7700 Long Lake Road Aerial Photo The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05A Page 5 of 7 Man nu �:Iw� • }=: Tom} '• 9'1$ 710# 7M 73W 7952 w 78+'I 7d64 7M 794E 711 F-MI77 78#�} 7f� MIS 7M 14�1� 78M 7&M 318C�} 7d[� rM MW 7M "P 7N1 'nu 7�1 TM 77 nal F P WMN F41 7na1 W40 77M 77" 7M } } • � rm "45 ??11 7� 1 o cid 0 77�4 r 1 11 L, - R-2 R--2 2947 2545 D-4 241 25N zw Zoning Map � W P 7 ■-nm •a a 7d -Am Tax r$1� 7W1 - - TppF _ 770 �! F� I --- %77 �7 INI 771f TM 779fl 7P1 F177P vpp ■ I TN11x+%M T f.rD1 con � T S.1 To 34 �a 7 I 7� 741 7M _ 7' a *R-1 SINGLE—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL B-2 LIMITED BUSINESS R-2 SINGLE & TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL B-3 HIGHWAY BUSINESS R-3 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL B—A REGIONAL BUSINESS R-4 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1-1 INDUSTRIAL R-5 MOBILE HOME PF PUBLIC FACILITIES R—O RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT B-1 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS CRP CONSERVANCY, RECREATION & PRESERVATION • AREAS NOT LABELED ARE R—I DISTRICTS The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05A Page 6 of 7 Site Photos 7700 Long Lake Road, view looking Northwest, from Sunrise United Methodist Church (April 14, 2023). 7700 Long Lake Road, view looking North, from Mounds View Square (April 14, 2023) The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05A Page 7 of 7 7700 Long Lake Road, panoramic view from near north property line, looking south. Long Lake Road at left (April 14, 2023). 7700 Long Lake Road, view looking Southwest along Long Lake Road (April 14, 2023) The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community PROPOSED DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN AS THUS: 5 PUBLIC WAY 5 1� 5 5 10 10 PUBLIC WAY t BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING PUBLIC WAYS AND BOUNDARY AND 5 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOING LOT LINES UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAT. DEVELOPMENT DATA: EXISTING ZONING = R-1 PROPOSED ZONING - R-2 0 to X g05.1 ;s 0 9p52 g04.8 1 1 010(0l Xg06.4 q0-1 ZONED R-1 Ix x 5• AINAGE AND UTILITY SEMENT PER PLAT x 07.q i = U) 905.1 L-105.5 I / Xg07.2 q0'6 (2332.26 PLAT) � o I 1 Xg06.3 N88013 50" E `gOq.ITW 006 -Xg05. 1 Xgo8.6 232.28 #47- C106.4 - g08.1 X go8.2 I 0,01-� - - - - I -------- FOUND 1/2 -- 1 F I �go8.a Bse INCH IRON i I q06 q08, �_� i #31 XgOg. PIPE MARKED I I RLS 4741 #26 r� \\ q0q XgOq.2 I _ti0 I #33 #45 #25 i Xq0 JAI A 0q.0 I XgOg.3 N 4 90 I 90 gOq.2 a0� 6 0 O 0 a - I VACATE EXISTING I DRAINAGE AND j goq.grW-\ P �-q 8.8 --ROOF=g31.0 �UTILITY EASEMENTS "0'3gBW-- + rno �,r----- 90 EXISTING BUILDING MB \9sT o 33-----F----- 33 -- - \3� \ 6 --- \\ g08.7BW 90 - 910.IX XgOg.B � )0\ 9 Xg08.14 g q.OTW XgOq-i S\ xaln�1 910 g10.4 I \ GM go8.e I I - -.6 0 I pa� O.g1W gOq. 6"' qOg' X S.ggO° I\ \-gOg.3BW #4q- 1909 U-g0q.0 �{q4 xang73sB I I •a - #5J6 B5B B5B goq.q �0 a XgOg.7 Clog gOB.q o9 #48 #51 XgOq.B X Oq.3 - q #44 C\1 AND Oq.4 ZONED R-1 1 #23 � EASEMENT - I 3t1s � \ x 8.e I #43 g10.5 #61 g08.2 I I 1 I 0 #24 I XgOq.5 I LOT #221 I o I N #60 m Xglo.q 24- - ----- I qll� Y #63 m r-#Iq m I �0g6k # 3 5 m #20 #42 37 _ ' I I g 11.7 y� 38 � #36 GAO � I I i° g08.0- I XgOq. q\ 906-211 OU OU OU 0 _ Xg08.3 m FOUND 1/2 p N 9,o mI�ro INCH IRON CO x oa. - , 0)- - +55.1 - - A>$-zrla.zBw- 9° PIPE MARKED ®- .� co #17 0� q0 9 RLS 4741 R o NI 0 qOg I m! O iXgO .3 °\o T 3 O m P x k N N x - m c X I x o 6 " a ° x o �6 16 x o j VACATE EXISTING x I \0 Ex x KENN L I DRAINAGE AND I �� � 6- ,n j UTILITY EASEMENTS O 3 x m # 13 9/0 x I 909 r 12 p � 156 � CG Xgll.3 I # #5q I 0110.4 B5B 11711.E X X 912.E J I---- - - - -----5�- ou � q\� 157.35 S8 013'50"W _ ------------------ %%l\`-------� #65 I 111.0 gll.3 C� Xg11.8 Xg12.5 IgII.gX9 qe� \ ql W o� q\ XgIL7 6TW x q 6r tK n 91 :OBWJ � 6q' g1 .6r x�X I #3g o �3 /�l\F o\` BSB #67 BSB Bs x BSB BSB /� -i 912.1 UG Xg12.4 g164T 9//.� gl2.l Xg12.1 g11.2BW- co B W g11.4 SHED ql • m EXISTING BUILDING -\IrxgU31.q o t-X x 0 i 1 rr- GG\KA(,r TOTAL AREA OF PARCEL AS SHOWN = 44,51 3 SQ.FT. I PLO - FLOOR=gl3.g'I ROOF=g27.2 71" PROPOSED LOTS = 3#14 m I I9 ram, # 10 p FLOOR=q 12.0 j LOT 1, BLOCK 1 = 13,214 SQ.FT. %------------- 62---------t--- Q OL � 6 x o,�- 9o _ 9, cn q\\- LOT 2, BLOCK 1 = 16,940 SQ.FT. �, a\0 s G ,� �, ���° , '9 LOT 3, BLOCK 1 = 14,359 SQ.FT. ING BUILDING q11. 6� � -#IS BLOCK I m %� T 9'�8 97'8 a\\• ?4 I 1 m I q\\� 9 g12.4J/l\� #76 \0 • z z BUILDING SETBACKS o �" I Cax i m I oG y r I x 12 1\` BSONT30'VERIFY cM BSB B5B BSB BSB #74 III #72 SIDE 0SBSB BSB Xgll.g g115--ql #78REAR 30 '1XgOq.3 #q i6 I #77 1\ I I 2" -- \ I ---- \ --- I x - r�-----�-- PROPOSED EASEMENT VACATIONS ZONED R-2 0-- - - - o - - - -` I I \ Xgog.6 xgio. ; i i \\ II #7q11Q (-NAIL THE FOLLOWING REQUEST TO VACATE ALL EXISTING PUBLIC I DR INAGE -- AND UT'L'TYxa11.4 r i O ' Xglll2 o I I PROPOSED y EASEMENT WITH THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION TO CLEAN UP N -- AN UTILITY -- I # N I \ / EASEMENTI xgII.I IEASEMENT I EA NT I I \/ I TRAIL FUTURE REFERENCES OF THE EASEMENTS ON TITLE INC D I/2 y6 I I #1 n I "\\� 157.45 INCH IRON-- + \ 1 PURPOSES. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO VACATE THE PIPE \ 232 46 CB EASEMENT IS AS FOLLOWS: - 11 Xgll.2 0 RIM=gI0.8---�\ I.3 q - T - g0g• ��/I \�� - �'88 19 56 W_ #81 _ III gOg.7 INV-gO7.1 Xg11.0 \ Xgll.3 g11.8 ALL THOSE PARTICULAR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS 1 Xglo.7 OVER LOT 7, BLOCK 1, AS DEDICATED ON THE PLAT OF II xg10.2 i I I I I I 1 X6111.2 xq \ BAYPORT ACRES RAMSEY COUNTY MINNESOTA ALONG I q\0• 60" WATERMAIN #80 9j� g110 9/0 \ Xg11.3 gll.7 r X 910.4 p #6 0#4 9, a\\� o X 911.1 9 WITH ANY PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER THE WEST 5.00 COI O xgl0.5 i8 + 0q9 g12.o iL ® > FEET THEREOF AS RECITED IN LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR i #8 911.2x #82 9i, _ a\\� Q - q12 - - SAID LOT 7. I q\o� I �qu.� � gIL7 �� q q g11.7 -g11.8 I 9j.8 q\\q MB `� -g11.8 I \ \ -gll.4 -gll.7 gll.8-J -g12.3 I - - 0110.6 I I 60" WATERMPIN - �' may` I I I I COO NTY RD I SAN NH V RIM=q 10.0 INV=8g0.g • 0 LU -gOq.6 W V J - OCIA O o D1 0 z -g10.0 9, / o 6 -g10.1 �N w� wo ~ t- oz ,U o -g10.4 6 w 0 V IJ I 1 q\\h L-1 ' 9i V �� N NH IM=gll.l =88q.8 -gll.3 I I I 60" WATERMAIN t9i -quV .» 15"RCP - > » V -d 7 w Z O N I RIM=q 11.8 II INV=gO6A V 70 STS NH Cn o SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 14 i RIM=q 12.E I / N _ ___ V ,-g12.5 INV=g05.55 I OF SECTION 6, T30, R23--\ N88019'56"E ° � SE CORNER OF SECTION 6, 265.53 Ia\2 - -�� J» II I \ I _ �� - ---- - P �- --264 - �- - � \\ i T30, R23, FOUND RAMSEY \--- o N88019'56"E `� COUNTY MONUMENT > > > > > > > > 0 SAN NH > > \\ I > > > > > - > SAN MH 9/2 RIM=gl2.3 > Tom- > ��+---- SOUTH 1/4 CORN R OF ON RIM=gll.8 INV=? F- N /\ c� 6, T30, R23, FO NO RAMSEY INVUI)CE) INV=? E� W (SLUDGE) I I I I 1 \ COUNTY CAST IR N MONUMENT I � I I II I o 1 - ou ou u - - ou ou -OU OU s� ou ou ou I OU - OU OU OU OU OU OU OU ® >> > >> oU - ZONED B-4 EXISTING IMPROVEMENT AREAS 60" WATERMAIN � I I I AI HOUSE = 1 545 (IN SQUARE FEET) 0 20 40 KENNEL = 671 I SHED = 84 GAZEBO = 245 CONCRETE = 500 NORTH GRAVEL DRIVEWAY =1002 WALLS = 41 TOTAL IMPROVEMENTS = 4088 SQ.FT. - 9.2% (% OF PARCEL AREA) -7 15"RCP LEGAL DESCRIPTION: L O N G (The following legal description is as shown on the Pillar Title Services as agent for Alliant National Title Services Company Title Commitment No. 100352.22 dated February 3rd, 2022) Lot 7, Block 1, BAYPORT ACRES, Ramsey County, Minnesota. TORRENS PROPERTY EASEMENT NOTES: The following easements or encumbrances are as shown on OWNER/DEVELOPER: the Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Report of Title Order No. 2657217 issued on January 24, 2018. SCHIFSKY COMPANIES 1 . Drainage and Utility Easement as shown on the Record 3476 Lake Elmo Ave Lake Elmo, Plat. MN 55042. 2. Easement for public use, such as setting of poles, C/O Carson Schifsky stringing wires, trimming and removal of trees if 651-260-3248 necessary for line clearance and lying underground conduits. Covers the west 5 feet of the subject www.schifskycompanies.com property. SURVEY NOTES: OWNER: 1 . BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE RAMSEY COUNTY MARCIA P JOSLYN COORDINATE SYSTEM NAD 1983. BEARING ARE 7700 LONG LAKE RD DIFFERENT THAN SHOWN ON THE RECORDED PLAT. MOUNDS VIEW MN 551 1 2-6204 2. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN PER GOPHER ONE LOCATES AND AS-BUILTS PLANS PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. 3. THERE MAY SOME UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, GAS, ELECTRIC, ETC. NOT SHOWN OR LOCATED. 4. DATE OF FIELD SURVEY 3-31 -22 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES: + COUNTY/CITY: THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED FROM FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING RA M S EY DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT C O U IV TY THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE C -rY O F UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE IN THE EXACT M O U N D S V I EW LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL LOCATE TICKET NUMBER(S) REVISIONS: 220880919. SOME MAPS WERE RECEIVED, WHILE OTHER UTILITIES DID NOT RESPOND TO THE LOCATE REQUEST. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY DATE REVISION EXIST. 4-10-22 PRELIMINARY ISSUE 6-30-22 PRELIMINARY PLAT 1 1-1 1-22 REVISED 2-28-23 3 LOTS 3-1 7-23 EASEMENTS CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! Gopher State One Call VTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 TOLLFREE: 1-800-252-1166 CERTIFICATION: BENCHMARKS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my direct supervision, and that I am ♦ a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota. ELEVATIONS BASED ON GPS DERIVED VALUES FOR NAVD 88. LEGEND: Dante L. Thurmes Registration tuber: 25718 Date:__4_10 _22__ FOUND MONUMENT FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION SET 1 IRON PIPE HYDRANT MARKEDED RLS NO. 25718 pp CURB STOP PROJECT LOCATION: ry CABLE TV PEDESTAL WATER WELL AC OE AIR CONDITIONER ELECTRIC MANHOLE 0 WATER MANHOLE Wn WATER METER � O O ELECTRIC METER ® POST INDICATOR VALVE EP Fr ELECTRIC PEDESTAL pd WATER VALVE LONG LAKE ROAD ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER O BOLLARD 0 LIGHT POLE FLAG POLE -0 GUY WIRE Mg MAIL BOX P I D#0 6 3 0 2 3 4 4 0 0 5 9 -0-POWER POLE a TRAFFIC SIGN OG GAS MANHOLE O UNKNOWN MANHOLE cn GAS METER SOIL BORING O TELEPHONE MANHOLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL 0 TELEPHONE PEDESTAL Suite #200 co SANITARY CLEANOUT CONIFEROUS TREE + 1970 Northwestern Ave. �o SANITARY MANHOLE or O CATCH BASIN DECIDUOUS TREE Stillwater, MN 55082 ® or ® STORM DRAIN Phone 651.275.8969 ® FLARED END SECTION dan@cssurvey STORM MANHOLE .net uF UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC uiv UNDERGROUND CABLE TV uF UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC _UT UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE ou OVERHEAD UTILITY uc UNDERGROUND GAS > >> SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER I WATERMAIN -x x FENCE CURB [TYPICAL] CORNERSTONE CONCRETE SURFACE LAND SURVEYING, INC. BITUMINOUS SURFACE FILE NAME SURVSCHOI PROJECT NO. ZZSCH22001 PRELIMINARY PLAT LONG LAKE COVE - - - - - - 33 - - - - - ►1 - - - - - - 33 ------ (232.26 PLAT) " LOT 1 I -,—f----------—�---� _ 00 ' � I I I I I s; -------------------� 157.35 I SB8'13'50"W — —— —i _ _ O�I — — — — _ ------------------------------ ° 0 Ln LOT 3 o z l� I I O - � I I I I i I I I �o I I I I I i LOT2 �� '� Q)z � z� o l I Ot I �� a I � II I o BLOCK i ONE i I I �� I I I I I I I I I t o ------------J I ------------------ _J � of r o� of o i i of Cr SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 i i OF SECTION 6, T30, R23--\ NBB'19'56"E 265.53 — 2640.44 _ ` -- N88'19'56"E i +---- SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 6, T30, R23, FOUND RAMSEY I i i i COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT LEGEND o Denotes 112 inch x 14 inch iron pipe marked with Minnesota License No. 25718 to be set within one year after recording of this plat. o Denotes 1 /2 inch x 14 inch iron pipe set and marked ,4� with Minnesota License No. 25718. • Denotes found 1 /2 inch iron pipe. 0 20 40 %7==1 1 INCH = 20 FEET SCALE IN FEET KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Long Lake Cove LLC., a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of the following described property situated in the City of Mounds View, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota: Lot 7, Block 1, BAYPORT ACRES, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as LONG LAKE COVE and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use forever the easements for drainage and utility purposes only as shown on this plat. In witness whereof said Long Lake Cove LLC., a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this __________day of --------------------- 20__. Signed: Long Lake Cove LLC., a Minnesota limited liability company, president Clyde F Wagner, STATE OF _________________ COUNTY OF________________ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_________ day of________________, 20__, by Clyde F Wagner, president of Long Lake Cove LLC., a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the corporation. -------------------------- ---------------------------- Notary Public ,__________________County --------------- My Commission Expires______________________________ I, Daniel L. Thurmes, do hereby certify that I have surveyed or directly supervised the survey of the property described on this plat; prepared this plat or directly supervised the preparation of this plat; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have been correctly set; that all monuments indicated on this plat will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this surveyor's certification are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. Dated this ______ day of ---------- 20 Daniel L. Thurmes, Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 25718 I STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF________________ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_________ day of________________, 20___, by Daniel L. Thurmes, Licensed Land Surveyor. I -- E COP-NE-2 OF SECTION 6, 30, R23, FOUND RAMSEY OUNTY MONUMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SURVEY THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 6, T30N, R23W IS ASSUMED TO BEAR N89'1 9'56"E . Notary Public ,__________________County, Minnesota My Commission Expires___________________________ CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW We do hereby certify that on the ______ day of ---------------------- 20___, the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Minnesota, approved this plat. ---------------------------- f Mayor -------------------------------, Clerk PROPERTY TAX, RECORDS, AND ELECTION SERVICES DEPARTMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.021, Subd. 9, taxes payable in the year 20___ on the land hereinbefore described have been paid. Also, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 272.12, there are no delinquent taxes and transfer entered this _______ day of ----------------- 20__. Heather L. Bestler, Ramsey County Auditor/Treasurer By-- __, Deputy COUNTY SURVEYOR Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 383A.42, this plat is approved this_____________ day of ------------------------ 20__. Daniel D. Baar Ramsey County Surveyor REGISTRAR OF TITLES, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota I hereby certify that this plat of LONG LAKE COVE was filed in the office of the Registrar of Titles for public record on this ________ day of 20 -------- at _______________ o'clock ____.M. and was duly filed in Book ______ of Plats, Pages ______ and --------- as Document Number -------------------------------------- Deputy Registrar of Titles VICINITY MAP COUNTY ROAD J G DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS -0 Q y��s ARE SHOWN AS THUS: (NO SCALE7 /o ) 5 BOUNDARY LINE z �,5o C�z 5 10 I I 10 PUBLIC WAY �� SITE\\ BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING PUBLIC WAYS AND 5 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING LOT LINES AND PLAT BOUNDARIES UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON 'COUNTY THIS PLAT. SECTION 6, T30N, R23W, ROAD I CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CORNERSTONE RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA LAND SURVEYING, INC. L X 12"CIP I — OE - EXISTING BUILDINGZM / MB LV I GM 4✓ _ #49 U _ #46 �� io #27 9 TYP #3 9 TYP I #26 #48 #51 �g o #33 #45 #52 I 45 #25� I I #44 �•. 6 TYP #53 #34 #54 ! •• 2�0 I I #43,`F �� .. #24 #56 I #22'`F #60 #21 I I I #62 I 0 JiD I I #63 I #57 �•, I . I #20 #35 9 TYP #59 #18 I I #42 .. 37 I •. • k38 I #36 GAZEBO 8 4 1 #40 #58 0/— OE OE — — X X 4 #65 I - I I of s x I #1 7 o� I 4 X X I X 69" X w X X� #39 Oe. o _ #16 X ^I X X— #75 #67 #6f 9 TYP X KENNEL I M X �o #13 X X o IC #68 #1 2 EXISTING BUILDING X I tt#11 X #3 GARAGE I 70" Lv 1 •.. 71 " a #14 #10 5 j � X •' ; '• 8/ 6 TYP I #15 X I ~ #76 4 6 TYP _ LL — #74 I#72 X .I� #9 ,� #78 #77 r — L.X X �X 73., I , 6 TYP #79 9 TYP ' #i 9 TYP 9 #7 #1­66 CB 10 _ — — — — — — '• •. '• •• ' #81 RIM=910.8 ' t INV=907.1 LLJ O I I 60" WATERMAIN 10 , . #80 10 re #6 #4 #82 • 2 ✓J.JeTYP• MB I 60" WATERMAIN P:\Projects\Projects - 2022\12226046 - Mounds View Residential\C. Design\Drawing Files\12226046 C100.dwg COUNTY RD. > ® >- SAN MH RIM=911.8 INV=887.7 v v v SAN MH RIM=910.0 INV=890.9 W J Z O J D SAN MH RIM=911 (1 INV=889. 60" WATERMAIN I CB RI RIM=911.8 INV=906.6 ��RCP v » v � I/v CD 60" WATERMAIN » SAN MH > RIM=912.3 INV=889.3 N INV=? E-1 OE STS MH RIM=912.6 INV=905.55 SYMBOL LEGEND REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING �' . • CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING GRAVEL KEY NOTES 0 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BUILDING AND ANY FOOTINGS ASSOCCIATED WITH BUILDING. O2 SAWCUT, REMOVE, AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. 3O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING GRAVEL. ® REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING FENCE FABRIC, POSTS, AND FOOTINGS. O5 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING ELECTRIC METER. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL. © PROTECT EXISTING TREES (LIGHT SHADED GRAY). O PROTECT EXISTING LIGHT POLE. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL TO PROVIDE POWER TO POLE. ® REMOVE AND RELOCATE EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER LINES, z POWER POLES, GUY WIRES AND FOOTINGS. COORDINATE WITH O ELECTRIC UTILITY PROVIDER REGARDING SYSTEM REVISIONS. Og REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TREE, STUMP, AND ROOTS r� (DARKER SHADED GRAY). �•/ 10 PROTECT "RAW WATER CONDUIT". VJ z O U U- DEMOLITION NOTES LL 1. Verify all existing utility locations. O 2. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to perform or coordinate all necessary utility demolitions and relocations from existing utility locations z to all onsite amenities and buildings. These connections include, but are not limited to, water, sanitary sewer, cable tv, telephone, gas, electric, site lighting, etc. 0/ 3. Prior to beginning work, contact Gopher State Onecall (651-454-0002) to Q locate utilities throughout the area under construction. The Contractor z shall retain the services of a private utility locator to locate the private — utilities. G 4. Prior to beginning work, the contractor shall submit a Traffic Control Plan J to the City according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devises W (MUTCD). L.L 5. Sawcut along edges of pavements, sidewalks, and curbs to remain. 6. All construction shall be performed in accordance with state and local standard specifications for construction. 7. Prior to beginning work, contact St. Paul Regional Water Services: Mike Knutson at 651.775.6192 48 hours in advance. NORTH 0 10 20 40 d o o� r Iv _ L, oo � -� 0 U Q O ■- L 0, Y 0 U c co � J NO c (1) � L -a(c 3)° L �.—Mm�M ��� w W N >� M � 0 > J Lr) N O N O Zw W D wC) C'4 i Q LO LO rn LL Z O J WLU O CC UW Y Jw G W v/ > Q W M 0 U, z W Q J 00. UZ2 W O w > QUo J Z r� V O 2i z 0U) J z O 0 U I hereby certify that this plan, specifications or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the state of Minnesota. 4�z=t� Thomas J. Herkenhoff, P.E. Date: 03.16.23 Lic. No.: 25520 Rev. Date Description Project #: 12226046 Drawn By: KBK Checked By: TJH Issue Date: 03.16.23 Sheet Title: DEMOLITION PLAN Sheet: OE GM #sew 0 #45 I I I PROPOSE[ X �#34 I I PROPOSE 65 I 10' — x I 55' _ I I O COUN TY RD. > >— —o — j — - OE I SYMBOL LEGEND NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION SEE DETAIL 1/C500 NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LONG LAKE ROAD (MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT) NEW LIGHT -DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT SEE DETAIL 2/C500 ° a C ° A NEW HEAVY-DUTY ° CONCRETE PAVEMENT ° a SEE DETAIL 3/C500 NEW CONCRETE PAVEMENT ° a LONG LAKE ROAD a° (MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT) NOTE: THE CONCRETE JOINTS ARE SHOWN ONLY FOR GENERAL REFERENCE TO SIGNIFY LIGHT -DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT. ACTUAL JOINTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PER PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. GENERAL PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE BUILDING SETBACK KEY NOTES OCONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER WITH CONCRETE APRON, SEE DETAIL 4/C500 OB618 CURB AND GUTTER, SEE DETAIL 5/C500 ONEW BITUMINOUS DRIVES 4 NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LONG LAKE ROAD (MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT) ONEW CONCRETE PAVEMENT LONG LAKE ROAD (MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT) O6 B624 CURB AND GUTTER SEE DETAIL 5/C500 NORTH 7mJ��� 0 10 20 40 z O U N� rr� v! z O U 0. O LL O z N� L.L Q z G Lu L.L o o� LO 0 0 U Q O ._ L ' Y !=� C3) U c cv J C) c i-00^ Wa^♦♦M(L •- MM J W � J 00 CU C Jw��25 N _E c J M N o N >.W zW D LL, C'4 o LL o J W O 2 UW<W J Y W VJ > r Q W M 0 U) z W Q J 00. UzZ2 Wow > Q )0 J � Z r� V O 02 z 00 J z m O .o U I hereby certify that this plan, specifications or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the state of Minnesota. Thomas J. Herkenhoff, P.E. Date: 03.16.23 Lic. No.: 25520 Rev. Date Description Project #: 12226046 Drawn By: KBK Checked By: TJH Issue Date: 03.16.23 Sheet Title: PAVING AND DIMENSION PLAN Sheet: P:\Projects\Projects - 2022\12226046 - Mounds View Residential\C. Design\Drawing Files\12226046 C200.dwg KEY NOTES OROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, O INLET PROTECTION, SEE DETAIL VC501 SEE DETAIL 4/C501 OSILT FENCE, O POND/BASIN PROTECTION SEE DETAIL 2/C501 SILT FENCE, SEE DETAIL 2/C501 ORIP RAP WIER OVERFLOW, SEE DETAIL 3/C501 OEROSION CONTROL BLANKET, SEE DETAIL 8/C500 100-YR HWL = 906.99 BOT = 904.00 II / � I � \ I I I-�oT I _I 12"CIP O /60" WATERMAIN >> >>» > w > > -> OE GRADING NOTES 1. Tree protection consisting of snow fence or safety fence installed at the drip line shall be in place prior to beginning any grading or demolition work at the site. 2. All elevations with an asterisk (*) shall be field verified. If elevations vary significantly, notify the Engineer for further instructions. 3. Grades shown in paved areas represent finish elevation. 4. Restore all disturbed areas with 5" of good quality topsoil and seed. 5. All construction shall be performed in accordance with state and local standard specifications for construction. 7. At the completion of the project and prior to turf establishment and seeding, the Contractor shall de -compact the soils in areas that were disturbed as a result of construction activities. De -compaction shall consist of ripping, cultivating, or scarifying the top 12" in an attempt to improve the infiltration characteristics of the soils. The Contractor shall use low impact earth moving equipment to prevent compaction of the underlying soils, for both temporary and final grading and smoothing of the topsoil prior to seeding. 8. Infiltration areas to be marked off and protected from compaction. Only tracked and low impact equipment allowed in bottom of basin. If compaction does occur, soils shall be scarified to a depth of 18". 9. All sidewalks shall be constructed with a cross slope not to exceed 2%. Maximum 2% slope to be maintained through driveway. N COUTY RD. I > SAN MH RIM=911.8 INV=887.7 I c6 (RIM=911.8 wv=ana a �cr J I 60" WATERMAIN i i > SANMH > RIM=912.3 INV=889.3 N INV=? E OE OE OE 0 -OE I \ / SYMBOL LEGEND - - - - - - - 950- - - - - - - EXISTING CONTOURS 950 PROPOSED CONTOURS - MAJOR INTERVAL 949 PROPOSED CONTOURS - MINOR INTERVAL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - GRADE BREAK LINE GRADE SLOPE SILT FENCE UOUU0000000 RIP -RAP / ROCK CONST. ENTRANCE 0000 OE - EROSION CONTROL BLANKET INLET PROTECTION EROSION CONTROL NOTES SPOT ABBREVIATIONS: 950.00 TC TC - TOP OF CURB 949.50 GL GL - GUTTER LINE B - BITUMINOUS C - CONCRETE G-GROUND EOF - EMERGENCY OVERFLOW LP - LOW POINT HP - HIGH POINT (*) - EXISTING TO BE VERIFIED 1. Owner and Contractor shall obtain MPCA-NPDES permit. Contractor shall be responsible for all fees pertaining to this permit. The SWPPP shall be kept onsite at all times. 2. Install temporary erosion control measures (inlet protection, silt fence, and rock construction entrances) prior to beginning any excavation or demolition work at the site. 3. Erosion control measures shown on the erosion control plan are the absolute minimum. The contractor shall install temporary earth dikes, sediment traps or basins, additional siltation fencing, and/or disk the soil parallel to the contours as deemed necessary to further control erosion. All changes shall be recorded in the SWPPP. 4. All construction site entrances shall be surfaced with crushed rock across the entire width of the entrance and from the entrance to a point 50' into the construction zone. 5. The toe of the silt fence shall be trenched in a minimum of 6". The trench backfill shall be compacted with a vibratory plate compactor. 6. All grading operations shall be conducted in a manner to minimize the potential for site erosion. Sediment control practices must be established on all down gradient perimeters before any up gradient land disturbing activities begin. 7 7. All exposed soil areas must be stabilized as soon as possible to limit soil erosion but in no case later than 14 days after the construction Z activity in that portion of the site has temporarily or permanently ceased. Temporary stockpiles without significant silt, clay or organic O components (e.g., clean aggregate stockpiles, demolition concrete stockpiles, sand stockpiles) and the constructed base components of roads, parking lots and similar surfaces are exempt from this requirement. 8. The normal wetted perimeter of any temporary or permanent drainage ditch or swale that drains water from any portion of the construction site, U or diverts water around the site, must be stabilized within 200 lineal feet from the property edge, or from the point of discharge into any surface water. Stabilization of the last 200 lineal feet must be completed within 24 hours after connecting to a surface water. Stabilization of the remaining portions of any temporary or permanent ditches or swales must be complete within 14 days after connecting to a surface water and construction in that portion of the ditch has temporarily or permanently ceased. ^ 9. Pipe outlets must be provided with energy dissipation within 24 hours of connection to surface water. Z 10. All riprap shall be installed with a filter material or soil separation fabric and comply with the Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard O ' ` Specifications. IV 11. All storm sewers discharging into wetlands or water bodies shall outlet at or below the normal water level of the respective wetland or water 0. body at an elevation where the downstream slope is 1 percent or flatter. The normal water level shall be the invert elevation of the outlet of the O wetland or water body. LL 12. All storm sewer catch basins not needed for site drainage during construction shall be covered to prevent runoff from entering the storm sewer system. Catch basins necessary for site drainage during construction shall be provided with inlet protection. I- 13. In areas where concentrated flows occur (such as swales and areas in front of storm catch basins and intakes) the erosion control facilities O shall be backed by stabilization structure to protect those facilities from the concentrated flows. Z 14. Inspect the construction site once every seven days during active construction and within 24 hours after a rainfall event greater than 0.5 inches in 24 hours. All inspections shall be recorded in the SWPPP. 15. All silt fences must be repaired, replaced, or supplemented when they become nonfunctional or the sediment reaches 1/3 of the height of the Q fence. These repairs must be made within 24 hours of discovery, or as soon as field conditions allow access. All repairs shall be recorded in Z the SWPPP. C- G 16. If sediment escapes the construction site, off -site accumulations of sediment must be removed in a manner and at a frequency sufficient to minimize off -site impacts. W 17. All soils tracked onto pavement shall be removed daily. n/ 18. All infiltration areas must be inspected to ensure that no sediment from ongoing construction activity is reaching the infiltration area and these areas are protected from compaction due to construction equipment driving across the infiltration area. 19. Temporary soil stockpiles must have silt fence or other effective sediment controls, and cannot be placed in surface waters, including stormwater conveyances such as curb and gutter systems, or conduits and ditches unless there is a bypass in place for the stormwater. 20. Collected sediment, asphalt and concrete millings, floating debris, paper, plastic, fabric, construction and demolition debris and other wastes must be disposed of properly and must comply with MPCA disposal requirements. 21. Oil, gasoline, paint and any hazardous substances must be properly stored, including secondary containment, to prevent spills, leaks or other discharge. Restricted access to storage areas must be provided to prevent vandalism. Storage and disposal of hazardous waste must be in compliance with MPCA regulations. 22. External washing of trucks and other construction vehicles must be limited to a defined area of the site. Runoff must be contained and waste properly disposed of. No engine degreasing is allowed onsite. 23. All liquid and solid wastes generated by concrete washout operations must be contained in a leak -proof containment facility or impermeable liner. A compacted clay liner that does not allow washout liquids to enter ground water is considered an impermeable liner. The liquid and solid wastes must not contact the ground, and there must not be runoff from the concrete washout operations or areas. Liquid and solid wastes must be disposed of properly and in compliance with MPCA regulations. A sign must be installed adjacent to each washout facility to inform concrete equipment operators to utilize the proper facilities. 24. Upon completion of the project and stabilization of all graded areas, all temporary erosion control facilities (silt fences, hay bales, etc.) shall be removed from the site. 25. All permanent sedimentation basins must be restored to their design condition immediately following stabilization of the site. 26. Contractor shall submit Notice of Termination for MPCA-NPDES permit within 30 days after Final Stabilization. 9h NORTH 7L77�� 0 10 20 40 • d C oC14 _ U) LO � L0 U Q O■ - c4 �� U cv J C) c � oM^1M0 W L �•- �_J capper 0o w J W N ��� 0 J Lr) N o N (P) �WWo ZW D N > � Lo Lo U I= 7. Z 2 O J J W O 5 UW<W Y W VJ > W � M �e Q r) V , Z W Q O n U Z 2 W 0 i� w > Q 000 J � Z rV � O R Z O� J Z O a� �o CU I hereby certify that this plan, specifications or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the state of Minnesota. Thomas J. Herkenhoff, P.E. Date: 03.16.23 Lic. No.: 25520 Rev. Date Description Project #: 12226046 Drawn By: KBK Checked By: TJH Issue Date: 03.16.23 Sheet Title: GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN Sheet: P:\Projects\Projects - 2022\12226046 - Mounds View Residential\C. Design\Drawing Files\12226046 C300.dwg I EXISTING BUILDING / I GM I% #45 I I I PROPOSED BUILDING #34 1" PE WATER SERVICE W/ TRACER WIRE O2 CURB STOP & BOX I I I I I PROPOSED BUILDI4" PVC SAN SE W SERVICE I I I I I X I II I I I I s9° I X W I I #39 O #67 1 X - #75 #6f 1 0z z I x -J -J I �E° EXISTING BUILDING I��s J L.Li D I #sa EXISTING BUILDING X#3 GARAGE I 70„ 0 0 0 71" #14 W W EXISTING BUILDING 1" PE WATER SERVICE W/ TRACER WIRE I O O I I #76 OCURB STOP & BOX 0- M I #72 #78 77 M H 1 - TC=909.50 I 251 LF 8" PVC @ 0.40% INV=899.50 > > > > > > - > - - 2" CURB STOP & BOX 213 LF 2" PE WATERMAIN W/ TRACER WIRE - I I IIVI I I 4" PVC SAN CB RIM=910.8 SEW VICE ( #81 I I INV=907.1 4x8 WYE I i I 60" TERMAIN I� #80 d e #82'� A c d #8 a MB a a w O I 60" WATERMAIN >> >> » » W > > > I 12"CIP I - OE N COUTY RD. I -> U >- SAN MH RIM=911.8 INV=887.7 om v I CONNECT TO EXIST 6" CIP WATER MAIN W/ CORPORATION PER CITY REQUIREMENTS I I CONNECT TO EXISTING 8" SANITAR) SEWER PER CITY REQUIRMENTS III I SAN MH RIM=910.0 INV=890.9 W i J v rn V Z O J u V I I CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MH EXIST INV = 889.80 3 O W INV = 898.49 8.7' INSIDE DROP SAN MH RIM=911. I INV=889. CONNECT TO EXIST 6" CIIPI WATER MAIN W/ CORPORATION PER CITY REQUIREMENTS -CB v RIM=911.8 INV=906.6 ��RCP v >> u � U �� 60" WATERMAIN I 3 STS MH RIM=912.6 INV=905.55 _ `S> >>O >> > >�> SAN MH RIM=912.3 INV=889.3 N INV=? E-Wi OE OE SYMBOL LEGEND O STORM MANHOLE O CATCH BASIN CURB INLET ® FLARED END O SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT H GATE VALVE & BOX ® WATER SHUTOFF LIGHT POLE CTV CABLE UNDERGROUND LINE OE of ELECTRIC OVERHEAD LINE UE uE ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND LINE FO FIBER OPTIC UNDERGROUND LINE - GAS GAS GAS- NATURAL GAS UNDERGROUND LINE > > > SANITARY SEWER PIPE STORM SEWER PIPE r r r TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND LINE WATERMAIN PIPE » DT DRAINTILE PIPE UTILITY NOTES 1. It is the responsibility of the contractor to perform or coordinate all necessary utility connections and relocations from existing utility locations to the proposed building, as well as to all onsite amenities. These connections include but are not limited to water, sanitary sewer, cable TV, telephone, gas, electric, site lighting, etc. 2. All service connections shall be performed in accordance with state and local standard specifications for construction. Utility connections (sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer) may require a permit from the City. 3. The contractor shall verify the elevations at proposed connections to existing utilities prior to any demolition or excavation. 4. The contractor shall notify all appropriate engineering departments and utility companies 72 hours prior to construction. All necessary precautions shall be made to avoid damage to existing utilities. 7 z 5. Storm sewer requires testing in accordance with Minnesota plumbing code 4714.1109 where located within 10 feet of waterlines or the building. O 6. HDPE storm sewer piping shall meet ASTM F2306 and fittings shall meet ASTM D3212 joint pressure test. Installation shall meet ASTM C2321. U 7. All RCP pipe shown on the plans shall be MN/DOT class 3. 8. Maintain a minimum of 7'/2 of cover over all water lines and sanitary sewer lines. Where 7'/2 of cover is not provided, install 2" rigid polystyrene insulation (MN/DOT 3760) with a thermal �^ v, resistance of at least 5 and a compressive strength of at least 25 psi. Insulation shall be 8' wide, centered over pipe with 6" sand cushion between pipe and insulation. Where depth is less than 5', z use 4" of insulation. O 9. Install water lines 18" above sewers. Where the sewer is less than 18" below the water line (or ' ` IV above), install sewer piping of materials approved for inside building use for 10 feet on each side of the crossing. 0. O 10. See Project Specifications for bedding requirements. LL 11. Pressure test and disinfect all new watermains in accordance with state and local requirements. 12. Sanitary sewer piping shall be PVC, SDR-35 for depths less than 12', PVC SDR-26 for depths O between 12' and 26', and class 52 D.I.P. for depths of 26' or more. z 13. A structure adjustment shall include removing and salvaging the existing casting assembly, ` removing existing concrete rings to the precast section. Install new rings and salvaged casting to proposed grades, cleaning casting flange by mechanical means to insure a sound surface and L.L install an external chimney seal from casting to precast section. Chimney seals shall be Infi-Shield Uni-Band or an approved equal. z NW I^^.L L.� KEY NOTES OSANITARY SEWER SERVICE, SEE DETAIL 7/C500 OWATERMAIN SERVICE, SEE DETAIL 6/C500 O3 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WITH INSIDE DROP, SEE DETAIL 9/C500 NORTH 0 10 20 40 d o o� r U) ;u LID 0 L0 U Q OI L O X: c J N L i-aa)a?° L J ) W Jwc)�� N0 J N O N O >- ZDN Wwo �'`O Q LO rn LL Z o J J w Y O W CUWaw C// > W (0 M Q 0 U, Z W Q J 00. UZ2 W 0 w > Q000 J � Z (V � O R Z 0U) J Z O 'o CU o_ I hereby certify that this plan, specifications or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the state of Minnesota. Je Thomas J. Herkenhoff, P.E. Date: 03.16.23 Lic. No.: 25520 Rev. Date Description Project #: 12226046 Drawn By: KBK Checked By: TJH Issue Date: 03.16.23 Sheet Title: UTILITY PLAN Sheet: P:\Projects\Projects - 2022\12226046 - Mounds View Residential\C. Design\Drawing Files\12226046 C400.dwg Item No: Meeting Date: Type of Business Planning Case City of Mounds K- w Staff Report 05B April 19, 2023 Planning Case To: Planning Commission From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 1158-23, Recommending Approval of Ordinance 999, Amending Mounds View City Code Chapter 161, Signs and Billboards Introduction: In recent months, The North Church and The Bear Lot have expressed a desire to install signs exceeding permitted limits. The City Council discussed at their February and April Work Sessions, directing Staff to prepare an Ordinance Amendment, and to revisit the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District requirements. The sign amendment can be done quickly. The Overlay district will take some time. Discussion: The North Church, 5151 Program Avenue, would like to replace their 95 sq ft Wall Sign, "Bethlehem Baptist Church" with "The North Church", exceeding the 100 sq ft wall signage permitted.' The Church's intent is to be more visible from County Road H. The Bear Lot, 2375 Mounds View Boulevard, would like to add a rooftop sign, "The Bear Lot", in addition to installing a bear statute on the roof. The intent is to be more visible from Mounds View Boulevard, and to establish a common icon between auto dealerships (White Bear Mitsubishi). Roof Signs are prohibited unless integrated into the roof, then they are Wall Signs (e.g. a sign on a pitched roof).z Existing Wall Signage is 86 sq ft.3 As proposed, total Wall Signage would be 301 sq ft + bear of unknown size (max 100 sq ft permitted combined). The Bear Lot, 2375 Mounds View Blvd (Jan 31, 2023) City Code §161.039(A)(1) (Miscellaneous Signage Requirements and Provisions; Signage allowances for specific land uses). City Code §161.040(C) (Prohibited Signs; Roof signs) 50 sq ft "The Bear Lot". 36.32 sq ft "Suzuki". The rviuun-, view visiun A Thriving Desirable Community• Item 05B Page 2 of 4 DECORATIVE RURDINGSIGN ARCHITECURAL ELEMENT ]15 Sq. Ft. NONCOMMERCIAL Proposed 215 sq fi wall signage ("the bear lot). + bear (wall signage). SUZUKI IIII1 IIII1 EXISTING SIGN 33 5q. Ft Analysis: Staff researched sign regulations from cities with zoning districts and traffic counts similar to Mounds View Boulevard, finding that other cities permit Wall Signs significantly larger than Mounds View does. If Mounds View increased wall signage from 100 sq ft to 200 sq ft per occupant, this would be reasonable. Regulation 2022 Allowed at The Bear Lot Ground Sin Wall Sin Ground Sin Wall Si n Area Height Area Area Height Area Arden Hills 100sf 16' 80sf 100sf 16' 80sf Blaine 180sf 14' 10°/%4 or 200sf, whichever smaller 180sf 14' 200sf Coon Rapids 200sf 20'-36' 40sf or 10% up to 200sf 200sf 30' 200sf Fridley 80sf 25' 1 15X of � wall len th5 80sf 25' 1 233.3sf Mounds View 200sf 16' 100sf 200sf 16' 100sf New Brighton 64sf 20' 40% of wall area, or 200sf whichever smaller 64sf 20' 200sf Roseville 200sf 25' 1.5sf /1 sf of wall length 200sf 25' 363sf Shoreview 50-150sf 10'-20' 5%-10% of wall area max 500sf 60sf 6' 424sf White Bear Lake 35sf 10, Single -tenant: 10% of front wall area + 5% of side wall area, not to exceed 200 sq ft, based on size of building. Single -Tenant: 7% of wall area, up to 80 sq ft. 35sf 10, 200sf The Bear Lots 229sf 26' 86'+215'+bear In contrast, there is little commonality for Ground Signs. Therefore, Staff intends to further research the City's intent of the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District (2014). Of the comparable cities surveyed, rooftop signs are prohibited. In reviewing Minneapolis' sign code', Roof Signs are permitted in specific zoning districts, with a maximum 5' height above a flat roof or parapet. Projection Signs are permitted to exceed the rooftop, 2' per story up to 10' above a flat roof. Example, rooftop "Wells Fargo" sign across from US Bank Stadium (as seen from the sky). The proposed amendment allows for iconic statues (Projection Signs) up to 10' above the roof height. Ten feet is consistent with the maximum height permitted for rooftop equipment.$ Projection Signs are included within the 200' sq ft Wall Sign calculation. 4 Front wall area (MV Blvd side) = 4,296sf area (source: p.A3.1 Building Elevations, Mar 6, 1998) 5 Wall length (MV Blvd side) = 242' (source) = p.A2.1 Floor Plan, Mar 6, 1998). Building height = 18' e Ground Sign #1 = 144.2sf area (permit #2017-00012), 26' ht (Res 5042). Ground Sign #2 & #3 = 2X 42.7sf. (Res 5042) Minneapolis Code of Ordinances, Title 20, Article VI (Special Provisions for Specific Types of Signs), S43.340 (Projection Signs), S43.350 (Roof Signs) s City Code §160.056(C)(5) (Area and Building Size Regulations; Height Limitations) I ne rvlounus view A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05B Page 3 of 4 If the Ordinance Amendment is approved as drafted, this does not address what the Bear Lot is asking for (300 sq ft Wall Signs + bear of unknown size). OTHER Sign regulations are complicated, with a lot of detail and interpretation. One item that Staff has struggled with is the base of Ground Signs; § 161.038 SPECIFIC SIGN TYPE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS. (A) Ground signs. The following standards shall be maintained for all ground signs, excluding incidental, temporary, home occupation, identification and real estate signs. (7) Ground signs must include masonry construction materials such as stone, brick or stucco. When referring to the attached photo examples, few signs include masonry. Many have been permitted without masonry as part of a PUD or Development Review (e.g. Tommy's Carwash). Some Ground Signs include a DIY block wall border around the base of the sign (e.g. Abiding Savior, City gateway signs). Staff has interpreted this as compliant with the "masonry construction" requirement, but it's also Staff's opinion that it's not keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code, to have a brick (masonry) sign, vs. a metal sign with block wall flower garden around the sign. This has not been an issue to anyone other than Staff, thus, Staff is looking for guidance from the Planning Commission, if Staff's interrelation that masonry around the base of a sign, is equal to a sign with masonry construction. Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: • ID, expand, and maintain City's strengths to include splash pad, parks, trails/sidewalks, park programs, Community Center, & beautification of Mounds View Boulevard. Consider other areas of the city to connect and add additional trails, walkways, amenities, features and improved appearances. • Beautification of Mounds View Blvd: Cooperate with Ramsey County in implementing new features and improved beautification, aesthetics, and landscaping including but not limited to different plant species in median that looks professional, clean, and neat. Conduct and budget for improvements in phases and use Hwy 96 as an example. • Consider a fagade and landscaping policy that is more robust while allowing for native pollinator plant species and other alternative landscaping that looks professional and pleasing including but not limited to urban gardening and creative energy saving projects. i ne rviuun.,..., .. —.un A Thriving Desirable Community Item 05B Page 4 of 4 Financial Impact: None Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. The Ordinance Amendment includes additional minor changes; • Outside of election season, there can be any number of non-commercial signs as long as they do not exceed a combined 9 sq ft, whereas the current code allows "one" sign totaling 9 sq ft. • Prohibits Wall Signs in the CRP zoning district, which includes undeveloped county and city parkland. The Sign Code was previously discussed by the Planning Commission in 2021. The Staff report is attached, for general background. Respectfully, Jon Sevald, AICP Community Development Director ATTACHED Resolution 1158-23 Staff Report, May 5, 2021 (Discussion — Signs) The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 1158-23 ORDINANCE 999 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 999, AMENDING MOUNDS VIEW CITY CODE CHAPTER 161 SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS The City of Mounds View Ordains: SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby amends Chapter 161 of the Mounds View Municipal Code by adding the underlined material and deleting the semen material as follows: § 161.020 PERMITS REQUIRED; EXCEPTIONS. (A) Permit required. It is unlawful to install, construct, erect, alter, revise, reconstruct or relocate any outdoor sign or structure, as defined in § 161.006 of this chapter, in the city without first obtaining a permit therefor as required by this chapter, except as provided in division (B) below. (B) Exceptions. Permits need not be obtained for any sign less than or equal to eight square feet in area (excluding temporary signs), or for the specific signs addressed below; provided, all other requirements of this chapter are satisfied: (11)Non-com mercial sign. For all types of property, the city allows eee signer that expresses an opinion or a viewpoint of a non-commercial nature. The non-commercial signer shall not be illuminated or exceed nine square feet combined. For multiple unit residential properties, the signer must be attached to the dwelling unit or placed in a location that clearly indicates ownership and does not represent the opinions of other residents in the area who have not agreed to the sign. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the non-commercial speech exemption provided by M.S. § 21113.045, as it may be amended from time to time, is hereby incorporated by reference. § 161.037 GENERAL LOCATION, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. (B) Signs allowed by district. The following table represents the allowable signage and area requirements (in square feet) by zoning district: Sign Type R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 -L+ 1-1 CRP PUD Billboards No No No No No No No No No No No No Construction' 8 8 8 8 8 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 Directional' No No 4 4 4 4 4 8 8 8 8 8 Ordinance 999 Page 2 of 3 Drive-thru menu No No No No No No No (2) 36' (2) 36' No No No board *** primary+ primary+ 15' 15' secondary secondary Ground*** No No 32 32 32 100 200 200 200 200 100 Home 1 1 No No 1 No No No No No No No Occupation Identification*** 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 8 8 8 4 Incidental 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Non- 6 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Commercial*** Projection No No No No No 180 **** 8 **** 24**** 24 **** 24 **** No **** Real estate*** 10 10 32 32 10 32 32 32 32 64 32 32 Temporary Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Wall No No 64 64 64 100 100 1W 200 499 200 100 1W No Window I No I No I No I No I No I Yes I Yes Yes Yes No I No NOTES TO TABLE: * Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as allowed by the PUD Narrative document. If no such document exists, signage shall be permitted for a B-3 district. ** Directional signs may be allowed within rights -of -way upon written approval of the city. The appropriate governmental agency having jurisdiction over the roadway (if not the City) and the owner of the property directly abutting the sign. *** For free-standing signs, maximum sign area is measured per side, maximum of two sides. **** See Specific Sign Type Standards and Requirements for Protection Signs. § 161.038 SPECIFIC SIGN TYPE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS. (C) Projection signs. The following standards shall be maintained for all projection signs. (1) All portions of projection signs shall be designed for a wind pressure of not less than 30 pounds per square foot. (2) Such signs shall not project over public street right-of-way but may project over private sidewalks. No such sign shall be less than 12 feet above the level of the sidewalk; except that, the signs which do not exceed four square feet and which do not project more than two feet over the sidewalk may be eight feet or more above the sidewalk. No projection sign shall project more than eight feet over any private sidewalk. (3) There shall be no more than two feet of space between the inner edge of any such sign and the face of the wall from which it projects, nor shall the outer edge of the sign be more than eight feet from the face of the wall. Proiection Signs and structural elements shall not occupy more than 25% of the area of the roof, nor exceed 10 feet in height above a roof or parapet. The allowable size of Projection Signs shall be included within the permitted Wall Sign area. (4) The building or structure from which any such sign projects and all attachments or fastenings must be so constructed as to safely resist the dead load and the wind load added by the attached sign. (5) All such signs shall be of non-combustible materials or of not less than one -hour fire -resistive construction. (6) Such signs shall be securely fixed in place and shall not be able to swing or sway. § 161.039 MISCELLANEOUS SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS. (A) Signage allowances for specific land uses. Public or semi-public recreational buildings and neighborhood and community centers; public and private education institutions limited to Ordinance 999 Page 3 of 3 elementary, middle and senior high schools; religious institutions; nursing homes, senior assisted living facilities and commercial day care facilities; may be allowed the following signage: (1) Wall signage not to exceed 1-00 200 square feet per principal building; and (2) Ground signage not to exceed I-00 200 square feet, subject to § 161.038(A)(5) of this chapter. § 161.040 PROHIBITED SIGNS. The following signs and sign types are prohibited in the city: (C) Roof signs, unless integrally incorporated into the roof design, then the sign shall be considered a wall Protection Sign; SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 3.07 of the City Charter, City staff shall have the following summary printed in the official City newspaper in lieu of the complete ordinance: On May 8, 2023, the City Council adopted Ordinance 999 that amends Chapter 161 of the Mounds View City Code, relating to Signs and Billboards. A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection during regular business hours at Mounds View City Hall and is available on line at the City's web site located at www.ci.mounds- view.mn.us. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force 30 days from and after its passage and publication, in accordance with Section 3.09 of the City Charter. Introduction and First Reading by the Mounds View City Council on April 24, 2023. Second Reading and Adoption by the Mounds View City Council on May 8, 2023. Publication Date: May 10, 2023. BE IT FINALLY RESOVLED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 19th day of April, 2023. Gary Rundle, Chair Attest: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director (SEAL) Item No: 06A motND MEW Meeting Date: May 5, 2021 J Type of Business: Other Planning Case: City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Planning Commission From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Discussion - Signs Discussion: Previously, the Planning Commission asked to discuss sign regulations. At the March 3rd Commission meeting, the scope was narrowed more toward the brightness of dynamic (digital) signs. Attached is a comparison of sign codes specific to city corridors similar to Mounds View Boulevard, for Ground, Wall, and Dynamic signs. Since the March meeting, information has been added regarding the maximum brightness of Dynamic Signs. Although Mounds View has maximum brightness standards, we do not have a tool to enforce this (costs about $2,000). Rather, the City requires that dynamic displays be installed with a manual override, in the event the sign's automated dimmer fails. Community Development Staff are not aware of any complaints about signage (excluding temporary signs), other than complaints generated by other City Staff. The Commission is encouraged to drive the Boulevard a few times, and provide an opinion as to what Commission members would change, if anything. For example, if there is a most favored, or least favored sign characteristics. One thing to note is that older signs which are non- conforming, can be repaired or replaced, but cannot be expanded. This means that some of the lesser desirable signs will likely stay until the property is re -developed. Also, a number of variances have been approved for signs over the years (e.g. McDonalds, BP, & Days Inn, Interactive Playground). Recommendation: Staff requests that Commissioners drive Mounds View Boulevard, and be prepared to discuss likes & dislikes. If Staff were to change anything, it would be to add diagrams to the Ordinance to visually explain requirements. Respectfully, �4QX Jon Sevald, AICP Community Development Director ATTACHED: Photos Sign comparison -- wuua�mcoaaol A A - "1t i i AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK W, , li �' ' l i l f'•� ' ^ r h���� ��us is ■-as 1.ybe Maroline Oq�'q ULA 8 Item 06A Page 4 of 7 The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community pMWF A-,win �.Ivtimp,�: W ` � tee. ri CHICK m r __- -1��tnfi Itk. - - Silver View''' CHIROPRACTIC MASSAGE THERAPY 763-786-5581 FAMILY DENTAL -' 763-432-3399 I - Outsource Receivables 1 r MOUNDS VIEW CITY CENTER SUITES I �f)�-- Sit PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting February 15, 2023 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Mounds View Boulevard, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Rundle at 6:30 p.m. for February 15, 2023. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Curtis, Farmer, French, Munson, Rundle, and Stevenson. Absent and Excused: Commissioner Nelson. Councilmembers Present: Mayor Hull, Councilmembers Cermak, Gunn, Lindstrom and Meehlhause Also Present: Community Development Director Jon Sevald and City Administrator Nyle Zikmund Index to Minutes Page Planned Unit Development Discussion 2 Approval of Minutes 5 3. Special Order of Business None. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting 5. Planning Cases None. 6. Other Planning Activity February 15, 2023 Page 2 A. Planned Unit Development Discussion with City Council Community Development Director Sevald stated Planned Unit Developments (PUD) are intended to provide flexibility from City Code requirements, in exchange for creating a more desirable project than what would be built otherwise. The PUD ordinance includes many requirements, but ultimately allows the City Council discretion of what deviations from the City Code to allow. In Staff s opinion, PUD's are being overused when it would be more appropriate to amend the City Code to allow every development to benefit from higher density, smaller lots, and higher architectural and landscape standards than is currently required (without a PUD). Community Development Director Sevald reported; if the Council's intent is to promote affordable housing (e.g. less than the median $302,000 house, $275,000 townhouse), then there is a fine -line, "give & take" between taking higher standards (architecture & open space), and giving deviations from the City Code (higher density and lesser setbacks). The goal of this discussion between the City Council and Planning Commission, is to have a high-level discussion of what the Council & Commission values, and how development can contribute toward those values (and vision). Councilmember Gunn questioned what the alternative was to a PUD. Community Development Director Sevald stated this would be straight zoning. Councilmember Gunn asked if PUD's stay with the property. Community Development Director Sevald reported this was the case, noting the PUD would stay with the property forever. Further discussion ensued regarding how PUD's can be amended and revoked as a CUP. Councilmember Lindstrom stated with the limited amount of space left to develop, he did not support moving away from the current model. Commissioner Munson questioned when the PUD zoning language was written. Community Development Director Sevald estimated this occurred in 1988. Commissioner Munson supported the PUD language being rewritten. Community Development Director Sevald questioned if there was anything the Commission or Council would change with the Boulevard or Bel Rae developments. Staff commented on how these developments were accessed. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting February 15, 2023 Page 3 The Commission and Council discussed these developments in further detail. The consensus of the group was that there were no concerns with either of these projects. Community Development Director Sevald inquired if the Commission or Council had comments on the Gray Stone Flats development. The only concerns with this development were the exterior colors. Councilmember Meehlhause stated he has heard INH enjoyed working with the City on this project. Community Development Director Sevald questioned if the City should consider putting a limit on building height. He anticipated the City would be considering a PUD for town homes. Councilmember Lindstrom stated he would like to see projects other than apartment complexes along Mounds View Boulevard. Commissioner Curtis indicated he would like to see future multi -family projects along Mounds View Boulevard having some form of retail included. Councilmember Gunn commented on how the City has to have more people in order to support more retail and restaurants in the community. Community Development Director Sevald commented on how the cost for commercial development was higher than residential development, which made it more difficult in the suburbs. Commissioner Munson stated Mounds View was not as walkable as other communities which may make it difficult to successfully develop mixed use projects. Councilmember Lindstrom discussed how people's patterns have changed since COVID and how people liked staying closer to home. Councilmember Gunn stated she would not rule mixed use out as an option, but anticipated the City would have work to do on its trail and transportation system before this type of development could occur. Community Development Director Sevald indicated the City may have to consider how badly it would like to see mixed use developments, and if the City would be willing to subsidize these commercial spaces if they were not able to find or maintain tenants. Commissioner Farmer discussed how mixed use developments in the suburbs would have to look different than mixed use developments in an urban area. Community Development Director Sevald questioned if the Commission and the Council supported smaller lot sizes in order to create more affordable housing. He commented on how the Council must balance the number of affordable housing units with the need for market rate units and single family homes. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting February 15, 2023 Page 4 Councilmember Gunn supported smaller lots in order to offer more affordable housing in Mounds View. Councilmember Gunn asked if the City allowed accessory dwelling units. Community Development Director Sevald discussed how City Code addressed ADU's. He questioned how the Council and Commission felt about ADU's or tiny homes. Chair Rundle stated he supported tiny homes, but he was uncertain where they should be located in Mounds View. Councilmember Gunn feared that if the City did not allow tiny homes, that the City would be limiting who could move into the community. Commissioner Curtis suggested the City consider locating tiny homes on vacant lots in Mounds View. He supported the City being mindful of existing residents and the quiet enjoyment of their property, while also making it easier for developers to bring tiny homes into the community. City Administrator Zikmund stated Belden River Estates may be a good location for tiny homes. Commissioner Farmer agreed that zoning would assist with allowing tiny homes in the community. He understood this was an emerging market and he could support a cluster of tiny homes in Mounds View. Councilmember Lindstrom stated it was his understanding tiny homes would range in price from $200,000 to $250,000, which was not exactly affordable. Councilmember Gunn explained she was not advocating for tiny homes in back yards, but she did support a tiny home neighborhood on vacant lots in the community. Jamie Stolpestad, Yard Homes representative, introduced himself to the Council and Commission noting his company manufactures compact dwellings used as ADU's. He reported there were 50 cities, counties and townships in Minnesota that allow ADU's. He explained some of these communities allow for clustered developments or cottage home parks. He stated an overlay district was created for these communities. He commented the biggest pressure for ADU's was for the senior population. Councilmember Curtis stated he would like to see potential zoning language from staff on how the City should regulate ADU's. Community Development Director Sevald thanked the Council and Commission for their feedback on this topic. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting 7. Approval of Minutes January 18, 2023. February 15, 2023 Page 5 MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Stevenson/Commissioner Curtis. To approve the Minutes of the January 18, 2023 regular Planning Commission meetings as presented. Ayes — 6 8. Reports Nays — 0 A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity Motion carried. Community Development Director Sevald stated he had no upcoming Planning Cases at this time. B. Staff Updates Community Development Director Sevald provided the Commission with an update from staff. He reported staff has been working to update its permitting software. City Administrator Zikmund updated the Commission on the potential Community Center expansion. He explained staff has met with local legislators in order to draft bills for bonding from the State. He stated the goal would be to get in the governors bonding for 2024. He indicated the City was considering a local sales tax to assist with funding the Community Center expansion. He reported a mailing would be sent to residents with specific information regarding the local sales tax and why this was needed for the Community Center. He explained six community meetings were scheduled in order to invite the public in to learn more about the project. City Administrator Zikmund discussed the recently approved agreement with the Rice Creek Watershed District regarding maintenance of the City's ditches. He commented further on how the City would be working to restore its stormwater ponds and ditches. C. Council Updates Council Member Meehlhause provided the Planning Commission with an update from the City Council. He discussed how local legislators support the Community Center expansion and the regional impact this facility would have on the community. He noted the City has met with the National Sports Center to ensure that the City's efforts were not taking away from their facility. He reported the Council recently approved a Human Dignity Task Force. Mounds View Planning Commission February 15, 2023 Regular Meeting Page 6 D. Planning Commissioner Reports Commissioner French reported this would be his last Planning Commission meeting. He explained he would be moving out of Mounds View. Commissioner Curtis commented on how effective the new stop sign has been in his neighborhood. 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. Wednesday, March 1, 2023 B. > 2023 10. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Rundle adjourned the meeting at 8:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Sevald Community Development Director Transcribed by: Heidi Guenther Minute Maker Secretarial P000 uo HOMES April 5, 2023 tardHomes Proposed residential neighborhood in Mounds View/Ardan Site Neighborhood Open House — Mounds View City Hall 2401 County Road 10 Thursday April 20th, from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Dear neighbor: Pulte Homes and YardHomes are proposing a development on the property known as the Ardan site. This site is generally located east of Long Lake Road and north of Woodlawn Drive. In responding to a solicitation by the City of Mounds View, Pulte Homes is proposing to build townhomes and YardHomes is proposing to build smaller single-family homes. We are inviting you to a neighborhood open house to learn about our plans. (Please the site plan on the back of this letter), If you would like to ask questions or provide feedback but cannot attend the neighborhood meeting, please contact me directly at 952-219-9082 or dean.lotter ult rou .cam. Sincerely, Pulte Homes of Minnesota Dean Lotter Manager of Land Planning & Entitlements 82021 Pulte Homes of Minnesota LLC. AR rights reserved. BL#BC627273 & U 4/14/23, 11:00 AM Duplexes, town homes, cluster developments: What you need to know about St. Paul's proposed zoning changes REJECT THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG AFFORDABILITY BOARD Lawmakers: Don't ignore PARTNERSHIP TO FIGHT nvZFACF health disparitie insurance comp: LOCAL Duplexes, town homes, cluster developments: What you need to know about St. Paul's proposed zoning changes St. Paul is considering eliminating single -family -only zoning, with the goal of boosting the city's housing stock. By Katie Galioto (https:/Iwww.startribune.com/katie-galioto/6234707/) Star Tribune APRIL 13, 2023 - 2:04PM St. Paul could soon eliminate what city planners are calling "single -family -only" zoning, meaning duplexes, triplexes and townhomes would be allowed in more places throughout the capital city. The change is one of many proposed by the city's Planning and Economic Development Department, which is leading a major overhaul of the zoning code. Wondering what's on the table, and what it means for residents? Here's a quick breakdown: What is zoning? Most cities, townships and some counties have local ordinances that control how land can be used, and zoning is usually part of a larger, long-term plan for orderly growth and change. In the United States, zoning typically divides land into areas for residential, commercial, industrial or other uses and often has additional rules regarding lot and building size, parking or secondary structures. Why are city planners proposing changing the zoning code? Under current laws, nearly half of the land in St. Paul can only be used for single-family homes. Ina 163-page memo (https: stpaul.granicus.com/DocumentViewer.php2 file=stpaul c5d706ddaa45578ld2318deaOd8db7a7.pdf&view=l)-on their proposed changes, city planners say this is problem for a variety of reasons. MARK VANCLEAVE, STAR TRIBUNE Ben Peters shows Brianna and Thomas Williams a triplex in St. Paul's North End Thursday, Aug. 15,2019. https://www.startribune.com/st-pauI-zoning-housing-single-family-duplex-triplex-accessory-dwelling-unit-development/600266823/ 1/4 4/14/23, 11:00 AM Duplexes, town homes, cluster developments: What you need to know about St. Paul's proposed zoning changes ADVERTISEMENT For one, like many cities across the country, St. Paul is facing a housing shortage that's fueled spikes in home prices and rents. The city has largely been built out, leaving limited land for new development — so planners are suggesting allowing more density in the neighborhoods that already exist. Researchers have shown that single-family zoning districts historically have perpetuated segregation (https://www.startribune.com/how-twin-cities-housing-rules-keep-the- metro-segregated/600081529/?refresh=true) by race and class, and likely are part of the reason the Twin Cities have some of the nation's worst disparities (https://www.startribune.com/racial-homeownership-gap-in-the-twin-cities-highest-in- the-nation/600072649/)-in income, wealth and homeownership between white residents and residents of color. In the early 1900s, after the U.S. Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional to use zoning to expressly prohibit people of color from living in certain neighborhoods, cities realized they could use single-family zoning to the same effect. Additionally, city officials want to give residents a wider variety of choices when it comes to housing. Some residents may prefer a duplex for a lower -maintenance lifestyle, or a town home to downsize. What would be allowed if the changes are approved? St. Paul city planners are emphasizing that single-family homes will still be allowed if their proposal passes. Their main focus is creating more flexibility for what urban policy experts call "neighborhood -scale" or "missing middle housing," such as duplexes, townhomes and carriage houses. This category of housing contains multiple units but is seen as compatible, in size and appearance, with standalone single-family homes, according to the city's memo. In practice, this could look something like splitting an existing single-family lot in two or adding an accessory dwelling unit in a backyard. An important note: Allowing this type of housing doesn't mean it will be built. City planners say the code changes are mostly geared toward long-term housing goals. They aim to promote the reuse of existing homes and development in lots and backyards, said city planner Emma Brown, the lead author of the proposed amendments. "A zoning change just opens up the possibility for other development," Brown said. "But land use —that doesn't change overnight." How would my neighborhood's zoning change? It depends where you live. The proposed amendments would condense the city's seven low -density residential zoning districts into four, with new standards regulating lot area, building heights, setbacks and lot coverage. The new districts would be: • Hl residential: Allows up to three units on interior lots and up to four units on corner lots. • H2 residential: Allows up to four units on a lot. https://www.startribune.com/st-pauI-zoning-housing-single-family-duplex-triplex-accessory-dwelling-unit-development/600266823/ 2/4 4/14/23, 11:00 AM Duplexes, town homes, cluster developments: What you need to know about St. Paul's proposed zoning changes • H3 residential: Allows up to six units on a lot and applies to land near transit corridors and neighborhood nodes. • RL large lot residential: Allows up to two units on a lot. City planners noted that this district is used only in a small portion of St. Paul's Highwood area, which is a hilly part of the Mississippi River bluff that is not consistently served by city sewer or water services. In H1 and H2 districts, it would be possible to add up to two additional units by complying with certain requirements. If one or two units contain at least three bedrooms, or if the owner rents out one or two units at prices affordable to someone making 80% of the area median income, they would be eligible for what the city is calling a "density bonus." Residents can look up how their lot is currently zoned and how it would change under the proposed amendments using an interactive map (https: stpaul.maps.arcgis.com apps/dashboards/e6748933eeld4591ba5d2764aaa99ba5) on the city's website. What other changes are being proposed? The city would update dimensional standards and other requirements so someone could feasibly build the type of housing the new zoning districts would permit. For instance, planners heard from the community and industry experts that setback and per -unit lot area minimums often limit a property owner's options — so the city wants to reduce both standards to allow more flexibility. The amendments would build upon minor code tweaks (https://www.startribune.com/st-paul-zoning-changes- pave-the-way-for-smaller-homes- cottage-clusters/600137974/?refresh=true)-the City Council approved last year to facilitate the development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs), which are smaller, secondary housing units on the same lot as a single-family home. St. Paul would allow each single-family dwelling to have up to two ADUs, one of which must be detached from the main home. The proposal also tackles standards for cluster developments, which are groups of multiple 1-to-4-unit dwellings on one lot, with a shared common space like a courtyard. Have other cities passed policies like this? Yes. All this may sound familiar because Minneapolis drew national attention in 2018, when it became the first city in the nation to loosen single-family zoning rules. St. Paul also studied subsequent state laws passed in Oregon and California and drew particular inspiration from changes to Portland, Ore.'s zoning code passed in 2021. In Minneapolis, the changes have been slow to catch on. The city is in the process of updating its zoning code standards to align with the broader changes. Until that happens, some property owners may have to seek variances (https://www.startribune.com/north-minneapolis-2040-plan-triplex- rejected/600264741/?refresh=true)_to fit a duplex or triplex on a lot that formerly housed a single-family home — a process that can be costly, timely and uncertain. Minneapolis is also appealing a Minnesota Court of Appeals ruling f https: //www.startribune.com/lawsuit-challenging-minneapolis-2040-plan-headed-back- to-district-court-for-more-proceedings/600238959/)_that sided with environmentalists who challenged the city's 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which included the elimination of single-family zoning. The opposing groups argued that a full build -out of the 2040 Plan could cause environmental damage and the city should have conducted a review required under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act. A St. Paul planning department spokesperson declined to comment on whether the city has concerns about similar challenges. When would these changes be implemented? https://www.startribune.com/st-pauI-zoning-housing-single-family-duplex-triplex-accessory-dwelling-unit-development/600266823/ 3/4 4/14/23, 11:00 AM Duplexes, town homes, cluster developments: What you need to know about St. Paul's proposed zoning changes The Planning Commission will host a public hearing on the proposal Friday at 8:30 a.m. in room 40 at City Hall. More information on the proposed changes is available on the city's website (https://www.atpaul.gov/departments/planning-and-economic- development planning/current-activities/1-4-unit-housing-study. After reviewing feedback, the commission will decide whether to recommend the zoning amendments to the City Council. The public would have another chance to weigh in on the proposed changes at a council hearing, likely in late spring or early summer. After that, if the council votes in favor of the changes, the city would likely update some of its processes to reflect the new laws. City planners acknowledged that financing and building code requirements can create challenges for small-scale projects, which may not be viable for large developers looking to make a market rate return of 15% or more, according to the memo. If the changes pass, staff said they would look for ways to engage and empower small-scale developers and homeowners, who could use the additional units to house a relative or earn extra income. "We know construction costs are very expensive," Planning Director Luis Pereira said. "So will this encourage some folks across the city to consider investing in an additional unit on their property, or converting what they have now?" "We expect this to continue to evolve as the market changes, as preferences change, as the population ages, as the population gets more diverse," he said. Katie Galioto is a reporter covering St. Paul City Hall for the Star Tribune. She previously covered the Duluth/Superior region while based in the paper's bureau Up North. katie.galioto@startribune.com 612-673-4478 katiegalioto https://www.startribune.com/st-pauI-zoning-housing-single-family-duplex-triplex-accessory-dwelling-unit-development/600266823/ 4/4