5.16 - 6.18 A(
\;,4
Item#'s 5.16.-6.18.
ity of , MEMORANDUM
lkRi•
ver TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Scott Harlicker, Planning Ass't.
DATE: July 28, 1998
SUBJECT: Request by CPDC for Zone Change,
Conditional Use Permit and
Preliminary Plat Approval, Public
Hearing Case No. ZC 97-1, CU 97-1
and P 97-8
At the July 14th Planning Commission meeting the Commission had an
opportunity to review and comment on Trott Brook Farms. Since that time
the applicant has revised their plans and worked with staff to address the
concerns expressed by the Commission. Attached are memos from Terry
Maurer, City Engineer; Steve Wensman, Planner; and Phil Hals,
Streets/Parks Superintendent.
• Staff is recommending approval of the rezoning from Rle and Rlc to PUD
based on the attached findings and approval of the preliminary plat and
conditional use permit with the attached conditions.
\\elkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\scott\tbcovlt.doc
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • TDD &Phone: (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425
4114,
f
• Howard R. Green Company
COW LTI►E MIMS
CONSULTING ENGINEERS Formerly MSA
Consulting Engineers
July 23, 1998
File: 800111J-0240
Chairman and Planning Commission
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: TROTT BROOK FARMS
Dear Planning Commission Members:
Since the Planning Commission meeting on July 14, 1998 to review the Trott Brook
Farms proposal, staff has had an opportunity to meet with the Developer's engineer to
discuss a number of the issues raised that evening. This memo will only touch on a
few of the main issues that the Developer has changed or convinced staff to change its
position on. These are as follows:
A. Lot Width
The proposal reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 14th had 47 of 350
single-family lots not meeting an 80-foot width at the building setback line. The
Developer has revised the layout and reduced the number of lots not meeting
80 feet from 47 to 14. These fourteen lots consist of five lots, 19 through 23,
located in Cul-de-sac T, five lots, 17 through 21, located in Cul-de-sac U, and
four lots, 7, 8, 14, and 15, located on Street O. Eleven of these fourteen lots
are pie-shaped cul-de-sac lots, substantially larger in square footage than the
minimum required by the ordinance. Three of the lots, one in Cul-de-sac T and
two on Street 0 are approximately rectangular, with lot widths of 73 feet to 75
feet. These lots can be easily dealt with in the development plan by restricting
the type and style of houses permitted. One other point worth mentioning is that
Lots 7 and 8 are narrower because Lot 6 has a slightly larger width, allowing for
a landscape screening area along the east side to screen the views from Street
A. Staff would recommend approval of the new concept as it relates to lot
widths.
B. Setback Variance
As indicated in the Developer's submittal, they are asking for a setback variance
from 30 feet to 25 feet, in an effort to save trees. The setback variance is not
•
being requested on Streets A, F, J, 0, R, or S. These streets would be
1326 Energy Park Drive • St.Paul, MN 55108 • 612/644-4389 fax 612/644-9446 toll free 800/888-2923
Planning Commission
July 23, 1998
Page 2
• considered the main routes within the development. The other streets where
the setback variance is being requested are either cul-de-sacs or lesser-traveled
streets. Staff can support this request for setback variance from 30 feet to 25
feet on the streets mentioned.
C. Southwest Area Townhouse Density
The Developer has proposed removing four units from the 156 total. These four
units would come out of the block of 8-plexes formed by Street S. This helps to
open up the green space between buildings. Staff would recommend that an
additional eight units for a total of twelve be taken out of this same block. Staff
feels that with twelve less units, the entire block could be reconfigured to give
the perception of green space tying into most of the units in this area.
No reduction in the number of units is proposed by the Developer for the 85-unit
townhouse development in the southeast corner. Staff feels that this total
number of units is acceptable because of the open space distribution among the
buildings. There are two wetlands and a pipeline easement that are spread
throughout this development, giving the feeling of more openness to each of the
units.
D. County Road 12 Right-of-Way
• Sherburne County has requested 70 feet of additional right-of-way, measured
from centerline along County Road 12. In addition to this, the City would
receive a 10-foot drainage and utility easement. The Developer has indicated
willingness to provide a 60-foot right-of-way and a 20-foot drainage and utility
easement, with the easement allowing the placement of the detached
pedestrian trail. Dave Schwarting, County Engineer, was unable to attend the
meeting with City staff, and the Developer's engineer. City staff believes that
this proposal of a 60-foot right-of-way with up to a 20-foot drainage and utility
easement is a workable solution and will coordinate with the County Engineer to
verify whether it meets the County's needs as well.
E. Connecting Cul-de-sacs
Previously, staff had recommended eliminating Cul-de-sac F by connecting it to
Street S. At the last Planning Commission meeting, the Developer had
indicated a desire not to do this for the loss of the neighborhood concept. His
engineers had indicated the difficulty of making this connection. We have had
an opportunity to look at this further with the Developer's engineers, and would
concur with their analysis that it is a difficult connection to make, due to the
vertical differences in elevation. Therefore, staff would recommend that this not
be pursued any further.
Howarrrnnc��IIccRII II.�IGreen Com oany
\\Elkriver\sys\SHRDOcb4DMIN\ENGINEER�'I .2303 T4 G ENGINEERS
Planning Commission
July 23, 1998
Page 3
F. Project Monumentation Package
The Developer's engineer has indicated that they have started to revise the
project monumentation, to make the signs slightly smaller, and to analyze
further which corners of intersections are appropriate for monumentation. City
staff would recommend that the final decision on project monumentation be
based on a review and approval by City staff at a later date.
This briefly summarizes a number of the key issues that have changed since the July
14, 1998 Planning Commission meeting. Assistant City Planner Scott Harlicker, has
put together a list of recommended conditions for the approval of the Trott Brook Farms
proposal. Should there be any questions, both Scott and I will be in attendance at your
July 28, 1998 Planning Commission meeting.
Sincerely,
Howard R. Green Company
/-f/ Cy/C/a-el/Ce/t)
Terry J. Vaurer, P.E.
TJM/st
•
•
Howard
�cRl , Green Com pany
\\Elkriver\sys\SHRDOC\ADMIN\ENGINEER-CP1'A14-170CG ENGINEERS
07-2B-1998 09:57AM SAND COMPANIES INC. 320 202 3139 P.02
i.
. ••
- • .
•
.. . • •: . ;
• .
•
• , • , .!: : ;
•
Sand Companies, . :
. :
Inc.• . ,
: • 366 Sour 1 10th Avenue•PO Box 727• Waite Park,MN 56387-0727•Office(320) 202-3100•Fax(320)202-3139.
. i •
, . .
. .
• • . . . ! • . . • . . •
. . . .
. .
. . .
' •
. . ...
i• ' • • ..
• . , •
. .
•
. . • ; • .
Jul 28 .1998 • ' . •
. • . , . . . • . , .
. .
. . .
. , . . .
. .
. . ., .• . . I . . . .; i .
• I • •
• .
• i i Sent-Via Facsimile Transmission •
. .:
: . .
• ' • . ; • • • . . ,
I '
: .
. : • , .
• ' '1 . .
i.
. .
. : . . .
: ! P1 "ng Commission .: •! • . • • . •
,
Ci of Elk River i . • • • .
• .. ••
• .
. .
. .
13 a•5 Orono Parkway. 1, ' . • • .• •. . •
. .
Elk River, MN 55330 I..
• • : .
. . •
.... .• . . . i '. • . • • ' : •
.. . . .
. . RE Staff Review Coinnients. • • • . .
• :• ; •
. . . .
. .
' ' •• pp)Amendment atd Preliminary Plat. . . .
. : .:
. .•
. .: . • . . .
a - . Planning Conniiissi4m Members: .
: I .
: , • . . i
. .
. .
. . . • I • .
. ,. We have reviewed the staff and engineers recommendations to the Planning Conunission .
• , . •• sUbmit the follavving it oomments: • . .
. •
. „ . . .
. • .
: , . • .
. ,
. ,•
• Preliminary Pliat, • .
. . .
' .
, . . • •
•
- • 1. We diScussed during our review with staff the fact that the dental amp:
: is looking'. for a certain square footage of land (approximately 60,000 .-
, .
. 70,0o( sq. ft.) and they are paying a certain dollar amount per sOiare• . •
. .
•
• • foot. !t was our understanding that as long as there are recorded icrois
•
• park* easements and the total parking requirement was met,,:the .
. .
: .
positicin of the lot line was flexible. Reducing the square footage of
• ,
•
:
Lot 2 may cause the lost sale of the lot. .
•
2. As we discussed with staf: dedicating a full 20 foot easement Will L .
• eliminate any possibility for a future addition to the hotel becanse it
!
, • would eliminate our future parking as shown on the civil drawings.
One of the reasons we chose this site is because of the flexibility it :
allOwS, us with the availability of the extra land. Depending onthe 1
success of the hotel, future expansion is always a possibility, ar44 ., !
can n& afford to land-lock ourselves by eliminating future additipni. ! :
•
At th same time, we recognize the advantage of a pedestrian bridge
not only for the hotel, but also for the nearby. residents. With this in
mind 6n, d taking into account our development needs, we feel the
dedication of a 10 foot easement on our property is appropriate. .. .. :
, 3. OK • .: i
1 • •
4.: See below.
. 5. OK I.
: :
.
:
: .
'
6. OK ' . . :
.. . . • , .
•
Sand.Cornpanies, Inc. • Sand Properties, Minnesota, Inc.
. . .
(EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER) .
07-28-1998 09:57AM SAND COMPANIES INC. 320 202 3139 P.03
• • ,.. 1 •
.• • .. . . • . •
. .
• • i
. . . • . • • . : i ; .
: ..
•
, • • • • :iii
. . . • • •
. . . i • •
• . .: - Conditional Use Permit. ' 2 .
gizi4 ?' '' •
• • .G0a
, 41);. ••• . . I. We recently held a neighborhood meeting on Thursday, July 23f'''.to
" ... inform the residents about our project and to answer any questions they
„ . . •
• ; . may have One of the items we covered was the elevations Of the
. • : building. Not one comment was raised about the look of the building's
. : • • • 1
•
. . , • . side elevation, so I am not exactly::sure who has taiSed this issue with
staff. Also,•our floor layout does not:allow for widows at the end of • • . .
. .
' ;, • ' .. . ' . :
hallway because we have linen rooms in this area with shelving on each :
• : wall:. lln addition, the exterior wills of the*end units have turtiiiiire • .
• •
•.
. . .• •
; • ' across:most of the exterior wall, thus making it impossible: to install .: •
• .
•
i .
:• . . ' • , windows in this*area: ' We feel this significant additional cost is iit* : . .
• .. .
, • justified. . '. •• : ' . . . . . . .
. _ , . •
' i• " • • i - ' • : 2. • The original PUD agreement was for a retail center and an antoMotive
• :: . .
. •
center Most users of these facilities have a predetermined destination
, . •
. .
.•
• . . :•' . ; in mind, In the case•of,the proposed hotel, most of the transient traffic ;
•
. , .
.. . . .
. i. : . • ' .. •
will be driven by impulse identifiCation. The highway location choSen i
: ;: .• • •. : dependent onthis transient traffic.from Highway 169.such as daily .
business travelers To limitthis identification 'will limit the hotels
• . : • ' • occupancy as we have experienced in our other:hotel location S that
• .
.• : ' . ,• have sign heights that range from'35 7 75 feet. The thirty foot sign we
• ' • are proposing is an absolute minimum we are comfortable ereCting. ,
. •
•
. • •: AlsO, with the addition of the future pedestrian bridge (and possibility .
of tree planting on the right-of-way), the signage visibility will WOOzed
• from southbound traffic with only a twenty foot sign. ' The neeklJoi' :
minimum sign height of 30 feet is critical to the success of the hotel as
has been demonstrated in all of our locations. • : '
• ,
: • 30K '• : ,
; :. : ' : .: .• 4. Seeblcrw. • •
. , 5. If the Office/dental lot is sold before or during construction of the'hotel
and:buyer agrees to pay for parking improvements, they Will be put in•
conjunction-With the hotel. Btit if the lot is not sold, only the pzirking•
' needed for the hotel will be constructed. This is because there Will be
I
. " no definite footprint of the office/dental building which could effect the
exact parking layout and would limit a potential buyers •building:
• : placement. .
6. The amendment of the PUD should include the proposed future patkin
: on the engineering plans. As discussed with staff,the set back fror9
thed
MNDOT lot to the north is currently 30 feet because of the:iion- •
Conforming residential use. It was made clear that in the future, itthe
current use Changes, the use will likely be changed to commercial Which
would only require a 10 foot setback as ShoWn. We would like to have'
. this future parking approved with the PUD amendment because K its
,
, : • :
importance to the development along with the fact that future staffsiand •
governmental officials may change. /
• ,, .: .
: . .
• . .•.
, .
• -
Planning Commission-Pagi 2
07-28-1998 09:SBAM SRND COMPANIES INC. 320 202 3139 P.04
• I' .i • : I°
' En, : gineer's Review-Preliminary Plan: , :
,0
• OK
i
• OK- said easement is in the vacation process.
• Please isee item,2lat
EPreliS'plat)above. : ;
• OK-final plat will encompass the needed easements as indicated. :
•• •.Please'see item 1 (prelirninasy plat)above.
•. . 'Engineer's Review'- Utility Plan:
• OK -the final hydrant location will be positioned where recommended
by the ocal fire chief
• . Engineer's Comments-Preliminary, Grading, Design and Erosion Control:
• • 'As spocificaily discussed with staff the lowering of the berm may bean.
: option!if the landscaping of the berm could be enhanced or increased: • •
The pfoposed reduction of the height of the berm;by two feet will not
occur on'the north end of the berm where the hotel is located. ' The
berm irea that is reduced has extensive landscaping added along!with
additional landscaping in the area near the hotel. This issue: was
•broug1t .up. at the neighborhood meeting and few comments were
raised.,
•: : • We raised this issue to the attention of Dan Smith, owner of Perkins,, ` •
j and he was comfortable with thissmall area that.was draining directly
• { onto his lot and •into his catch basin. He also said he relayed his
' feelings on this issue to Scott Harlicker.
• • This was also specifically discussed with staff and they suggested ;we ; • :
• contact Dan Smith to find out the usage patterns of this sidewalk: -He
commented to us that the sidewalk is not used a great deal because'
• i most of his customers arrive by motor vehicle. At the same time,;we '
feel very little use of the sidewalk will be needed for the proposed!hotel
and offiee/building, especially with the . addition Of the .pedestrian' :
'bridge. •
'• • . • OK- a permit will be applied for with MNDOT if grading in this area is
needed •
• • OK- calculations will be supplied directly to the engineer for review:
! •.
!. Engineer's Reviely- Site Plan/Landscape Plan: i
• • OK 'landscaping will be adjusted to accommodate•future trail `and
current utility locations; I
••' OK-we will provide the city with an appropriate letter of agreement .
• • OK final position of the sign will be situated:as not to affect:`the
current utility locations, and the exact location needsto be determined
0. with staff as it may need to be moved further north. ;
Planning Commission-Pag 3
•
07-28-1998 09:59AM SAND COMPANIES INC. 320 202 3139 P.05
i j
ii
i I
i
•
• . OK - the. building has been moved east since original plans were
0 i submitted. As shown on current plans submitted, the building and .
overhang do:no encroach the easement. , . 1
i
As ou carr see, a numbed of issues are very critical to the development of a hotel in Elk
I' ' • ; especially the positionof its signage and the flexibility of future'expansion I will'be
in a tendance to discuss our project and 'answer any questions you may have. We look
. , ' f• _: d to becoming an ak tive member of your'fine community. .' "
i Sin erely, ; .
: : ' :i Companies, Inc. . ' : ' • ,• .
• '
.
J= e Thelen ,.
Vi - President of Development •
•
'
'.... ' .:. : 1 : .: • : . ' .
l { I
i
Oji. 'i
•
•. : i s Ii .
. ; . .
IllI.
• ;
• i
Planning Commission-P•ag4 4 I
I
\44 Item#'s 5.16.-6.18.
*.tidy of 1MEMORANDUMRierlk Planning Commission
FROM: Steve Wensman, Planner
DATE: July 28, 1998
SUBJECT: Request by CPDC for Zone Change,
Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary
Plat Approval, Public Hearing Case No.
ZC 97-1, CU 97-11 and P 97-8
Attachments
• July 14, 1998 Memo to Pat Klaers
• July 23, 1998 Memo from Phil Hals
Trott Brook Trail Corridor
• Since the Planning Commission Workshop, the following changes have been
made or discussed regarding the Preliminary Plat. In the Preliminary Plat
the Trott Brook Trail is not shown to be accessible from Street 0 or County
Road 12. Ed Hasek, of Westwood Engineering, says the grading plan will
show how the Trott Brook Trail will be accessible from Street O. The Trott
Brook Trail connection has been moved further to the East to a point visible
from County Road 12 adjacent to a townhouse driveway. This trail ending
does not directly connect to County Road 12 and is to be considered
temporary. The developer and planning staff concur that a better connection
would be to the East of the plat in future development, where the Trott Brook
runs closest to the County Road 12 and where the connection is not stuck
between townhomes. Eventually, the trail corridor will extend to the East
and parallel County Road 12.
Outlot F
Outlot F is being donated to the City, however it is not considered as part of
the park dedication. The area is approximately 23 acres of wetland and some
upland oak forest. This area may be used as passive recreation, however it is
difficult to access. This parcel will require an access corridor for pedestrians
and maintenance vehicles (see Phil Hals memo). Creation of an access
•
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • TDD &Phone: (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425
Memo to Planning Commission/Trottmmo
Julyl 28, 1998
Page 2
corridor should be coordinated with the need for a sewer and water corridor
. to the East of the plat.
Townhouse Open space
The Planning Commission and Staff have expressed concerns about density,
and lack of open space within the townhouse development in the Southwest
corner of the plat. Although not considered as park land, the open space
should be design such that it is a space central to the development, serving as
visual relief from the density and providing a view for those near the center
of the dense area
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the
preliminary plat with the following conditions related to the park dedication:
1. THAT THE DEVELOPER DEMONSTRATE ON THE GRADING PLAN HOW THE
TROTT BROOK TRAIL IS ACCESSED FROM STREET O.
2. THAT THE DEVELOPER PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN AND MAINTENANCE
VEHICLE CORRIDOR TO OUTLET F FROM STREET N AS PER CITY
ORDINANCE TO BE COORDINATED WITH A SEWER AND WATER CORRIDOR
illTO THE EAST OF THE PLAT.
3. THAT THE DEVELOPER WORK WITH STAFF TO CREATE A LARGER
CENTRAL OPENSPACE IN THE TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT IN THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PLAT.
•
\\e lkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\scott\trottsw.doc
ITEM NO. 'S 3.1.-3.3.
(
ty of
lk •
River
MEMORANDUM
TO: Pat Klaers
FROM: Stephen Wensman, Planner SN
DATE: July A, 1998
SUBJECT: Trott Brook Farms Parks Proposal
Attachments
A) Park and Recreation Commission Minutes Summary
B) Park and Recreation Minutes
C) Trott Brook Trail Corridor Memo
Overview
• On March12, 1997, John Payton, Senior Associate with Westwood
Professional Services and Homer Tompkins, met with the Park and
Recreation Commission regarding park requirements for the then proposed
300 acre, 500-550 single family home and townhouse development (Trott
Brook Farms). At that time the Commission requested the following:
• 4-6 acres of park land of which 3 acres would be neighborhood park in the
center of the plat and the remainder to the East of the plat to link to
future park areas when the land to the East develops.
• A trail system be established through the plat connecting the park areas
and pedestrian routes.
• The remaining dedication requirements be collected as cash.
On May 14th, 1997, Steve Ach, City Planner, informed the Commission that a
4.2 acre park was being planned with 2.2 acres on the eastern edge of the
development. The Commission requested more flat land in the park and
requested the following amenities: a ballfield with backstop, tot lot,
basketball hockey rink, sand volleyball court, and picnic shelter. The
developers ask the Commission if all the park improvements were made "up
front" by the developer, could a credit towards their park dedication be made
•
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425
Memo to Planning Commission/Trottmmo
April 28, 1998
Page 2
as the project develops. The Commission said they would consider the
request.
On June 11, 1997, Ed Hasek and John Payton of Westwood Professional
Services, presented a revised Trott Brook Farms proposal. The proposed
development encompassed 280 acres and the park increased to 8.13 acres
(6.59 acres of upland). The proposed centrally located park included: a
ballfield, soccer, playfield (hockey in winter), tot lot, tennis/basketball court,
and picnic shelter. Three trail connections were proposed to the park. The
developer again requested credit be given for park improvements with the
phase 2 of the project. Also mentioned was that tot lots and other amenities
would be associated with the townhomes. The Commission approved the
park land dedication concept with a cash contribution to meet park
dedication requirements. The Commission also moved to have staff work
with the developers to develop the Trott Brook as a linear park.
Furthermore, the Commission approved the concept of park dedication credit
for improvements made by the developers for Trott Brook Farms Park.
On April 8, 1998, Homer Tompkins and Ed Hasek again presented changes to
Trott Brook Farms Park. The proposed development increased from 280 to
360 acres with a total park dedication of 20.6 acres. The dedication included,
a centrally located park area increased from 8.5 acres (6.6 acres of upland) to
13.2 acres (9.8 acres of upland) with the previously proposed amenities. In •
addition, the proposal included a 3.9 acre linear park along Trott Brook, and
a 3.5 acre passive area to the North along Trott Brook. The Commission
discussed whether or not 9.8 acres of park was adequate for the size of the
development and expressed support for the trail along Trott Brook and felt a
sidewalk should connect the Trott Brook to the central park area.
On May 13, 1998, Ed Hasek of Westwood presented the proposed parks for
Trott Brook Farms. The total park dedication presented was 17.2 acres
including: a 11.2 acre centrally located park with amenities (8.3 acres of
upland), 6 acre linear park along Trott Brook, and cash or improvements to
go towards the remaining park dedication. (See Attachment A)
Park Dedication
The Elk River Subdivision Ordinance requires that an amount of land equal
in value to ten percent (10%) of the undeveloped land proposed to be
subdivided shall be set aside and dedicated ... or, ...shall contribute to the
City an amount of cash equal to the fair market value of the undeveloped
land....
•
f:\shrdoc\planning\stevewen\pcmmo\trottmmo.doc
Memo to Planning Commission/Trottmmo
April 28, 1998
Page 3
The 10% park dedication for a 360 acre development would be 36 acres of
• park land, or cash.
Trott Brook Trail Corridor
The park dedication includes a trail corridor along Trott Brook that includes
Outlet E and D of the preliminary plat with a trail connection South through
the townhomes to the future County Road 12 bituminous trail. In the
Preliminary Plat the trail is not yet shown to be accessible from Street 0 or
County Road 12. The trail ends at a townhouse driveway which connects to a
townhouse road which connects to County Road 12.
Outlot E and D, in the Preliminary Plat, provide roughly 50 feet of open
space on each sides of the Brook. In the Southern half of the site this ensures
some protection of the Brook and public access. In the Northern half of the
site the Brook is encroached upon by large lots providing no open space or
public access, with a reliance on future development for a continuation of the
trail.
Neighborhood Park
The neighborhood park includes all the site amenities requested by the Park
• and Recreation Commission. Concerns of the Park and Recreation
Commission include: amount of wetland included in the park, the close
proximity of amenities to the road and to residential lots without a buffer
space or landscaping and the tight nature of the park amenities in general.
Outlot F
Outlot F is not part of the park dedication endorsed by the Park and
Recreation Commission. The area at one time was propose as a 3.5 acre
passive recreation area. If this area would become part of the park
dedication, pedestrian linkages would be required. Furthermore, some
provision for maintenance access would need to be provided in the plat.
Hillside City Park
Hillside City Park, the old city dump site south of Trott Brook Farms, has
been endorsed by the Park and Recreation Commission as a wooded park
with rugged bike trails through out. This shall provide an alternative
location for recreation for families in the area provided there is a safe
crossing of County Road 12 off the County Trail.
IIII
f:\shrdoc\planning\stevewe n\pcmmo\trottm mo.doc
AttSment A • •
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes Summery (Trott Brook Farms)
Date Development Proposed Parks Park Commission Recommendations and Comments
Acres Acres
3/12/97 300 acre approx. (3 acres)Central neighborhood park
6 acres (1-3)acres east of plat with trail system
Cash
5/14/97 300 acre 4.2 acre neighborhood park 6.4 Park include: a ballfield, soccer,playfield(hockey in
2.2 acres east of plat acres winter),tot lot, tennis/basketball court, and picnic
• shelter
6/11/97 280 acres 8.13 acres(6.59 acres of upland)Central neighborhood park. approx. Park concept with cash contribution
3 Trail connections to park. 11.13 Develop the Trott Brook linear park.
Tot lots and amenities with townhomnes acres Dedication credit for improvements made to park
4/8/98 360 acres 13.2 acres(9.8 acres of upland) Central neighborhood park. 20.6 Support for the trail along Trott Brook
3.9 acre linear park along Trott Brook acres Connect the Trott Brook to the central park area with
3.5 acre passive area to the north along Trott Brook a sidewalk
5/13/98 360 acres 11.2 acre (8.3 acres of upland) Central neighborhood park. 17.2 Accepted concept as park dedication
6 acre linear park along Trott Brook acres
Cash or improvements
Park & Recreation Meeting Minutes
March 12, 1997
Page 2
6.2. Review Concept Plan of 300 Acre Residential Development ISchultz Property)
410 Steve Ach explained the developers of the Waddy Schulze property were
present to discuss their plans for a 300 acre residential development.
Representing the development company were John Payton -Senior Associate
with Westwood Professional Services of Eden Prairie, Homer Tompkins-
Contractor Property Developers Company, and Al Block- President, Town &
Country Homes. Steve noted the developers are interested in obtaining some
direction from the Park & Recreation regarding park needs for this area.
Mr. Payton explained the proposed development will consist of 500 -550 single
family and townhouse residential units. Al Block indicated they will require a
forester to work with the home buyers so that as many trees as possible can be
preserved. Mr. Block expressed his support for trail systems and noted nearly all
their developments have trail systems.
Discussion followed regarding park and trail needs for the area.
It was the consensus of the Park & Recreation Commission that the developer
consider the following recommendations in order to meet park dedication
requirements for the proposed plat:
• Approximately 4- 6 acres be designated for park land which would
include approximately a 3 acre neighborhood park somewhere in the
center of the plat, and an additional park area on the eastern boundary
which could be linked to a park area if property to the east were
• developed.
• A trail system be established through the plat connecting the park areas
and other predestrian routes planned for this area.
• The remainder of the park dedication requirements be collected as a
cash payment.
6.1. Astrid McBeath Request for Administrative Subdivision, Case No. AS 97-1
Steve Ach explained Astrid McBeath is requesting an administrative subdivision
to subdivide a 17 acre parcel located immediately west of the end of Island
View Drive and 191st Avenue, into 2 lots.
COMMISSIONER DAVE ANDERSON MOVED THE PARK AND RECREATION
COMMISSION RECOMMEND ACCEPTING A CASH PAYMENT TO MEET PARK
DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MCBEATH ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION,
CASE NO. AS 97-1, AND THAT PARK AND TRAIL NEEDS WILL BE REVIEWED IF THE
PROPERTY IS FURTHER SUBDIVIDED IN THE FUTURE. COMMISSIONER MADSEN
SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
Commissioner Huberty left the meeting at this time (approximately 9:45 p.m.)
•
Nark & Recreation Minutes
May 14, 1997
Page 2
of way to the 10 acre lot being created. Mr. Barsody plans to develop the
• remaining property when mining of the site is completed.
COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED TO ACCEPT CASH PAYMENT OF PARK DEDICATION
FEES. COMMISSIONER MADSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
5.4. Administrative Subdivision for Nellie Sachs
Nellie Sachs has requested an administrative subdivision to subdivide a 21.5 acre
parcel located on the northwest corner of County Road 32 and County Road No.
1, into a 6 acre lot and a 15.5 acre lot.
COMMISSIONER DAVE ANDERSON MOVED TO ACCEPT CASH PAYMENT OF PARK
DEDICATION FEES. COMMISSIONER HUBERTY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION
CARRIED 5-0.
5.5. Preliminary Plat for Cherrywood Hills
John Peterson of Good Value Homes has requested preliminary plat approval to
subdivide 39 acres located in the northwest corner of Proctor and 193rd Avenue
into 68 single family lots. The Commissioners discussed 193rd Avenue becoming a
trail corridor. A 30 foot wide trail is proposed to connect Rush Circle with 193rd.
COMMISSIONER DAVE ANDERSON MOVED TO ACCEPT OUTLOT C, CREDIT THE
DEVELOPER FOR TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS IN OUTLOT C AND ALONG PROCTOR
• TO 193RD AVENUE, AND THE BALANCE OF PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS BE MET
BY A CASH PAYMENT. COMMISSIONER MADSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
5.6. Preliminary Plat for Hillside Crossing Two South (Phoenix Enterprises)
Phoenix Enterprises has requested preliminary plat approval to subdivide a 7 acre
commercial lot into two lots, located east of Highway 169 and south of 193rd
Avenue.
COMMISSIONER DAVE ANDERSON MOVED TO ACCEPT CASH PAYMENT OF PARK
DEDICATION FEES. COMMISSIONER KUESTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION
CARRIED 6-0.
5.1. Preliminary Plat for Trott Brook Farms (CPDC)
Steve Ach reviewed discussion items of the last Park & Recreation Commission
meeting. Steve noted a 4.2 acre park was proposed for the Schulze property and
2.2 acres on the adjacent parcel.
John Payton explained the developer needs to know what sort of park the Park
& Recreation would like see in the area. Chair Dana indicated he would like to
see more flat land, possibly taking in more area to the north of the wetland. Mr.
Ed Hasek indicated the difficulty in creating flat land due to the topography.
Discussion followed regarding adjusting the roadway to gain additional flat land
to the north of the proposed park. He felt if the Park & Rec Commission was
•
satisfied with a centrally located park and felt it was large enough for a ballfield
Park & Recreation Minutes
May 14, 1997
Page 3
and tot lot, they could work on the layout so that it would fit within the proposed
plat. •
Grading plan for the structures/features in the park should include the following:
-basketball hoops on each end (60'x100' pad)
-ball field with a backstop
-hockey rink
-sand volleyball court
-picnic shelter
The developers asked the Commission if all the park improvements were made
"up front" by the developer, could a credit towards their park dedication be
made as the project develops. The Commission indicated that there are a large
number of park improvements that need to be made throughout the city.
However, they would consider the request and give the City Council a
recommendation to consider.
6.1. Community Recreation Update - Jeff Asfahl
Lance Cunningham, representing Elk River Skateboarders, Inc. provided an
update on fundraising activities proposed by the skaterboarder's group. He
noted the students have received their non-profit status through the state. Lance
distributed samples of the logo which will be used by the group.
Jeff updated the Commission on recent activities as.follows:
-A Web site has been established for the Youth Initiatives Task Force •
project
-Mentoring program is proposed as elective through the senior high school
-Summer program registration is underway
6.2. Harold Gramstad- Representative of the Lions' Club
Harold Gramstad explained this is the final year of the Lions' Club plans to donate
$75,000 in improvements for Lions' Park over a three year period. Projects
proposed to be completed with the remaining $25,000 are:
-blacktopping of remainder of trails
-blacktopping of the hockey rink
-lighting in the basketball court area
-sliding tube on hill
-landscaping
Planning Commission expressed their appreciation of the stewardship of the park
7. Discussion on Moving Playground Equipment from ECFE to Handke School
Katy Alfebee, Maria Derks and Judy Schulze were present to express the need for
playground equipment at Handke School. Maria Derks explained how the
playground equipment at the former ECFE site was originally acquired and how
they plan to incorporate the equipment at the Handke site. Ms. Derks also
explained the fund-raising efforts in progress to fund new playground equipment.
Ms. Schluze estimates incorporating the existing structure at the former ECFE site •
into the plans for the Handke playground, they would realize a cost saving of
Park & Recreation Commission Minutes
June 11, 1997
Page 2
Hals explained that even though it is a challenge to keep sidewalks clear in the
41/
winter, he supports sidewalks.
4.4. Trail Issues
Chair Jon Anderson stated his concern that the areas adjacent to some of the
trails are not being maintained. Discussion followed regarding location and
signage of trails.
4.5. Park Land Shapes
Commissioner Dave Anderson expressed his concern for changes being made in
parks after the Park & Recreation Commission has spent time and effort reviewing
and making recommendations for new plats.
4.6. PUD's
Chair Dana Anderson and Commissioner Dave Anderson expressed concern that
the PUD concept may allow too much flexibility by allowing developers to
increase density, thereby preserving fewer natural amenities. It was consensus of
the Commissioners for the Park and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission
and City Council to work jointly to improve the PUD ordinance.
2. Consider 6/11/97 Park & Recreation Commission Agenda
COMMISSIONER ROLF ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE JUNE 11, 1997, PARK &
• RECREATION AGENDA. COMMISSIONER OLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
3. Consider Minutes of 5/14/97 Park & Recreation Commission Meeting
COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE PARK AND RECREATION
COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES AS FOLLOWS:
MAY 14, 1997 REGULAR MEETING
MAY 21, 1997 SPECIAL MEETING
MAY 28, 1997 SPECIAL MEETING
JUNE 4, 1997 SPECIAL MEETING
COMMISSIONER ROLF ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED
6-0.
5. Open Mike
No one appeared for this item.
6. Planning Items
6.1. CPDC LTrott Brook Farms)
Ed Hasek and John Payton were present to discuss the revised the park proposal
for Trott Brook Farms. Mr. Payton explained the entire parcel is 8.13 acres in size
Park &Recreation Commission Minutes
June 11, 1997
Page 3
which includes 1.54 acres of wetland, for a net usable park area of 6.59 acres.
The centrally located park will include a ballfield/soccer/playfield (hockey in
winter), a tot lot with playground equipment, a tennis/basketball court, and a
picnic shelter with picnic tables.There will be 3 trail connections to the park. The •
developer has requested credit be given for park improvements when Phase 2 of
the project is developed. John Payton noted there will be tot lots and other
amenities associated with the townhomes, as well.
Members of the Commission expressed interest in the developers' proposal for a
passive park in the northeast portion of the plat, as well as a trail along Trott
Brook.
COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE PARK LAND DEDICATION
CONCEPT COMBINED WITH A CASH CONTRIBUTION TO MEET PARK DEDICATION
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TROTT BROOK FARMS SUBDIVISION. COMMISSIONER DAVE
ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER
AND THE PARK& RECREATION COMMISSION IN DEVELOPING THAT PORTION OF
TROTT BROOK AFFECTED BY THE TROTT BROOK FARMS PLAT AS A LINEAR PARK.
COMMISSIONER MADSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONCEPT OF PARK DEDICATION
CREDIT FOR IMPROVEMENTS MADE BY THE DEVELOPERS IN THE TROTT BROOK FARMS
PARK, WITH DETAILS OF THE PARK WORKED OUT AND PRESENTED TO THE
COMMISSION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTING ANY IMPROVEMENTS. COMMISSIONER
OLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
6.2. Administrative Subdivision (James Maplethorpe) AS 97-4 •
James Maplethorpe is requesting to subdivide a 5 acres parcel into 2 lots at 13975
196th Avenue.
COMMISSIONER DAVE ANDERSON MOVED TO ACCEPT A CASH PAYMENT OF PARK
DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MAPLETHORPE ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION.
COMMISSIONER KUESTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
7. Discussion of Hillside 5th Park
Chair Anderson acknowledged receipt of a letter from Chuck Gilliam adressing
residents' concerns related to development of the Hillside Estates 5th Addition
park.
Chuck Gilliam, 11018 196th Avenue NW, asked the Commission to consider the
concerns of the residents, as stated in his letter.
Lou Kirsch, 11098 196th Avenue NW, owner of Lot 3 adjacent to the park,
expressed his objection to locating the proposed playground area next to his
home. He stated he was told when he purchased the lot, there were no plans to
develop the park. He requested the park be as least intrusive to the residents as
possible.
•
Park&Recreation Minutes
April 8, 1998
Page 3
- Information kiosks
- Play structure
• -Sliding hill
CHAIR ANDERSON MOVED TO ACCEPT A COMBINATION OF CONCEPT A AND B FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF MEADOWVALE PARK, WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES:
- OMIT PLAY STRUCTURE UNTIL USAGE IS DETERMINED
- INCLUDE OPTION C SOUTH PARKING PROPOSAL
- SECURE PARKING AREA TO THE NORTHEAST IF OPPORTUNITY ARISES
- SOME TYPE OF BRIDGE(POSSIBLY FLOATING DOCK) LINKING LAND MASSES TO BE
DETERMINED BY COST
- SHELTER ON BOTH SIDES OF WETLAND
- BENCHES SCATTERED AROUND TRAIL LOOP
COMMISSIONER DAVE ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION.THE MOTION CARRIED
6-0.
Steve reviewed the concepts for Mississippi Oaks and Country Crossings 3rd
previously discussed by the Commissioners. Steve noted a full court basketball
court has been incorporated in the Country Crossing 3rd park concept, rather
than a half court.
Chair Anderson suggested the approved park concepts could be enlarged,
laminated and posted in each particular park.
It was the consensus to invite the Country Crossing 3rd•residents to the May 13th
• Park and Recreation Commission meeting to review the park concept.
7.c. Review Boys and Girls Club Proposal
It was the consensus of the Park and Recreation Commissioners to approve the
plans for the Boys and Girls Club facility proposed to be located in Lions Park.
7.d. Review Concept Plan for Trott Brook Estates
Homer Tompkins of Contractor Property Developers Company and Ed Hasek of
Westwood Engineering were present to discuss park plans for Trott Brook Farms.
Mr.Tompkins indicated they spent a significant amount of time and money
investigating the development of a championship golf course, only to find they
were uncomfortable with the increased density and land value that would be
necessary to do the project.
Mr. Hasek explained the changes that have been made in the park concept
since the Park and Recreation Commissioners last review. The concept previously
approved by the Park and Recreation Commission included a trail system with
connections to all of the roadways which abutted the park property, a
ballfield/soccer playfield, hockey rink, skating rink, tot lot, tennis/basketball court,
and a small parking area near the street on the south. The total project has been
increased in size from 280 acres to 360 acres. The project is bounded by County
Road No. 12 on the south, County Road No. 13 on the west and Trott Brook on the
east. The proposed centrally located park area has been increased in size from
Park&Recreation Minutes •
April 8, 1998
Page 4
8.5 acres (6.6 acres of upland) to 13.2 acres (9.8 acres upland). A park linkage of
3.9 acres has been included along Trott Brook, as well as a potential 3.5 acre
passive area to the north along the creek. The total dedicated park area will be •
approximately 20.6 acres.
Mr. Hasek indicated the park area will serve as a focal point at the southern
entrance into the project. Mr. Hasek explained the layout of the park and the
location of the proposed trails and trail connections. The revised park plan shows
the proposed locations for the playfields, hockey rink, skating rink,
tennis/basketball court, an additional playfield to the west and a picnic shelter.
He noted picnic tables could be included in the wooded area. Mr. Hasek
described the proposed landscaped entrances.
Commissioner Olson expressed his concern that the wetlands will increase in size.
Mr. Hasek explained a drainage system will be in place to properly route the
runoff and explained how the topography creates a natural separation area.
Mr. Hasek explained a 50' corridor is shown along Trott Brook, but he felt this
corridor would need to be tied into a future project to the north. The
Commissioners felt since the trail would be subject to flooding, the construction
material would be something other than bituminous (i.e.,wood chip, ag lime,
etc.)
Discussion followed regarding proposed locations of trails and sidewalks.
Chair Anderson expressed his concern that the impact of the park on the
adjacent homes to the north and south of the park. Mr. Hasek felt the impact on
the homes to the north would be the trail between the lots which will be no less 111
than 50 feet. The distance from the back of the building pads to the balifields is
250-300 feet and did not feel the lots would be impacted. The lots to the south
that would be most impacted would be those directly south of the tennis court
and adjacent to the hockey rink. He felt the location of tennis court and hockey
rink could be changed to lessen the impact on the residences. Also, he felt the
activities during the day would be less likely to affect the neighboring properties.
Discussion followed regarding the location of the hockey and skating rinks and
possible lighting. Mr. Hasek suggested locating a lighted hockey rink in the 80
acre city park to the south of the proposed project. Mr. Hasek felt that if the
hockey rink were lighted, it would be a draw for people from other areas to use
the rinks. A warming house and substantially more parking would then be needed
and the complexion of the park would be changed from a neighborhood park to
an area park.
Chair Anderson expressed his that concern the hockey and open skating would
have on the southern lots. Mr. Hasek suooested the City's Planning Intern, Steve
Wensman, view the site to see if a workable solution can be found.
Further discussion followed on relocating the southern lots. Commissioner
Anderson indicated he felt the usage of the park will be greatly limited by the 7
residential lots on the south side of the park. Mr. Hasek discussed the possibility of
relocating some of the southern lots to the west on the collector street. He
•
________--- ---
__. ...
•
U5 111G�yz� %
/
/- _
NOttN6°'UNO/
_/
_____5_-00-'°\---)1--'t
0
��' UNI TED I'D-' SOC.
/ ---- --U ARDENT,ASENT PER DOC
' • 190399,ie. 03552 b NO 263872
/ c
/ 1aEE`SMS pEF
/- 169 Js cote.
S C+ i+ *cc I
sr+E +� ..."--....',,,0007."—.2%-"----
,-_-_,---*7---,„,.....,-",.._/mss; C y
r
• ^ -
w Y e
e
2 X68
RETAINING - \ �®�"
WALL _ I'
� I 0 _
�' REMOVE ISLAND • —' i� wA
�i� / 6 PAVE TO MATCH 1f'��� �1� R�,=—
s ��,� . EXISTING SECTION
2,2,______ �;;1 '1 !!
/ . ,34 0 ®iw■ f 1::=10, ......-"immii)jii..''''
711.1.11.1.1111.1.11°E...'
Iv
/� _ a I , ;
�� I •
r 34.5
Ilifijill
,7 PrIP /I,
---/ft
Ad
DRAINAGE b UTILITY v„pill ,
j ��0.1 ,,,,. _......_ _ -p`' 'llszwiiiir
p }6
—en 11411-91".111.10,. ....;..1� ►' . . . I
I�irbT •I& r.� 1 e,/
• CATCH BASIN __ \ I
-°- "— — =— —�.. A v.1e 5B O X , CA
CATCH BASIN 1 $ 94H NS T R
75 A3R HER_ AL AS IN,
T/R 934.40 i, =
' tL --'— 16"WTRI
A INV.925.40
16"WTR •A'-
PER 0095 121123,NO 088.
�p NO 268612,1a 272295 b N• 8608 Nn 3
}5.n.___ _________,..___...,5;.5.%_____,,,,,,,,„" j I ,':9AN yyyci 3 '�2+00 7' 100' 1{QO POWEr1A560C.
�:��� 24+00 23+5 P� 23+00 /T j • UTILITY- .EMENT PER TOC
/SAN MH no 190399 0 103652 6 NO 283870
ICATCH BASIN, , FREEPORT AVENUE ST/RAN 933.40 j p
T/R 934.35 NV.918.88+
INV 931.35 ----- - --
T. / _ " Y
�\ - HYD ...1r
II CATCH BA
11
T/R 935.
INV.932.
• JI-- oil 3
11
y
I
il
11 1
BITUMINOUS PARKING �I ,le..,��
�� ‘ER POLE
j/ LEGEND PROPOSED OUST INS
CONTOURS J..1...I /.IN/
IP.
/ WATER SERVICE
/ SANITARY SERVICE
j NNM0.E • •
CATCH BASIN ■ •
---.""----------1
ITIENT WEDGE 9.ATEYALVC : �xi
SANTARYYSE —►eRN^ —......90.11—
1/311Y W O °
/ /
/� 9TpB18ELER �SIm1'SS _____>>..s,._____>>..s,...______>>..s,..._� .� �v1N `1( I
VATElB1A1M —AY.R.� —sA'Nt.— •i
SPOT ELEVATION it.. .Y.. \v IIIYYY��� ,\
DMEC T ION OF PLOW -.-1•SL
SILT FENCE
CURB a GUTTER/ SD IL BDNINOSCITY O F
RETAIN IRB WALL
/ DEC10.1d1,TREES ♦4
w*
40 ��� RIVER 25 / CON IFFRONf TREES ELK Ra.LR
TREE_ENE
BOUNDARY LINE M I N N E S O T A
91 PROPERTY LINE
I . -- SETBACEASEYENT LINE _ —
\ SETBM,t LINE �.�.�.�
o, \ \ 7 LDunu1 Er a X.ro
cc ORA INT ILE
Ii
I2863
1, N VNN , \
A e ovo 'D v9; \ 4 C - a
'F,� / ,N 833.09 14I Ili IN 6sur
- i �.I \`\•I 2+00 'I DNx55/DEvetDVE6 sr
N'1/4.
a y..: 1 � }71 0 20 40
7.71.i...1.
ZJ I1IIIr%
I o•is se �� 1 I SCALE IN FEET Fly.
► OPPODAN1
..�" '- .� a •oil ,,1��
~ II ��� ■ I l�I \■ e11t!■d Iowa a'..Srr De via
420 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE
`B ' P .8•,: I 50 L NOTES: 000 SECOND AVENUE sbsTM
II� :� I I UTILIZE EXISTING ON SITE PAVING AND SURFACE 012-sy0My
K1• '64, `^ ,111
• 11.
FEATURES FEATURES.WHERE POSSIBLE. FIELD VERIFY I mrllno CONDITION.PUN
CONDITION BEFORE USE. REMOVE ALL UNUSED
•11111
9}2.3+ 93'7C SURFACE
■ 1�II_ ';l0� i xil lit NLE9,�
33.8 'k I E, ' II 111 csi ro019809x SITS
OO N'PLAN MX
■ o s @1 F. n4-1 P.o...au,tan=MAN
0(9FE�03sA.b • '�il
_ F�I 11 Z
1jCRB I
iri,\\„\,,,i,. .r,URANSITION 'I� ll I I• � II. 5.0 INv. 947
0 iii11 Z
tI I o I
I� lie rti 11 J I a, 4 _0 °TART.,
. al 36r JCU' -�_- 35.0 • 4-1 INV.!
i - T�,SipIk .F• a II
a �y CAT(
..Ij® 1' —MEJ 60 CATCH 01N 1 ,i I I III INV .,.�e,A�.....�•..
11
i°ma. i�r���
�- CONN ISTIV _ rn 5 \ .74„1: 52,3171,-,,,....t.,,,....,„;:,....o "'"+uv
UTILITY RVI '— •^•b'^'e ceµq Nn
■' . 4 "m,e- ; 1111111.1111111 °n=M' n." °° - ,s. r.
16;COMCI�ETE�AAU(,' ' H. w uu \. �.ry tl. .e
EI aJUG vELEC✓ ud /s" p'991 auk Alxv _
�Y'a uCATCH BASIN m.a.e'Ndnx.
•
CATCH :' :'T TO EXIST1"'/ I T/R 931.98 'HIlT INeviTCH
H BAS 1N , BASIN Iv INV.924.48 NMI
T/R 93:I_V 'BASIN
'( 926.88 SE 18�
934188 INV.92•. •
1 ."WTR
MNIIIMOIIIIIIN
925 98
\3 •}1.92 ..55:11 •1•••_
3
I I 20+50 n 20+00 I9+5D -��T -
– 21+00 / •••••••-,.'I• l AA _•/.■MI!
P 01' !i' Via,
i / _ „ _ ______ <<--12"STS--r- aaaa '''''
mteks
CATCH BASIN CATCH 1 diraif mmitodirigt,nae.
.IN T/R 931.95 T/R 931
16 I INV.923.25 INV.92. Pls..•eoPneen• n< Wry
.• oen••N.6aNN
ogtfts
16 myw. iot-::m.e lerorrN
PRELIMINARY
.. 1...===,- 71 GRADING PLAN
lialgiLIKL
f981611
C3-I
ie;%�7/ C9010HV1
4
i1
• 111'1°Al 14�• 169
US
LI
Fg
NO`�
ci
NOR\N
SpNSN9cNp�qNE
UNITED OWER ASSOC.
ASEMENT PER DOC
NO 190399, 0 103552 8 NO 263870
GKw ''''t11-•
169
13S �1
\ E� w
U ___.,,,.!.;.0----- B
t �A o
• ^ ' . J
8
1 92A 5 16g 33
D\NN'
WALLIN ING ,\. 3.48
WALL
l�\TY
EASET NTO EXISTING
50
Ogp28
Np
.1 illir
R 9
9 Illpmuirminm
1�
i it. 00
.
34.5
Ig2 g I - 'c4> 1. - I *RI .
1- 1.1.11111ria
k. Ile 16
t pllINIIIIIMP .0 TC-93
it
1 1 ¢.
c s
x,
�' CATCH BASIN 934.40 11 AI s
T//�
......_;.\:"
R l q5 A INV
A INV.928.40 A 16"WTR kl
fi WTR
CB
NO 268612,a 272295 8 ca 6608m
ti 9 5 10 pyy O9 N 't-into POWE�nASSOC.
----1?.SAN 29400 '-� 2}i50+� 23+00 T O OMENS PER Q0C
I /SAN MH IF Z NO 180399 0 103552 8IAN0 263870
^ CATCH3BASIN FREEPO RT AVENUE SAN 933.40 A
199.918.88
IN/V/.9/31.35 \\
HYD CATCH B,
T/R 935
O 1
INV.932
BITUMINOUS PARKING
• MER POLE
6/..../ fr 7
- LEGEND PROPOSED OtISTINS
CONTOURS ......-11....., .•••••••••••
CDO. WATER SERVICE —ti
SNI ITMT SERVICE
HPINHOLE • • 1e11n1�e11y111EE1''''E''�' Y
V OM BASIN ■ I n,u 11 s R1�■ W O RES[L IENT WEDGE SATFVALVE I I
� coO
I. //
SMITMT SEVER pfE°� �-Nn—
SiORN SEIER DjAYEI. —>)^'x-sx^— ��(�[;Il'�
mmowN
SPOT ELEVATION .t°.. �l�
DIRECTION OF FLOW a-LII-. �L95—
i / SILT FENCE
CURB L GUTTER
BOIL BOR PROSRETAIN(NG WAI, CITY OF
4 4j� DEC MUCUS TREES ��, ��
40-
25 j BOUNDARY L TREES RIVER
LR
' TREEL ENE
9Mr LINEOrr
MIN N E S O T A
\\` 9� ( PRWFRTT LINE ——— —— -
q55' - I EASEMENT LINE
SETBACK LINE
FFNCIN9 �''••'¢ =4•'.1.7 �cBrtecT
a Tg'RCQ \ ,\ REw«Ael LourI . X.RE XRNR .^L
I
<,. "
GG \ ` 1 CRA INT ___
1�N.1. 28 g5
W 1
ovC""" \ 933.09 \ 4II a ����y.(,I.e Si I,'��LT
i�Il \ 2+00 0MM/cEcEI r3
11111NrilliM.01111111
SCALE IN FEBT
®SPO®AD�1
;.. ; ":tea�i r:.i� :: :.8 &Mirdlam adv
ill ...:�.1.'� � 33.8°1, 1 60 uo INrnaAnnut carne
II M.111 e��TiE mil, 11 NOTE: 900 SECCNO TH
512-336-6485
iPIN v�66402
9'.
4 d�mI
iIl .� �i WPI I UTILIZE EXISTING ON SITE UTILITIES
�I�:: I ��WII 932 A.
..TD WHERE POSSIBLE. FIELD VERIFY
CONDITION BEFORE USE. ABANDON ALL Rx���
EVE _� (SOD V I 1� • UNUSED UTILITIES. SNOTME
No W,m,,,,,
�� 33.8 34.3 ri1 �IxJ401 -s
viI PRIMER ..IN55.08115422 ars D Pl.
zimez.
O■
�I�� 34.Or1 Ipj
-CURB ' 11 1
.. K\ \\\\\ \VF " TRANSITION 'll w
Mum ? \�� �l . NV. 927,0 ji1 o Z
1
`4 11 * e , T R .
. ..._I�� \J6r 8. TU..NS____--J 35.0 INV.
I�I.. x IT�'�� i 1 ID' CAT,
•= I ---lig -- _..6 CATCH •IN I INV .»�w.......�......
MgI Mg� _ _____ � EA 51
I n......,.__...
EII I}0'
'IFI C^��T in 0 7 O.i A��� 2� - - °VE5 awanchnom nu.�r '' a ABAN°•P MIK
.n..N .b ,T.y n °KK.:t.;:M».
/w \a AL
n N. e L:/m ._a
II 6:CONCRETE',WALK ��.NEM . .. / -.. ......_....,,..t.._..........._.tl e1 m..r °i a�m».
UG ELEC �/ EIL'an '" ny .sM '^' "°'"°°nr1.
CATCH BASIN
CATCH T TD EXI5T1... T/R 931.98 Ions NMS/ONSIN BASIN v INV.924.48 918.14
88 INV.9229'G 926.88 SE
98 16"WTR
NTO EX. ‘j 931.92 9��?1
V.929.0 /g319
5"SAN w 3 1 I' 3 1.
21100 20+5D 20f00 19+50
11•••1. ,-�9TI_1 I e L
�_ie�-.• ■ 979 II E.LY
l? <-12•STS-« •° c..E.
CATCH BASIN CATCH I ��!1(r
SIN T/R 931.95 I T/R 93c
46 I INV.923.25 INV.92 ele�.1ryNse..BNrrti°n.R.xsoe»p�bdoe..0
96 T S O Z..09°°ee"l.uiru-m
PRELIMINARY
UTILITY PLAN
I
110801-fb
98168 1
I / , ti
/ um0HVI
I O
M'•Y 2T'.2' 14'.2 34'.11.. TOP OF MASONRYA
EL.•122'-e• 1�
BAOC LIT SIGNAGE-NI.C. ----,
N TOP OF MASONRY
_ __ • _ EL.•121'-4"
.-".7-------•--�—I � � Nr/A/1_lam-�.( --PREFNISNED METAL COF
%%-'lH o LILYW.41 . ==___"--,---='-r- %�_ ( r ( F - E1F5.CORNICE
51P BRICK
A M/' 'nff„ 1 \11 11 _//,,s,%-- -..._
_ GOOSENECK LIGHTING FI}
.1141141414.111111111111111111111111111,•unn vl _wMIMIIIII■IIIb"_'mmum"=_IwI mIlwili
ACCENTTILEE CENT
r ' _. ROCKFACE ACCENT BAN[
METAL CANOPY(RED)
/ MO
/ / / ; I / / / EE�m / f% aralle-7.
BRICK(SOLDIER COURSE
' ' \\ _ _ . `- 1I=� PRECAST CONCRETE SILL
TOP OF SLAB
.i ROCKFACE BLOCK(COLOR I) EL.•100'-0' Y
ROCKFACE BLOCK(COLOR 2) TOP OF FOOTING
E'
EL.•SEE STRUC.
ALI.M.STO NT(RED)
EXTERIOR ELEVATION (NORTH)
O
O 0 O 0 0
TOP of MASONRY ,
J
/ EL•122'-e' ' 1
1 f TOP OF MABONISY •
EL•121'_4"
r--
Ali
\ w
� \
_ -- Imo =_
--, - TOP OF SLAB 0
1 EL.•100'-0'
TOP OF FOOTING di
YYf
` -� EL.•SEE SMUG.
• 2 EXTERIOR ELEVATION (SOUTH)
0 0 0 0
he'-0• TOP OF MASONRY
EL.•122'-0'
TOP OF MASONRY
__ l_ _ -iF EL.•01'_4•
Thr __ \ Jig_ / _
_N---
Lig\ � �P-=H 0 L LY yy O Di �� ��i '\r//'
ri: l�� .�� _ \011''!\ •=.ii:eg :ii:
--lig• iii=ipmili_ -_�
i;!EI EE!E,I�=�EEEEEI.I.E!i�Et' ___, • / / / / /111111111111111111.1111111111111111111111111,11111,11111,4,1111/111111111111111P1111/111111111/HI 1111.11.1
immomm mum _•
TOP OF SLAB 0
EL.•100'-0'
__ -_y _ TOP OF FOOTING
:: -`I' t- EL.•SEE 8TRNC.
OEXTERIOR ELEVATION (EAST)
O O O O
TOP OF MASONRY 0
/EL.•122'-e-
TOP CF MASONRY
1 1EL.•121'-4•
EX
1}K VI IE 1'X 4r.
1
r
...c.--..
/ / I / / i / / - / / / I / • / `
– L/'s � 1 1
-_� EL.
GF SLABB
EL.
•
TOP CF FOOTING A
,------, •SEE STRNC.
EXTERIOR ELEVATION (WEST)
Rf p
RSP Architects. Ltd.
120 First Ave.N.Minneapolis.MN 56401
/// FAX 612.339.6760 PH 612.339.0313
{
NOME:The design.Mown and deserted herb Including
I.d,niod amine.vachirs.ad moOSe Haat a.pro-
prietary and mint be copied duplicated or commercially
emplane;in.hale a in pail,.Renu[mean mitten per-
miadm of RSP Architect.Ltd.Thate ae emlabl.hr!Fo-
iled
hmRed min ad.valuation by dent;consultants,antra,
tors,government agendas,vendors and office personnel
only in accordance with this Notice.
Capyight RSP Architect.Ltd.1996 All rights reserved
I hereby certify that this plan,specification,
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
registered Architect under the laws of the
stats of Minnesota.
Spieler.
Registration No.
Dots
111111
OPPIDAN
Builder of towns. Creator of value.
COminleslon No.
6340.012.00
Drawn t3y
Checked ey
Det.
27 luly 1998
RevlelaM
'21/66 Chy S bnleetm
1/1896 ReNwd Gtt Sbnlubn
dp9f;;,���
arRIVER, MN
Elevations
A2 ''
d
1