The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPL PACKET 08182020 If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City Clerk at 612-782-3313 or email city@savmn.com. People who are deaf or hard of hearing can contact us by using 711 Relay. Our Mission is to be a progressive and livable community, a walkable village, which is sustainable, safe and secure. The meeting can be viewed live via cable channel 16 in the North Suburbs or the web broadcast at https://webstreaming.ctv15.org/regionview.php?regionid=64. Due to health concerns and limited seating, we encourage use of virtual option by using this link https://www.savmn.com/Calendar.aspx?EID=996&month=8&year=2020&day=12&calType=0 There is also a dial-in option available. Members of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so in person. For those not in attendance, If you wish to submit a comment or question, electronically submit your comments at https://www.savmn.com/FormCenter/Public-Comments-for-City-Meetings-conduc-20/Public- Comments-for-Planning-Commission--95 no later than 5:30 pm on the day of the Planning Commission meeting. Following guidance from state health officials, some commissioners may choose to participate in upcoming meetings electronically pursuant to MN Stat. §13D.021. Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on all of the following items: I. Approval of the August 18, 2020 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. (action requested) II. Approval of the April 21, 2020 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. (action requested) III. Public Hearing. A. Consider a request for an amendment to the Silver Lake Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) at 3725 Stinson Blvd. This public hearing will be to consider the application of Interstate Development for a Preliminary Plan stage of the Silver Lake Village PUD. IV. Staff Reports. V. Other Business. A. Consider scheduling a work session of the Planning Commission to discuss (1) Temporary Signs, and (2) Accessory Buildings CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA AUGUST 18, 2020 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 PM If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City Clerk at 612-782-3313 or email city@savmn.com. People who are deaf or hard of hearing can contact us by using 711 Relay. Our Mission is to be a progressive and livable community, a walkable village, which is sustainable, safe and secure. VI. Community Forum. Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any City business item not included on the regular agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, sign their name and address on the form at the podium, state their name and address for the Clerk’s record, and limit their remarks to five minutes. Generally, the Planning Commission will not take official action on items discussed at this time, but may typically refer the matter to staff for a future report or direct the matter to be scheduled on an upcoming agenda. VII. Information and Announcements. VIII. Adjournment. CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2 3 APRIL 21, 2020 4 7:00 p.m. 5 6 CALL TO ORDER. 7 8 Chairperson Westrick called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. 9 10 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 11 12 Chairperson Westrick invited the Commission and the audience to join her in the Pledge of 13 Allegiance. 14 15 ROLL CALL. 16 17 Commissioners Present: Chair Westrick, Commissioners Socha, Neumann, Payne, Rude, and 18 Erickson. 19 20 Absent: Commissioner Morita. 21 22 Also Present: None 23 24 Commissioner Neumann was unable to participate verbally due to technical difficulties. 25 26 I. APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 21, 2020, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 27 AGENDA. 28 29 Motion by Commissioner Socha, seconded by Commissioner Rude, to approve the April 21, 30 2020, Planning Commission agenda. 31 32 Motion carried 6-0. 33 34 II. APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 18, 2020, REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION 35 MEETING MINUTES. 36 37 Motion by Commissioner Rude, seconded by Commissioner Payne, to approve the February 38 18, 2020, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 39 40 Motion carried 6-0. 41 42 III. PUBLIC HEARING. 43 44 A. Consider a request for a Preliminary Plat to Divide Current Parcel at 3800 Silver 45 Lake Road into two separate parcels. 46 47 Chair Westrick reviewed how the public hearing will proceed this evening. This item will 48 come before Council on May12, 2020. 49 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 21, 2020 Page 2 1 Chairperson Westrick opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. 2 3 City Planner Grittman reviewed the request for a Preliminary Plat to divide current parcel at 4 3800 Silver Lake Road into two separate parcels. 5 6 Commissioner Socha wondered if there was anything that would prohibit the owner of these 7 two parcels from selling them separately or whether granting this motion would allow the two 8 parcels to be sold separately to different owners. Mr. Grittman explained technically it would 9 allow the parcels to be conveyed separately because they would be two legal parcels. In a 10 practical matter that is highly unlikely because the project is regulated by both a PUD 11 agreement which regulates the specifics of what can be developed and how they inter-relate to 12 each other and it is also subject to a Tac Increment Financing (TIF) redevelopment agreement 13 which is specifically written with the Doran Companies as a party. It would be exceedingly 14 difficult without a significant amount of further Council and probably HRA approval to 15 actually sell these separately as a separate project. Even if these were conveyed separately, 16 without any further approvals these parcels would still be subject to all of the PUD 17 requirements that are part of the original approval. It is unlikely, but possible. 18 19 Chairperson Westrick asked if the property owner was present for questions. 20 21 Mr. Grittman indicated the property owner was not present and believed they were monitoring 22 the meeting but would stand with the staff presentation for the time being. 23 24 Chair Westrick asked if there were any responses from the public on this item. 25 26 Mr. Grittman indicated staff has not received any comments and there was no one in the 27 Chamber audience. 28 29 Chairperson Westrick closed the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. 30 31 Commissioner Rude asked if the reason for this item was to aid in the financing. Mr. 32 Grittman indicated that was correct. The financing would be separated between the first and 33 second phase. 34 35 Commissioner Rude asked if there was any concern with the outlot being a separate third lot. 36 Mr. Grittman explained there should not be any concern and it would continue to be an outlot 37 and has public improvements in that. The PUD requirements for that is it would need to 38 continue to remain an outlot. It already is technically an outlot and separate from the 39 subdivision. There is no reason to wrap it into the subdivision and is controlled by the PUD 40 agreement. 41 42 Commissioner Payne understood this is a two-phase project and would dividing this into two 43 separate lots have an affect on the calendar for that two-phase project. Would it delay 44 anything. Mr. Grittman indicated it should not have any impact and the applicants have 45 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 21, 2020 Page 3 indicated that the construction should remain as originally anticipated, the economy 1 notwithstanding. 2 3 Commissioner Erickson noted he was not a part of the original PUD approval discussion so 4 one question he would have is if there is a separate parcel, even if the timing does not change, 5 is there now a greater possibility that the second parcel could be sold to someone else and then 6 there would be the likelihood that the new owner could develop something that is not to the 7 specifications of the original project and could be something that does not match the original 8 plans. He thought that would be a concern and wondered if the PUD would cover those kinds 9 of concerns. Mr. Grittman stated the PUD would control any development on the site. 10 11 Mr. Casey indicated the project owner is on the line and available for comments and 12 questions. 13 14 Mr. Even Doran indicated he could answer questions. He stated this is a fairly standard 15 process for them and have done this multiple times in the Twin Cities. It is really about 16 timing and when the land is being conveyed and then financing put into place. Most banks 17 will not necessarily place financing on parcels where they think a different bank might come 18 in and finance a different phase of the property. He explained the bank does not want to have 19 competing interest in a blended single plat version of the project. Most banks today typically 20 require a plat boundary which is what is essentially driving this subdivision. 21 22 Chair Westrick stated this information talked about modification to the emergency response in 23 Phase 2 and would be subject to Fire Chief approval. She assumed this was not significant 24 and did not see anything referencing this in the recommendations. Mr. Grittman explained 25 that originally it was anticipated that the developer might construct the entire surface parking 26 lot around the entire site as they were building out the first building on the north side and 27 would use the south boundary parking lot as emergency vehicle access to get around the 28 building on the south side. The applicants are asking to modify that and rather than building 29 the entire paved area on the south side that they would have an interim emergency vehicle 30 access that skirts through the middle of the project along that boundary line temporarily until 31 the second phase is ready for construction. That is the intent of that comment. The Police and 32 Fire Chief have been looking at that and have been discussing that with the developer and 33 City Engineer. 34 35 Motion by Commissioner Socha, seconded by Commissioner Erickson, to recommend that the 36 City Council approve a Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Silver Lake Village 3rd Addition, 37 with the conditions as detailed in the staff report. 38 39 Motion carried 6-0. 40 41 IV. STAFF REPORTS 42 43 City Planner Grittman reviewed Worksession items the Planning Commission has been 44 working on over the past couple of months which have been put on hold and staff plans on 45 bringing those items back when a more normal type of meeting and quorum is available. 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 21, 2020 Page 4 1 Mr. Grittman explained the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan was approved by the 2 Community Development Committee and the Environmental Committee of the Met Council 3 over the last couple of weeks and is on the Metropolitan Council agenda for tomorrow 4 afternoon. Staff is hopeful and expect to have an approved Met Council Comprehensive Plan. 5 6 V. OTHER BUSINESS – NONE. 7 8 VI. COMMUNITY FORUM – NONE. 9 10 VII. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS – NONE. 11 12 VIII. ADJOURNMENT. 13 14 Motion by Commissioner Payne, seconded by Commissioner Rude to adjourn. 15 16 Motion carried 6-0. 17 18 Chairperson Westrick adjourned the meeting at 7:43 p.m. 19 20 Respectfully submitted, 21 Sue Osbeck 22 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 23 MEMORANDUM To: St. Anthony Village Planning Commission From: Stephen Grittman, City Planner Date: Planning Commission Meeting – August 18, 2020 NAC Project No. 323.01 - 20.14 Request: Request for a Preliminary Plan Planned Unit Development – Stinson Apartments Property Address: 3725 Stinson Lake Road Property PID: 313023330209 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff has reviewed the project for land use compliance with the intent and policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and for zoning consistency with the R-4, Multiple Family Residential District as a baseline. The Comprehensive Plan promotes high density multiple family residential uses of up to 40 units per acre upon the subject site. The proposed PUD meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for the majority of the baseline standards. The principal areas of flexibility which have been requested under the PUD include the following: 1) Residential Density. The allowance of a residential density greater than 40 units per acre upon the subject site. Specifically, a density of 44.7 units per acre is proposed (38 units on 0.85 acres of land). For comparison purposes, the baseline R-4 zoning district allows up to 25 units per acre without PUD flexibility. 2) Side Yard Setback. A side yard setback less than 30 feet. The City’s R-4 District imposes a 30-foot building setback requirement along side yards which are adjacent to public rights-of-way. A 20-foot setback is proposed on the north side of the apartment building (along 38th Avenue NE). August 18, 2020 Page 2 3) Parking Supply. A parking supply of less than 2 spaces per unit as imposed in the R-4 zoning district. A total of 46 parking spaces are proposed which results in a ratio of 1.2 spaces per unit. This number is equal to the total number of bedrooms proposed in the project. 4) Covered (Enclosed) Parking. The allowance of no covered (enclosed) parking stalls. The City’s R-4 District standard requires at least half of all parking stalls to be covered/enclosed. 5) Impervious Surface Coverage. The allowance of impervious surface coverage which exceeds 50 percent of the area of the site (as imposed in the R-4 zoning district). The proposed site plan calls for 76.7 percent of the site to be devoted to impervious surface. Staff believes that the flexibility requested under the PUD is appropriate, given the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and the related improvements and amenities proposed as part of the project. Staff is recommending approval of the Preliminary Plan stage of the PUD for the Stinson Apartments project, with a series of conditions as noted in the summary section of the report which follows. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Interstate Development Owner: Apache Redevelopment, LLC Location: 3725 Stinson Boulevard Existing Land Use Vacant Zoning: PUD, Silver Lake Village PUD Surrounding Land North: Multi-family housing, zoned PUD Use / Zoning: South: Restaurant, zoned PUD East: Multi-family housing, zoned PUD West: Multi-family housing (City of Columbia Heights) Deadline for Agency Application Complete Date: July 23, 2020 Action: 60 Days: September 21, 2020 Letter Sent: NA 120 Days: November 20, 2020 August 18, 2020 Page 3 ANALYSIS Background. The applicant is proposing to construct a three-story, 38-unit apartment building upon a vacant, 0.85-acre site located south of 38th Avenue Northeast and east of Stinson Boulevard. Of the 38 proposed units, 30 are to be one-bedroom and 8 are to be two-bedroom. According to the applicant, the apartment units are intended to target renters who wish to live in “new construction” but cannot afford rents associated with typical luxury apartments. In this regard, the target resident profile for the proposed apartment building project is an annual household income starting in the low to mid $40,000 range. The applicant has indicated that the apartment building will incorporate several features which are common in luxury apartment developments. These features include the following: • Quality exterior finishes (cement board and brick veneer siding) • Quality interior fixtures, flooring, cabinetry and countertops (solid surface) • Ceilings which measure 9 feet in height • In-unit washers and dryers August 18, 2020 Page 4 The subject site is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development. Within PUD zoning districts, uses and development parameters/requirements are specified in a PUD development agreement. Planned Unit Development Purpose. In consideration of PUD applications, it is important that the purpose of planned unit development be considered and that a determination be made that such purpose will be fulfilled. Generally speaking, planned unit development is intended to allow a mixture of uses and/or flexibility from the strict terms of the Zoning Ordinance in return for higher site and building design standards than what would otherwise be allowed. Section 152.202 of the Zoning Ordinance specifically states that planned unit development may allow the following: (A) Variety. Within a comprehensive site design concept, a mixture of land uses, housing types and densities; (B) Sensitivity. Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes, minimum house sizes, minimum requirements, and other performance standards associated with traditional zoning, a PUD can maximize the development potential of land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics; (C) Efficiency. The consolidation of areas for recreation and reductions in street lengths and other utility-related expenses; (D) Density transfer. The project density may be clustered, basing density on a number of units per acre in place of specific lot dimensions; and (E) District integration. The combination of uses which are allowed in separate zoning districts such as: 1. Mixed residential uses to allow both densities and unit types to be varied within the project; 2. Mixed residential uses with increased density based upon the greater sensitivity of PUD projects to regulation; and 3. Mixed land uses with the integration of compatible land uses within the project. August 18, 2020 Page 5 Existing PUD. While the subject site lies within the boundaries of the Silver Lake PUD (approved in 2004), the PUD does not include an approved conceptual development plan for the subject site. In this regard, no modifications to the original terms of the PUD approval or the processing of a PUD amendment are necessary. Processing. To accommodate the project, a two-stage review process will take place. The application under consideration is the Preliminary PUD Plan stage. Generally speaking, Preliminary Plan approval is similar to a basic rezoning in that it establishes that the proposed use is appropriate for the subject site. Also, as part of Preliminary Plan review, various conditions of approval are typically imposed. The Preliminary Plan will be subject to a public hearing, review and recommendation by the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council. The second stage is the Final PUD Plan which basically serves to implement the various conditions of Preliminary Plan approval and ensure that such conditions have been satisfied. The Final Plan will be subject to review and approval by the City Council. No public hearing is required for Final Plan consideration. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan. According to the St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Metropolitan Council has classified St. Anthony Village as an “urban community.” “Urban communities” are expected to plan for forecasted population and household growth at average densities of at least 10 units per acre for new development and redevelopment. In addition, “urban communities” are expected to target opportunities for intensive development near regional transit investments. The Land Use Plan included in the draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan directs high density residential use of the subject site. The Plan also establishes a desired density range of 20 to 40 units per acre for high density residential development. Proposed Residential Density. The applicant has proposed a residential density of 44.7 units per acre (38 dwelling units/0.85 acres) which exceeds the density range directed by the City’s draft 2040 Plan. As previously indicated, the applicant has requested flexibility from this density directive via the PUD. In previous review of the PUD concept plan, Staff raised two options available to the City to address the density issue. These options were as follows: A. Expand the area of the subject site such that the density directives of the Plan can be satisfied. This would basically involve the acquisition of a portion of the restaurant property which abuts the subject site to the south. August 18, 2020 Page 6 B. Consider areas of the Silver Lake PUD which have been built out at lower density and transferring a portion (or portions) of that allowance to the subject site such that the “overall density of the PUD is consistent with the density directives of the Plan. In consideration of the preceding options, the City Council and Planning Commission were supportive of the idea of allowing the proposed development to utilize dwelling unit / development density rights which were afforded other sites in the Silver Lake PUD but were not used. Densities in the Silver Lake PUD vary widely, and there is little remaining land to develop. Capping the project at 40 units per acre would result in a unit count of 34 units. As such, the increase proposed by the applicants is a total of 4 units over the cap. Averaging this unit count over the larger district would result in an insignificant impact to the PUD density. Affordable Housing. The housing aspect of the project potentially raises the issue of affordability. The City’s Comprehensive Plan identifies several aspects of affordability and density. The Plan notes that for existing housing stock, St. Anthony Village provides a greater ratio of affordable housing, a greater ratio of rental housing, and a greater ratio of multiple family housing that the metropolitan area in general. This is also true for most aspects of affordability when compared to nearby suburban communities. With regard to planned housing and affordability, the Metropolitan Council assigned (as a part of the 2040 Plan Update process) an allocation for 152 additional “affordable” units to St. Anthony for the 2021-2030 decade. The Plan accommodates this allocation with land designated for affordable residential development of more than 460 units. The proposed apartment project serves to implement the City’s Land Use Plan which directs high density residential uses upon the subject site. In this regard, the project provides a potential “opportunity” for additional affordable housing units in the City. Moreover, it is worthwhile noting that this supply of affordable units would be provided without need for public subsidy. Land Use Compatibility. In consideration of the proposed apartment building project, a determination should be made that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses. The subject site is bordered by multi-family housing to the northeast, east and west, and by a commercial uses to the south and north: restaurant to the south, car wash and vacant retail center to the north. With this in mind, the proposed multi-family housing project will be contiguous to similar uses and therefore is considered generally compatible with surrounding uses (and not an isolated use). Site Access. Access to the subject site is to be provided from the north via 38th Avenue NE and from the west via Stinson Boulevard. Appropriately, both access points are located a August 18, 2020 Page 7 significant distance form the Stinson Boulevard/38th Avenue NE intersection such that stacked vehicles at the intersection will not negatively impact site entry and exit maneuvers. Access-related issues should be subject to further comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. Site and Building Layout. The site and building layout are considered well-conceived and respectful of the site’s context. The proposed apartment building is situated in the northwest corner of the site which enables site access and egress to occur in locations which will not conflict with traffic at the Stinson Boulevard / 38th Avenue NE intersection. Also, to be noted is that front yard planting areas are proposed along both Stinson Boulevard (30 feet in depth) and 38th Avenue NE (20 feet in depth). Setbacks. The PUD zoning district does not impose specific structure setback requirements. For reference purposes however, the following table illustrates setback requirements imposed in the City’s R-4 Multiple Family Residential zoning district (commonly applied to high density residential housing projects) and setbacks proposed by the applicant: R-4 District Setback Proposed Setback Front Yard 30 feet 30 feet Side Yard Along ROW Interior 30 feet 20 feet 15 feet (north) 77 feet (south) Rear Yard 40 feet or 20 % of the lot depth, whichever is greater 61 feet With the exception of the north side yard, proposed structure setbacks meet or exceed the requirements imposed in the City’s R-4 District. As shown above, a 20-foot setback is proposed north of the apartment building. As a result, setback flexibility via the PUD has been requested. Compliance with the 30-foot setback is problematic in consideration of the limited width of the lot, parking lot dimensional requirements (necessary to ensure proper functioning) and interior dwelling unit configurations. For context, the two multi-family buildings to the east are placed approximately 15-20 from the curb line of the extension of 38th Avenue NE through their development. With a 20 foot setback proposed on this project, and the street right of way, the Interstate project would be approximately 33 feet from the curbline of 38th Avenue. August 18, 2020 Page 8 Off-Street Parking Supply. According to the Zoning Ordinance, apartments must provide two off-street spaces per unit, one of which is enclosed. In this regard, a total of 76 off-street parking stalls are required, 38 of which must be covered or enclosed. The applicants have proposed a total of 46 spaces (1.2 spaces per unit) on the site. The 46 parking stalls match the number of bedrooms to be provided in the apartment building. As previously indicated, the applicant has requested flexibility from the required parking supply via the PUD. In this regard, the City would need to allow flexibility from the general ordinance requirement as part of the PUD approval. Reliable research related to the number of parking spaces required for suburban multiple family buildings with access to transit is provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) “Parking Generation” manual. There is extensive transit coverage in the Silver Lake Village area, and Metro Transit is currently working on enhancing its transit stop capacity along Silver Lake Road. For such developments, a parking requirement equal to one parking space per .9 bedrooms can predict actual parking demand. As previously indicated, the total number of bedrooms in the proposed apartment building is 46, which results in a ratio of 1.2 spaces per bedroom, which should be adequate to serve the project. The applicant is cautioned that overflow parking would likely need to be accommodated on its companion property to the south if needed, as on-street parking can be tightly limited in the area. Covered (Enclosed) Parking. According to the Ordinance, apartments must provide two off-street spaces per unit, one of which is enclosed. The applicant has requested flexibility from the covered (enclosed) parking requirement via the PUD in order all surface parking stalls, none of which are to be covered/enclosed. According to the applicant, the limited size of the subject site (0.85 acres), coupled with a desire to provide units which are affordable to the majority of residents in the area, make the construction of enclosed parking spaces not financially feasible. As a condition of preliminary plan PUD approval, City Officials should make a determination that the proposed surface parking stalls (uncovered) are acceptable. Dimensional Requirements. According to the Ordinance, off-street parking spaces must measure not less than 9 feet in width and 19 feet in depth. Appropriately, all surface August 18, 2020 Page 9 parking stalls and drive aisles meet the minimum dimensional requirements of the Ordinance. Disabled Parking. According to the American Disability Act, required accessible spaces (for persons with disabilities) varies by the number of spaces in a parking lot. For parking lots which provide 26 to 50 spaces, two spaces must be devoted to use by disabled persons. Appropriately, two spaces are proposed which are to be devoted to use by persons with disabilities. Building Height. While the PUD zoning district does not impose a specific height requirement and can provide for “flexibility” in this regard, it is important to note that the City’ R-4, Multiple Family Residential District imposes a maximum height requirement of 3 stories or 35 feet. The proposed apartment building measures 34 feet in height which meets the maximum height requirement imposed in the R-4 zoning district. Impervious Surface Coverage. The R-4 zoning district imposes a maximum impervious surface coverage requirement of 50 percent of the area of the site. According to the submitted site plan, 76.7 percent of the subject site (0.65 acres) is to be impervious. Via the PUD, the applicant has requested flexibility from the maximum 50 percent impervious surface coverage requirement. The applicant has noted that the proposed amount of impervious surface is similar to the gas station/carwash use which previously occupied the subject site. The applicant has also indicated a stormwater management plan being developed for the site is expected to satisfy both the Rice Creek Watershed agency and the City. Issues related to the referenced stormwater management plan and impacts associated with the proposed impervious surface coverage should be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. Building Materials. According to the submitted building elevations, the apartment building is to be finished in a variety of materials including brick veneer, fiber cement lap siding, prefinished metal accents and glass. The apartment building will primarily be finished in varieties of earth tone colors. The proposed building materials are consistent with Ordinance requirements and the color scheme is considered consistent with the neighborhood and with applicable standards found in the City’s newer multi-family housing stock. Landscaping. A preliminary landscape plan has been submitted for review. The plan illustrates a significant number of tree plantings along Stinson Boulevard and 38th Avenue August 18, 2020 Page 10 NE. Included are a series of Boulevard Linden trees along 38th Avenue NE and what appears to be Prairiefire Flowering Crabapple trees along Stinson Boulevard. Also proposed are a variety of plantings near the building’s western entrance (along Stinson Boulevard) and adjacent to an outdoor patio space located in the northwest corner of the site. Foundation plantings are also on all sides of the apartment building. According to the Ordinance, multi-family residential buildings which are located in R-4 zoning districts and include over 25 dwelling units must provide 12 trees plus one tree for every five units over 25. In this regard, the proposed 38-unit apartment building is required to provide a minimum of 14 trees. In satisfaction of this requirement, a total of 21 trees are proposed upon the subject site. The Ordinance does not impose minimum size requirements for plantings. Sidewalks. The submitted site plan illustrates concrete sidewalks along the north and west sides of the site (along Stinson Boulevard and 38th Avenue NE). The sidewalk along Stinson Boulevard presently exists while the sidewalk along 38th Avenue NE will be new. Both sidewalks are expected to serve the site well, and connect it to neighboring pedestrian and bicycle routes. Lighting. To date, a lighting plan has not been submitted for review. As a condition of Final PUD approval, a lighting plan should be submitted for review which demonstrates compliance with City requirements. Signage. The Preliminary PUD application does not include any information related to signage. As a condition of Final PUD approval, a sign plan must be submitted which demonstrates compliance with applicable City sign requirements. Trash Handling. A trash handling enclosure is proposed in the extreme southeast corner of the site. As a condition of Final PUD approval, the applicant should provide details related trash enclosure design. The enclosure should utilize materials typical of the principal building. Grading, Drainage, and Utilities. Issues related to grading, drainage and utilities should be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. PUD Agreement. As a condition of Final PUD approval, the applicant will be required to enter into a PUD agreement with the City and post all the necessary securities required by it. August 18, 2020 Page 11 SUMMARY AND STAFF/PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Preliminary Plan PUD - Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Access-related issues shall be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. 2. In recognition of other development sites within the Silver Lake PUD which were developed at densities less than 40 units per acre, the City finds the proposed residential density (44.7 units per acre) to be acceptable. 3. The City finds that the proposed 20-foot building setback along 38th Avenue NE will not negatively impact adjacent properties and is therefore considered acceptable (within the context of the PUD). 4. The City finds that the proposed parking supply (and the deficit based on Ordinance requirements) is adequate to serve the parking demand generated by the proposed apartment building. 5. The City finds that the limited size of the subject and target tenant base justify an off- street parking supply which does not include covered spaces (within the context of the PUD). 6. In consideration if the limited site size and previous site development conditions, the City finds the proposed impervious surface coverage of 76.7 to be acceptable. 7. Impacts associated with the proposed impervious surface coverage shall be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. 8. As part of the Final PUD Plan submission, a lighting plan be submitted for review which demonstrates compliance with City requirements. 9. As part of the Final PUD Plan submission, a signage plan be submitted for review which demonstrates compliance with City requirements. 10. As part of the Final PUD Plan submission, details shall be provided related to the proposed trash enclosure design. 11. Issues related to grading, drainage, stormwater management and utilities shall be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. August 18, 2020 Page 12 12. The applicant enter into a PUD agreement with the City and post all the necessary securities required by it. 13. Consideration of comments of other City Staff. This recommendation is based on a finding that the proposal, with the conditions cited, is consistent with the requirements for PUD consideration, with the long-term objectives of the Silver Lake Village PUD, and with the recommendations and policies of the St. Anthony Comprehensive Plan. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Location map Exhibit B: Application and Supporting Material Exhibit C: Draft resolution PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2020 3725 Stinson Blvd Interstate Development: Preliminary Plan PUD PRELIMINARY –SITE LOCATION PRELIMINARY PLAN PUD –PROPOSED SITE PLAN PRELIMINARY PLAN PUD –BUILDING PERSPECTIVE DRAWING PRELIMINARY PLAN PUD –FIRST FLOOR PLAN PRELIMINARY PLAN PUD –SITE PLAN ILLUSTRATION PRELIMINARY PLAN PUD –BUILDING ELEVATIONS PUD PRELIMINARY PLAN FLEXIBILITY REQUESTS Parking supply (code requires 2 per unit, total of 76); applicant proposes 46 spaces – 1.2 per unit or 1 per bedroom. Open parking (code requires 50% of parking spaces to be covered) Lot coverage/impervious surface (R-4 code limits this to 50%); applicant’s proposal is approximately 76.7%. Density (R-4 code limits this to approximately 24 units per acre, Comprehensive Plan calls for 20-40 units per acre); applicant is proposing approximately 44 units per acre. PRELIMINARY PLAN PUD–PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Consideration of recommending approval for a Preliminary Plan PUD as presented by Interstate Development at 3725 Stinson Blvd., and with conditions, including those recommended by staff. THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK July 23, 2020 6390 Carlson Drive | Eden Prairie, MN 55346 | 651.406.8050 | www.interstatedevelopment.com July 22, 2020 RE: PUD Amendment Application Project Narrative – Stinson Apartments, St. Anthony, MN Interstate Development, an Eden Prairie based development company, in partnership with Belden River Properties, a St. Anthony based real estate company, are under contract to purchase a 0.85 acre site at 3725 Stinson Blvd, St. Anthony, MN. The partnership intends to develop an exciting new 38-unit multi- family project on this last vacant parcel of Silver Lake Village (the “Project”). The lot has sat vacant since 2006 after the demolition of the former use as a gas station/car wash. As the Project is within the Silver Lake Village PUD, we are anticipating going through a Preliminary and Final PUD Amendment process. The Project site is located at the southwest intersection of Stinson Blvd and 38th Ave NE. It is bordered by 1960’s vintage 3-story apartments to the west (in Columbia Heights), a car wash to the north, the Silver Lake Village apartment community to the east, and the Unofficial restaurant/bar to the south. The same development partnership that is planning to build this Project is also the owner of the Unofficial parcel (land and improvements). The business owner of the Unofficial restaurant is fully supportive of this Project as he recognizes the additional residents will expand his customer base as well as that of the other retail in Silver Lake Village. The Development team at Interstate and Belden River are excited about this Project as we both see the need for not just more housing but for housing that most residents in St. Anthony can afford. The price of new construction has skyrocketed the past five years which has led to most new construction having to target the higher-end demographic or the low-income demographic using tax credit financing. Our Project is targeting the renter that wants to live in new construction but can’t quite afford the typical luxury new development rents but also do not qualify for affordable housing. Our targeted resident profile will have household income starting in the low to mid-$40K range. The Project will have the same first-class finishes found in the new luxury developments with quality fixtures, flooring, cabinetry, solid surface countertops, 9-foot ceilings, and in-unit washer/dryers. The exterior design will also be of quality materials including large windows, cement board and brick veneer siding, and is comparable to the other multi-family projects in Silver Lake Village. The way that our Project can still deliver quality design and finishes yet target rents $200 to $300 below other new luxury developments are the intentional small and efficient floor plan layouts and the use of modular construction. Modular construction uses the same wood-frame construction techniques used by traditional builders, however, 90% of the construction is built offsite in a controlled factory. This leads to better quality control, reduced waste, and a shorter construction window, which all contribute to an overall lower development cost. The Project will consist of 38 units, 79% one bedrooms and 21% two bedrooms. The Project will be three stories over a concrete foundation. The site will have 46 parking spaces, one per bedroom, all of which will be surface parking. The project will have controlled access with a package room for deliveries and a lobby and outdoor patio for resident’s communal use. 6390 Carlson Drive | Eden Prairie, MN 55346 | 651.406.8050 | www.interstatedevelopment.com Some of the project elements we have incorporated in our Project are a slight departure from current city zoning guidelines. Although the site is guided as high-density residential, the small in-fill location of the Project requires these variances to make the development economically viable. As the project is already located within a PUD, we are seeking the city’s approval of these elements within the flexibility of the PUD. The main project elements needing PUD flexibility are as follows: 1) Density - The 2040 Comprehensive Plan for St. Anthony has designated the Project site as high- density residential at up to 40/units an acre. At 0.85 acres, the guidelines would limit the Project density to 34 units. Under our Project application, we are requesting a density transfer within the PUD that would allow us to build 38 units which is equivalent to 44.7 units per acre. The higher density is necessary to reduce the per unit project development and operating costs. 2) Parking – Current R-4 parking code requires two parking spaces per multi-family unit. Under our Project application, we are showing a total of 1.2 spaces per unit for a total of 46 spaces, all of which will be uncovered. Based on research from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the 5th edition of their Parking Generation Manual, the average demand generated for a suburban 3-story apartment project would have average peak parking demand of 1.31 spaces per unit. ITE also publishes average peak demand per bedroom as they do recognize that a project of one bedroom units (the Project is 79% one bedrooms) will have a lower parking demand than a project of two or more bedroom units. ITE projects the parking demand for a suburban apartment project with 95% confidence to be 0.80 spaces per bedroom, which would generate a demand much lower than the 1 space per bedroom supplied within the Project. When looking at both ITE calculations together, we feel comfortable the Project has a sufficient number of parking spaces to meet demand. If we are short of parking, as owners of the retail parcel to the south with an abundance of parking available, we will ensure the parking demand could be satisfied without the need for on-street parking. The other departure from parking code we are seeking flexibility on is the removal of the requirement of half of the parking to be covered. Due to this small in-fill location and our mission to create housing the majority of residents could afford, building a parking deck is not financially feasible. In addition, due to the modular construction design, we could only get a max of 18 parking spaces within the deck which falls well short of the parking code of 38 covered spaces. With covered parking spaces renting for $75/month at other communities, our total rents at our project will be that much further lower than our competition. Yes, we will lose some potential renters that want covered parking, but there are plenty of options for those residents to choose from in the neighboring apartment communities. However, we are confident that the first-class finishes we are offering and at a reasonable rent will be attractive enough for residents to be comfortable with the slight inconvenience of uncovered parking through the winter months. 3) Impervious Surface – The current R-4 standard for impervious surface area is 50%. Under our project application, our impervious surface area is projected to be 76.7% (0.65 acres of impervious surface area of the 0.85-acre site). Although this site had a similar impervious 6390 Carlson Drive | Eden Prairie, MN 55346 | 651.406.8050 | www.interstatedevelopment.com surface percentage under its former use as a gas station/car wash, since that use was demolished in 2006, the current impervious area is now 0.34 acres (40%). The Project will be an increase of these current levels of 0.31 acres of impervious surface area. Our civil engineer has been working on a storm water management plan and has begun conversations with the Rice Creek Watershed agency. Based on initial design work, we are confident our Project’s storm water management plan will satisfy both the watershed agency and the city of St. Anthony. Although we are asking for some PUD flexibility around these key project elements, we feel the Project fits perfectly within the PUD and is consistent with the themes residents of St. Anthony shared during the development of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan as outlined in the Housing section and are noted in bold italics below: • Overwhelming positivity for the “small town feel” of St. Anthony. These small in-fill apartment projects are a nice alternative to the self-contained, massive apartment developments that are increasingly becoming the norm. • Balance the need for housing redevelopment and property improvements with the need to maintain an affordable housing stock. The targeted rental rate is comparable to rent charged at older projects that have been renovated. The Project will add new multi-housing stock at these attractive rents without diminishing the supply of the naturally occurring affordable housing that occurs when these older projects are redeveloped. • There is an interest in increasing housing density in strategic locations (along transit routes or in underutilized areas). The Project is delivering high-density residential housing along a major transit route on Stinson Blvd. • Being inviting to new residents will keep the community vibrant. We believe the Project’s low price point for new construction and its attractive finishes and design will attract new residents to St. Anthony. • The City has housing for all types of families, households and residents at all stages of their lives. We believe the Project is offering a product type not being served by the other communities in the PUD, which are larger and heavily amenitized including covered parking. We are trying to create a modern, boutique living environment at a low price point that we feel will be attractive to a younger demographic early in their careers. • Prioritize mixed uses and allowing housing to co-occur within proximity to services, businesses, and critical infrastructure. The Project completes the Silver Lake Village PUD as it is the last remaining vacant parcel and will help bring additional customers to the struggling retail that has been hit hard by the pandemic. We look forward to working with the city of St. Anthony to further this Development Plan submittal. Sincerely, Michael Holst Interstate Development STINSON APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MINNESOTA PROJECT TEAM OWNER LAND USE APPLICATION OWNER CONTRACTOR Currently Un-named ARCHITECT DJR Architecture, Inc. 333 Washington Avenue N Union Plaza, Suite 210 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Contact: SCOTT ENGLAND 612.676.2720 612.676.2727 (fax) SENGLAND@djr-inc.com STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL CIVIL INTERSTATE DEVELOPMENT 6390 Carlson Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Contact: MICHAEL HOLST 952.658.6443 MHOLST@interstatedevelopment.com DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING + LAND SURVEYING 3339 W. Germain St. Suite 250 St. Cloud MN 56301 Contact: DAN FOLSOM, PE 320.227.0202 DJF@dte-ls.com Currently Un-named Currently Un-named LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT RINGDAHL ARCHITECTS, INC. 510 22nd Avenue East Suite 102 Alexandria, MN 56308 Contact: DUSTIN TOMOSON 320.763.9368 DUSTIN@ringdahlarchitects.com STANDARD PARKING 44 STALLS ACCESSIBLE PARKING 2 STALLS TOTAL 46 STALLS SURFACE PARKING Copyright 2020 DJR Architecture, Inc. G001 COVER SHEET ST. ANTHONY, MN 3725 STINSON BLVD 20-034 07/22/2020 LAND USE APPLICATION SHEET INDEX Sheet Number Sheet Name GENERAL G001 COVER SHEET ARCHITECTURE A110 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1 A120 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2 & 3 A150 ROOF PLAN A200 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Area Schedule Name Level Count Area CIRCULATION LEVEL 1 1 711 SF LOBBY LEVEL 1 1 528 SF MECH/ELECT LEVEL 1 1 360 SF ST LEVEL 1 2 334 SF UNIT 1A LEVEL 1 1 517 SF UNIT 1B LEVEL 1 9 4,665 SF UNIT 2A LEVEL 1 1 1,045 SF UNIT 2B LEVEL 1 1 868 SF LEVEL 1 9,030 SF CIRCULATION LEVEL 2 1 711 SF ST LEVEL 2 2 335 SF UNIT 1B LEVEL 2 10 5,194 SF UNIT 2A LEVEL 2 1 1,045 SF UNIT 2B LEVEL 2 2 1,744 SF LEVEL 2 9,030 SF CIRCULATION LEVEL 3 1 711 SF ST LEVEL 3 4 335 SF UNIT 1B LEVEL 3 10 5,194 SF UNIT 2A LEVEL 3 1 1,045 SF UNIT 2B LEVEL 3 2 1,744 SF LEVEL 3 9,030 SF Grand total 27,090 SF UNIT SCHEDULE Name Count Area UNIT 1A 1 517 SF UNIT 1B 29 15,053 SF UNIT 2A 3 3,136 SF UNIT 2B 5 4,357 SF Grand total 38 23,063 SF UP UP STINSON BLVD5'-0"SPRINKLER ROOM MAIL 126'-10" 5"16'-0"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"16'-0"5" A200B3 A200 D2 A200 D1 A200 F3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F5"22'-5"10'-6 1/2"5'-9"10'-6 1/2"22'-5"5"UNIT 2A 101 UNIT 1A 103 UNIT 1B 105 UNIT 1B 107 UNIT 1B 109 UNIT 1B 111 MECHANICAL / ELECTRICAL 125 UNIT 1B 112 UNIT 1B 110 UNIT 1B 108 UNIT 1B 106 UNIT 1B 104 UNIT 2B 102 LOBBY/AMENITY 120 STAIR A 121 CORRIDOR 123 STAIR B 124 SETBACK BOUNDARY PROPERTY LINE TRASH ENCLOSURE 18'-8"12'-0" 38TH AVE. NE 40'-0"30'-0"20'-0"30'-0"72'-6"PACKAGE ROOM 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 528 SF517 SF517 SF517 SF868 SF528 SF 1,045 SF 360 SF Copyright 2020 DJR Architecture, Inc. A110 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 1 ST. ANTHONY, MN 3725 STINSON BLVD 20-034 07/22/2020 LAND USE APPLICATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A1 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 1 N UP UP DN DN A200B3 A200 D2 A200 D1 A200 F3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F UNIT 2A 201 UNIT 1B 203 UNIT 1B 205 UNIT 1B 207 UNIT 1B 209 UNIT 2B 211 UNIT 1B 212 UNIT 1B 210 UNIT 1B 208 UNIT 1B 206 UNIT 1B 204 UNIT 2B 202 UNIT 1B 200 STAIR A 222 STAIR B 224 CORRIDOR 223 5'-0"126'-10" 5"16'-0"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"16'-0"5"5"22'-5"10'-6 1/2"5'-9"10'-6 1/2"22'-5"5"72'-6"517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 528 SF517 SF517 SF517 SF868 SF528 SF 1,045 SF 876 SF A200B3 A200 D2 A200 D1 A200 F3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F UNIT 2A 301 UNIT 1B 303 UNIT 1B 305 UNIT 1B 307 UNIT 1B 309 UNIT 2B 311 UNIT 1B 312 UNIT 1B 310 UNIT 1B 308 UNIT 1B 306 UNIT 1B 304 UNIT 2B 302 UNIT 1B 300 STAIR A 56 STAIR B 57 CORRIDOR 58 5'-0"126'-10" 5"16'-0"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"15'-8"16'-0"5"5"22'-5"10'-6 1/2"5'-9"10'-6 1/2"22'-5"5"72'-6"517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 517 SF 528 SF517 SF517 SF517 SF868 SF528 SF 1,045 SF 876 SF Copyright 2020 DJR Architecture, Inc. A120 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 2 & 3 ST. ANTHONY, MN 3725 STINSON BLVD 20-034 07/22/2020 LAND USE APPLICATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A1 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 2 1/8" = 1'-0"A3 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 3 N N A200B3 A200 D2 A200 D1 A200 F3 SLOPE 1/4" / FT RD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F OF RD RD OF RD SLOPE 1/4" / FT SLOPE 1/4" / FT SLOPE 1/4" / FT SLOPE 1/4" / FTSLOPE 1/4" / FTSLOPE 1/4" / FTSLOPE 1/4" / FT PREFIN. ALUM CAP FLASHING, TYP. ROOF HATCH PARAPET WALL BRACE LOCATIONS PARAPET WALL BRACE LOCATIONS Copyright 2020 DJR Architecture, Inc. A150 ROOF PLAN ST. ANTHONY, MN 3725 STINSON BLVD 20-034 07/22/2020 LAND USE APPLICATION 1/8" = 1'-0"D1 ROOF PLAN LEVEL 1 100' -0" LEVEL 2 110' -10 13/16" LEVEL 3 121' -9 5/8" ROOF TRUSS BEARING 130' -11 1/8" 5 6 7 7 7 4 4 8982 2310'-10 13/16"10'-10 13/16"9'-1 1/2"3'-4"ABCDEF 9 337 10 LEVEL 1 100' -0" LEVEL 2 110' -10 13/16" LEVEL 3 121' -9 5/8" ROOF TRUSS BEARING 130' -11 1/8" 1 2 3 4 33 126'-10"9'-1 1/2"10'-10 13/16"10'-10 13/16"35'-0"1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 9 4878 9 2 9 7 29 LEVEL 1 100' -0" LEVEL 2 110' -10 13/16" LEVEL 3 121' -9 5/8" ROOF TRUSS BEARING 130' -11 1/8" 9 7 2 73 3 123 8 35'-0"10'-10 13/16"10'-10 13/16"9'-1 1/2"3'-4"123456789 126'-10" 2 48 8 9 9 9 7 LEVEL 1 100' -0" LEVEL 2 110' -10 13/16" LEVEL 3 121' -9 5/8" ROOF TRUSS BEARING 130' -11 1/8" 5 21 29 9 7 74 34377 10'-10 13/16"10'-10 13/16"9'-1 1/2"3'-4"A B C D E F 8 Copyright 2020 DJR Architecture, Inc. A200 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ST. ANTHONY, MN 3725 STINSON BLVD 20-034 07/22/2020 LAND USE APPLICATION F1 3D BUILDING VIEW AT CORNER 1/8" = 1'-0"B3 EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"D2 SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"D1 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"F3 WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION KEYNOTE - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Note # Note 1 PREFINISHED METAL CANOPY AT ENTRANCE 2 EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE 3 PREFINISHED METAL EYE BROW 4 PREFINISHED METAL PARAPET CAP 5 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT DOOR & WINDOW SYSTEM 6 HOLLOW METAL DOOR - GLASS 7 FIBERGLASS WINDOWS 8 FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING, 4" EXPOSURE 9 BRICK VENEER 10 HOLLOW METAL DOOR - PAINT FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOlllllllllllllllllllFOFOFOFOFOFO lOHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEUGE UGE UGE UGE UGE UGEUGEUGEFOFOFOFOFOFOFOGASGASGASGASlllllllllllllllllllllllllllTHIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-BASE PROPOSED.DWG #### 7/20/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA 0 20'40' OHE LEGEND HYDRANT SANITARY MANHOLE GATE VALVE POWER POLE LIGHT POLE CATCH BASIN SIGN DECIDUOUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE SHRUB PEDESTAL GUY WIRE BOLLARD POWER BOX ELECTRIC METER MONITORING WELL SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT WOOD FENCE CHAINLINK FENCE WIRE FENCE STORM SEWER LINE SANITARY SEWER LINE WATERMAIN OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND FIBER UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND GAS LINE CONCRETE PAVEMENT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AGGREGATE SURFACING LANDSCAPING BUILDING UGT FO UGE GAS l W CO NOTES: 1.CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND REMOVAL LIMITS PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 2.SAWCUT CURB AND GUTTER AND SIDEWALK, OR REMOVE AT NEAREST EXPANSION JOINTS. 3.SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT FULL DEPTH AT ALL TIE-IN LOCATIONS. 4.THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN HEREIN ARE APPROXIMATE. THEY HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND/ OR RECORDS. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FIELD VERIFYING LOCATION AND ELEVATION TO ENSURE THAT ANY EXISTING UTILITIES (SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN) ARE NOT DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 5.ALL UTILITIES AND SERVICES SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN SHALL BE REMOVED OR ABANDONED WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINES. COORDINATE WITH LOCAL GAS COMPANY, UTILITY COMPANY, OR PROPER AUTHORITIES PRIOR TO REMOVAL OR ABANDONING, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6.GOPHER STATE ONE CALL DAMAGE PREVENTION SYSTEM FOR BURIED UTILITIES. 1-800-252-1166. X 38TH AVENUE NE STINSON BLVDREMOVALS PLAN C101 REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER SAWCUT CURB AND GUTTER OR REMOVE AT NEAREST EXPANSION JOINTSAWCUT CURB AND GUTTER OR REMOVE AT NEAREST EXPANSION JOINT REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER SAWCUT CURB AND GUTTER OR REMOVE AT NEAREST EXPANSION JOINT SAWCUT CURB AND GUTTER OR REMOVE AT NEAREST EXPANSION JOINT SAWCUT EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AT PROPERTY LINE REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHT POLE REMOVE TREESHANDHOLE TO REMAIN (ADJUST CASTING AS NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE PROPOSED GRADES) REMOVE EXISTING TRUNCATED DOMES REMOVE AND RELOCATE EXISTING UTILITY PEDESTAL (COORDINATE WITH LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY) SAWCUT EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK OR REMOVE AT NEAREST EXPANSION JOINT SAWCUT EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK OR REMOVE AT NEAREST EXPANSION JOINT FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOlllllllllllllllllllFOFOFOFOFOFO lOHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEUGE UGE UGE UGE UGE UGEUGEUGEFOFOFOFOFOFOFOGASGASGASGASlllllllllllllllllllllllllllTHIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-BASE PROPOSED.DWG #### 7/20/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA 0 20'40' PARKING INFORMATION PARKING STALLS 44 STALLS ACCESSIBLE STALLS 2 STALLS TOTAL STALLS 46 STALLS PROPERTY INFORMATION TOTAL PROPERTY AREA 0.850 AC DISTURBED AREA 0.93 ±AC EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.342 AC PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.652 AC NET INCREASE IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.310 AC LEGEND PROPOSED LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT PROPOSED NON-REINFORCED CONCRETE PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAGE PROPOSED PAINTED ACCESSIBLE PARKING SYMBOL PROPOSED MANHOLE PROPOSED CATCH BASIN NOTES: 1.ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FLOW LINE, CENTERLINE OF FENCE, OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3.ALL CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE WHITE IN COLOR. 4.ALL INTERIOR PARKING STALL STRIPING SHALL BE 4" AND YELLOW IN COLOR. 5.ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL STRIPING, ACCESS AISLE, AND SYMBOL SHALL BE PAINTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL AUTHORITY REQUIREMENTS. 6.GOPHER STATE ONE CALL DAMAGE PREVENTION SYSTEM FOR BURIED UTILITIES. 1-800-252-1166. FREE-STANDING GREEN SCREEN TRELLIS BUILDING SETBACK BUILDING SETBACK BUILDING SETBACKBUILDING SETBACKTRASH ENCLOSUREPROPERTY LINE46 PARKING STALLS SITE PLAN C201 38TH AVENUE NE STINSON BLVDPROPOSED BUILDING 9.00 (TYP) 8.04 9.009.00 9.00 (TYP)9.00(TYP)19.00 (TYP)19.00(TYP)19.00(TYP)8.31R 4 . 0 0 R4.0 0 R4 . 0 0 11.92 6.92 5.0023.148.93 7.005.00 8.07 12.0022.0019.31 21.54 18.00 24.00 24.003.483.443.3020.0020.0030.00 60.834.004.0043.00 R4.00R4.0 0 29.98 30.2821.785.00PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK PROPOSED 5' PUBLIC SIDEWALK PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN RAMP PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVE APRON PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVE APRON PROPOSED CONCRETE INTEGRAL SIDEWALK PROPOSED B612 CURB & GUTTER (TYP) PROPOSED B612 CURB & GUTTER (TYP) 1.5' HIGH BACK CURB RETAINING WALL 17.065.0062.00R 4 . 0 0 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN NO PARKING SIGN 15 16 15 PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN RAMP FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOlllllllllllllllllllFOFOFOFOFOFO lOHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEUGE UGE UGE UGE UGE UGEUGEUGEFOFOFOFOFOFOFOGASGASGASGASllllllllllllllllllllllllllll >959 959 960 961 961 96 1 960959958 958.40 959.00 958.49 958.49 958.65 959.55 961.64 962.05 961.83 961.65 961.65 959.42958.99 958.84 958.77 958.84 959.00957.23 959.00 957.35 957.32957.23 957.78 958.04 958.15 958.55 958.00 959.89 960.59 959.00 960.15 960.50 961.13 960.53 961.22960.50959.41958.30 961.65 958.50 957.15 957.67 958.97 959.07 960.38 960.38 960.35 958.30 958.30 958.91 959.82 960.00 960.00959.82 ??? 960.39 959.79 959.54 958.95959.60 958.48 960.25 THIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-BASE PROPOSED.DWG #### 7/20/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA XXXX.XX GRADING LEGEND = EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR = EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR = EXISTING CONTOUR LABEL = PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR = PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR = PROPOSED CONTOUR LABEL = EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION* = PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION* *SPOT ELEVATIONS ALONG CURB & GUTTER AND OTHER REVEALS ARE TO FLOWLINE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 100 0 20'40' NOTES: 1.THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN HEREIN ARE APPROXIMATE. THEY HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND/ OR RECORDS. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FIELD VERIFYING LOCATION AND ELEVATION TO ENSURE THAT ANY EXISTING UTILITIES (SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN) ARE NOT DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 2.SIDEWALKS SHALL MEET ADA REQUIREMENTS, AND SHALL NOT EXCEED 2.00% CROSS SLOPE, OR 5.00% LONGITUDINAL SLOPE. 3.CONCRETE ENTRANCES AND APPROACHES SHALL NOT EXCEED 2.00% CROSS SLOPE IN SIDEWALK AREAS. 4.ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS SHALL MEET ADA REQUIREMENTS, AND SHALL NOT EXCEED 2.00% CROSS SLOPE IN ALL DIRECTIONS. 5.ONCE SUBGRADE ELEVATION IS REACHED, SCARIFY EXISTING SUBGRADE AND RECOMPACT TO 95% OF THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 6.SUBGRADE AND FILL AREAS UNDER PROPOSED PAVEMENT, SIDEWALKS, AND CURBS SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 100% OF THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 7.ALL EXCESS OR WASTE MATERIAL GENERATED AS PART OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS. 8.IN ADDITION TO THESE PLANS, A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STUDY HAS BEEN PROVIDED. THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STUDY INCLUDES IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING STORMWATER PROTECTION FOR THE SITE, SUCH AS CONCRETE WASH-OUTS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HANDLING/SPILLS, EROSION CONTROL INSTALLATION, EROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE, ETC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW THE STORMWATER BOOK AND USE THE INFORMATION TO COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS. 9.GOPHER STATE ONE CALL DAMAGE PREVENTION SYSTEM FOR BURIED UTILITIES. 1-800-252-1166. GRADING PLAN C301 38TH AVENUE NE STINSON BLVDPROPOSED BUILDING FFE=960.50 MATCH INTO EXISTING CONCRETE MATCH INTO EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER MNDOT STANDARD PEDESTRIAN RAMP (MATCH INTO EXISTING TOP BACK OF CURB) MNDOT STANDARD PEDESTRIAN RAMP (MATCH INTO EXISTING CONCRETE) MATCH INTO EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK MATCH INTO EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER MATCH INTO EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER MATCH INTO EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER MATCH INTO EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT UNDERGROUND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 2.00% MAX. CROSS SLOPE TOWARDS STREET GRADE BREAKMATCH INTO EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK MATCH INTO EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK 1.5' HIGH BACK CURB RETAINING WALL FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOlllllllllllllllllllFOFOFOFOFOFO lOHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEUGE UGE UGE UGE UGE UGEUGEUGEFOFOFOFOFOFOFOGASGASGASGASllllllllllllllllllllllllllll >THIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-BASE PROPOSED.DWG #### 7/20/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA = EXISTING HYDRANT = EXISTING CURB STOP = EXISTING GATE VALVE = EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE = EXISTING CLEANOUT = EXISTING STORM MANHOLE = EXISTING CATCH BASIN = EXISTING CULVERT APRON = EXISTING WATER LINE = EXISTING SANITARY LINE = EXISTING STORM LINE 0 20'40' NOTES: 1.THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN HEREIN ARE APPROXIMATE. THEY HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND/ OR RECORDS. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FIELD VERIFYING LOCATION AND ELEVATION TO ENSURE THAT ANY EXISTING UTILITIES (SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN) ARE NOT DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE BUILDING UTILITY CONNECTION SIZES, LOCATIONS, AND ELEVATIONS WITH PLUMBING, MECHANICAL, AND ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS. 3.ALL WATER PIPING SHALL BE BURIED A MINIMUM OF 8'. 4.SEE WATER DETAILS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 5.WATER LINES SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 10' OF SEPARATION FROM SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE. 6.SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUTS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN 5' OF THE BUILDING FOR UNIT'S CONNECTION. 7.SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT SPACING SHALL NOT EXCEED 90'. 8.SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 2.00% GRADE. 9.SEE SANITARY SEWER DETAILS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 10.ALL CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINNESOTA STATE PLUMBING CODE. 11.ALL PIPING SHALL BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINNESOTA STATE PLUMBING CODE. 12.ALL IMPROVEMENTS SHALL REMAIN VISIBLE FOR INSPECTION . 13.GOPHER STATE ONE CALL DAMAGE PREVENTION SYSTEM FOR BURIED UTILITIES. 1-800-252-1166 = PROPOSED HYDRANT = PROPOSED CURB STOP = PROPOSED GATE VALVE = PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE = PROPOSED CLEANOUT = PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE = PROPOSED CATCH BASIN = PROPOSED CULVERT APRON = PROPOSED WATER LINE = PROPOSED SANITARY LINE = PROPOSED STORM LINE CO D lUTILITY LEGEND l>DESCRIPTION CB 1 CB 2 STMH 1 STRUCTURE TYPE MNDOT STORM MANHOLE 48-4020 MNDOT STORM MANHOLE 48-4020 MNDOT STORM MANHOLE 48-4020 UTILITY PLAN C401 38TH AVENUE NE STINSON BLVDPROPOSED BUILDING FFE=960.50 CB-2 RIM:958.00 INV:952.50 CB-1 RIM:957.15 INV:952.50 CORE DRILL AND CONNECT TO EXISTING CATCH BASIN INV:952.10 54 LF - 12" RCP @ 0.50% 20 LF - 12" RCP @ 0.50% CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" GATE VALVE 27 LF - 6" PVC C900 @ 8' MIN. BURY 29 LF - 6" PVC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE @ 2.00% MIN. STMH-1 RIM:957.58 INV:952.37 SUMP:950.37 UNDERGROUND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BOTTOM ELEV:951.00 3 LF - 12" RCP @ 0.50% CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" SANITARY SEWER SERVICE STUB 6" CLEANOUT WITHIN 5' FROM BUILDING 30 LF - 8" PVC @ 0.50% CONNECT TO ROOF DRAIN (SEE ARCHITECTURAL) FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOlllllllllllllllllllFOFOFOFOFOFO lOHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEUGE UGE UGE UGE UGE UGEUGEUGEFOFOFOFOFOFOFOGASGASGASGASllllllllllllllllllllllllllll >==========THIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-BASE PROPOSED.DWG #### 7/20/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA 0 20'40' NOTES: 1.ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE FINAL GRADED AND PERMANENTLY STABILIZED WITH THE SEED MIX IDENTIFIED ON PLANS. 2.INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED ON ALL CATCH BASINS AND INLETS DOWN GRADIENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. 3.PROVIDE SILT FENCE PERIMETER CONTROL DOWN GRADIENT OF ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND TEMPORARY STOCKPILES. 4.TEMPORARY ROCK ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. 5.NO OFFSITE VEHICLE TRACKING IS PERMITTED. STREETS SHALL BE CLEANED AND SWEPT WHENEVER TRACKING OF SEDIMENTS OCCURS AND BEFORE SITES ARE LEFT IDLE FOR WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS. 6.REFER TO THE SWPPP AND THE CITY OF ST. ANTHONY EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR FURTHER EROSION CONTROL SEQUENCING. 7.IN ADDITION TO THESE PLANS, A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STUDY HAS BEEN PROVIDED. THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STUDY INCLUDES IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING STORMWATER PROTECTION FOR THE SITE, SUCH AS CONCRETE WASH-OUTS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HANDLING/SPILLS, EROSION CONTROL INSTALLATION, EROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE, ETC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW THE STORMWATER BOOK AND USE THE INFORMATION TO COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS. 8.GOPHER STATE ONE CALL DAMAGE PREVENTION SYSTEM FOR BURIED UTILITIES. 1-800-252-1166. EROSION CONTROL QUANTITIES: ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (200 SY) SILT FENCE (330 LF) MNDOT SEED MIX 25-151 (HYDROSEED) OR SOD (1,170 SY) INLET PROTECTION (3 EA) = EROSION CONTROL PLAN C501 38TH AVENUE NE STINSON BLVDPROPOSED BUILDING PROVIDE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PROVIDE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PROVIDE INLET PROTECTION PROVIDE INLET PROTECTION PROVIDE INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE SILT FENCE SILT FENCE THIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-DETAILS.DWG #### 7/21/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA CIVIL DETAILS C601 VARIES VARIABLE WIDTH 2% MAX. CROSS SLOPE 1/2" EXPANSION JOINTS AT ADJACENT WALK OR STRUCTURE MN/DOT 3702 CONCRETE SIDEWALK MN/DOT SPEC. 2521, MIX NO. 3F52 CONTRACTION JOINTS PER MN/DOT SPEC. 2521 1/2" EXPANSION JOINT COMPACTED GRANULAR MATERIAL6" 4" CURB AND GUTTER MATCH EXISTING 2" SPWEB340B WEAR COURSE OR MATCH THICKNESS WHICHEVER IS GREATER 2" SPNWB330B NON-WEAR COURSE OR MATCH THICKNESS WHICHEVER IS GREATER 2357 TACK COAT BETWEEN LIFTS COMPACTED CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE (MATCH EXISTING THICKNESS) MATCH ROAD SLOPE SAW CUT EXISTING BITUMINOUS SURFACE 6"4'-0"36"60" MIN. - 66" MAX.NOTE: 1.PROVIDE "NO PARKING" SIGN AT ACCESSIBLE PARKING ACCESS AISLE STALLS. 16" DIA. CONC. FOOTING CAULK TO SIDEWALK/PAVEMENT GRADE 6" PIPE W/ CONC. FILL & HDPE BOLLARD COVERS BY G.C. SLEEVE @ SIGNAGE LOCATIONS 2" DOME CONC. SEALANT @ SIGNAGE LOCATIONS 2" SQ. - 12 GA. PERFORATED STEEL SIGN POST BLUE BACKGROUND, FRONT, BACK, AND POST 12" x 18" - 16 GAUGE GALV. STEEL SIGN 1" WHITE HELVETICA MEDIUM LETTERS 1/2" WHITE BORDER LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTIONTYPICAL SIDEWALK DETAIL BITUMINOUS STREET REPAIR, CURB & GUTTER INSTALLATION DETAIL COMPACTED SUBGRADE -NOTIFY ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACING AGGREGATE BASE IF ORGANIC MATERIAL IS ENCOUNTERED IN SUBGRADE 8" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE 2" NON-WEARING COURSE (SPNWB330B) TACK COAT 1-1/2" WEARING COURSE (SPWEB340B) NOTES: 1.ALL ORGANIC OR OTHER UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM BENEATH THE ROADWAY. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN & POST DETAIL THIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-DETAILS.DWG #### 7/21/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA CIVIL DETAILS C602 AA PLAN SECTION A-A EXCAVATED WASHOUT STRUCTURE PLAN SECTION B-B BB STAPLE DETAIL WASHOUT STRUCTURE WITH STRAW BALES NOTE: CAN BE TWO STACKED BALES OR PARTIALLY EXCAVATED TO REACH 3 FT DEPTH BB PLAN SECTION B-B WASHOUT STRUCTURE WITH WOOD PLANKS CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS 1.LOCATE WASHOUT STRUCTURE A MINIMUM OF 50 FEET AWAY FROM OPEN CHANNELS, STORM DRAIN INLETS, SENSITIVE AREAS, WETLANDS, BUFFERS AND WATER COURSES AND AWAY FROM CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. 2.SIZE WASHOUT STRUCTURE FOR VOLUME NECESSARY TO CONTAIN WASH WATER AND SOLIDS AND MAINTAIN AT LEAST 4 INCHES OF FREEBOARD. TYPICAL DIMENSIONS ARE 10 FEET X 10 FEET X 3 FEET DEEP. 3.PREPARE SOIL BASE FREE OF ROCKS OR OTHER DEBRIS THAT MAY CAUSE TEARS OR HOLES IN THE LINER. FOR LINER, USE 10 MIL OR THICKER UV RESISTANT, IMPERMEABLE SHEETING, FREE OF HOLES AND TEARS OR OTHER DEFECTS THAT COMPROMISE IMPERMEABILITY OF THE MATERIAL. 4.PROVIDE A SIGN FOR THE WASHOUT IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE FACILITY. 5.KEEP CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURE WATER TIGHT. REPLACE IMPERMEABLE LINER IF DAMAGED (E.G., RIPPED OR PUNCTURED). EMPTY OR REPLACE WASHOUT STRUCTURE THAT IS 75 PERCENT FULL, AND DISPOSE OF ACCUMULATED MATERIAL PROPERLY. DO NOT REUSE PLASTIC LINER. WET-VACUUM STORED LIQUIDS THAT HAVE NOT EVAPORATED AND DISPOSE OF IN AN APPROVED MANNER. PRIOR TO FORECASTED RAINSTORMS, REMOVE LIQUIDS OR COVER STRUCTURE TO PREVENT OVERFLOWS. REMOVE HARDENED SOLIDS, WHOLE OR BROKEN UP, FOR DISPOSAL OR RECYCLING. MAINTAIN RUNOFF DIVERSION AROUND EXCAVATED WASHOUT STRUCTURE UNTIL STRUCTURE IS REMOVED. WOOD FRAME IMPERMEABLE SHEETING IMPERMEABLE SHEETING WOOD FRAME SECURELY FASTENED AROUND ENTIRE PERIMETER WITH TWO STAKES STAKE (TYP.) STAKE (TYP.) IMPERMEABLE SHEETING STRAW BALE (TYP.) STAPLES (2 PER BALE) BINDING WIRE STRAW BALE (TYP.) IMPERMEABLE SHEETING 1/8" DIA. STEEL WIRE WOOD OR METAL STAKES (2 PER BALE) SANDBAG IMPERMEABLE SHEETING IMPERMEABLE SHEETING 1:1 OR FLATTER SIDE SLOPE SANDBAG OR EQUIVALENT 10' TYP. 10' TYP.3' TYP. 10' TYP. 2" 4" 3' TYP. 10' TYP. 10' TYP. 3' TYP. 10' TYP. 10' TYP. CONCRETE WASHOUT DETAILS THIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO LEGAL PROSECUTION. COPYRIGHT @ 2020 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, 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. DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE DESCRIPTIONPRELIMINARY:NOT F O R CONSTRUCTIONDATE:LICENSE #: PRINTED NAME:F:\DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING\PROJECTS\000 - MISC 20\00020057 - 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS\CONSTRUCTS\CIVIL\00020057-C-DETAILS.DWG #### 7/21/2020JEREMY E. ANDERSON 44223 00020057 3725 STINSON BLVD APARTMENTS ST. ANTHONY, MN 07/22/20 RJK JEA EROSION CONTROL DETAILS C603 CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. _____________ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAN STAGE PUD, CONSITUTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SILVER LAKE VILLAGE PUD, FOR THE INTERSTATE DEVELOPMENT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT OF 38 DWELLING UNITS AT 3725 STINSON BOULEVARD NE WHEREAS, the City of St. Anthony Village received a request from Interstate Development for an amendment to the Silver Lake Village PUD, developing the site for a multiple family residential development of 38 dwelling units in a single building at 3725 Stinson Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the property consists of approximately .85 acres is located in the Silver Lake Village PUD district; and WHEREAS, The subject parcel is currently undeveloped and vacant; and WHEREAS, the project would be consistent with the St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan related to multiple family residential use; and WHEREAS, the density of the proposed project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan density range for such use, when considering overall density in the PUD area and the remaining developable land in said PUD; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 18, 2020 on the application and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plan PUD with the conditions noted in the Staff report, and as listed below; and WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings of fact in support of the resolution for approval: 1. The property is located in an area of mixed commercial and residential use. 2. The proposed improvements to the property are consistent with the character of the neighborhood in which it is located. 3. The various aspects of the proposed development are consistent with requirements of the City’s high density housing requirements, or are supported by the goals and objectives of the requirements for PUD consideration, and the long-term expectations of the Silver Lake Village PUD. 4. With the modification to the site plan under conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission, the proposed improvements constitute a reasonable use of the property. 5. The density, parking, and other aspects of the site constitute reasonable accommodations within the expected range of PUD consideration. 6. The flexibility offered under the PUD, including setbacks, parking, and impervious surface are reasonably consistent with other development in this area of the PUD. 7. The proposed PUD will accommodate reasonable use without negative impacts on neighboring property nor on public improvements and services. NOW THEREFORE MAY IT BE RESOVLED, that the City Council of the City of St. Anthony Village accepts the findings and recommendations documented in the staff report and approves Preliminary Plan for Amendment to the Silver Lake Village PUD as shown on the plans submitted on July 23, 2020, at 3725 Stinson Boulevard NE: 1. Access-related issues shall be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. 2. In recognition of other development sites within the Silver Lake PUD which were developed at densities less than 40 units per acre, the City finds the proposed residential density (44.7 units per acre) to be acceptable. 3. The City finds that the proposed 20-foot building setback along 38th Avenue NE will not negatively impact adjacent properties and is therefore considered acceptable (within the context of the PUD). 4. The City finds that the proposed parking supply (and the deficit based on Ordinance requirements) is adequate to serve the parking demand generated by the proposed apartment building. 5. The City finds that the limited size of the subject and target tenant base justify an off-street parking supply which does not include covered spaces (within the context of the PUD). 6. In consideration if the limited site size and previous site development conditions, the City finds the proposed impervious surface coverage of 76.7 to be acceptable. 7. Impacts associated with the proposed impervious surface coverage shall be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. 8. As part of the Final PUD Plan submission, a lighting plan be submitted for review which demonstrates compliance with City requirements. 9. As part of the Final PUD Plan submission, a signage plan be submitted for review which demonstrates compliance with City requirements. 10. As part of the Final PUD Plan submission, details shall be provided related to the proposed trash enclosure design. 11. Issues related to grading, drainage, stormwater management and utilities shall be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer. 12. The applicant enter into a PUD agreement with the City and post all the necessary securities required by it. 13. Consideration of comments of other City Staff. Passed in regular session of the City Council on the ___ day of _________, 2020. ____________________________________ Randy Stille, Mayor ATTEST:____________________________ Nicole Miller, City Clerk Review for Administration: ____________________________________ _________________, City Manager THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that on August 18, 2020, 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, the Saint Anthony Village Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to solicit public response to a request for an amendment to the Silver Lake Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) at 3725 Stinson Blvd., Parcel ID Number 31-30-23-30-209 the N 70 Ft of Lot 1 Blk 1 Pillsbury Addition and is SD Apache Plaza Lot 8 Blk 1, of the plat of Silver Lake Village in Ramsey County. This public hearing will be to consider the application of Interstate Development for a Preliminary Plan stage of the Silver Lake Village PUD consisting of a 3-story, 38 unit multiple family structure and related parking and open space. Following the public hearing the Planning Commission will make a recommendation regarding the proposed request to the City Council for their meeting expected to be held on Tuesday, September 8, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Those persons having an interest in said meetings are encouraged to attend. Oral testimony will be accepted on the above subject at this meeting. Written comments may be taken at the St. Anthony Village City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, St. Anthony Village, Minnesota 55418 until the date of the hearing. Questions may be directed to the City Planner, Stephen Grittman, at 763-957-1100 or planner@savmn.com. The Planning Commission agenda and packet item relating to this application will be made available prior to the meeting online at www.savmn.com . Stephen Grittman City Planner