9.1. SR 01-22-2019
Request for Action
To Item Number
Mayor and City Council 9.1
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Work Session January 22, 2019 Zack Carlton, Planning Manager
Item Description Reviewed by
River Walk Apartments Cal Portner, City Administrator
Reviewed by
Action Requested
Provide informal, non-binding, feedback to the applicant regarding their proposed development of the
former Saxon Motors site.
Background/Discussion
The applicant has proposed redevelopment of the Saxon Motors property and building as a mixed-use
building which incorporates mini-storage and apartments. The existing building would be partially torn
down. The remaining section of the building would be remodeled to accommodate storage uses, and a
new residential addition would be constructed above and around the new storage area.
The property is guided for high-density residential uses, supporting the apartment use, but not the mini-
storage facilities. The applicant has proposed development of the site as a PUD, allowing their unique
development with Council approval.
The applicant is seeking input from Council regarding their intended use and requested deviations from
city ordinances. These requests are outlined in the attached comment letter. Staff will also have a
presentation for the meeting which reviews the applicant’s requests.
Financial Impact
None
Attachments
Updated Plans Submitted December 15, 2018
Site Renderings
Staff Comment Letter dated January 14, 2019
The Elk River Vision
A welcoming community with revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity
SHERBURNE COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PART OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 3, T 32 N, R 26 W
(TRACT B)
Property Description per Title CommitmentPrepared by Tri County Abstract and Title Guaranty, Inc.Commitment No. 107331 Rev. 2Dated Augusta 25, 2011(TRACT A)That part of Government Lot
1, of Section 3, Township 32, Range 26, Sherburne County, Minnesota, lying North of the South 830.55 feet thereof, southwesterly of State of Minnesotaright of way and west of a line
bearing North 19 degrees 58 minutes 27 seconds West from a point on the North line of said South 830.55 feet of Government Lot 1 distant 151.19 feetwest of the westerly right of way
line of U.S. Highway No. 10 as measured on an assumed bearing of West along said North line,.Subject to and together with a 66.00 foot ingress and egress easement across the following
described property: Government Lot 1 of Section 3 and the Southwest Quarter of theSouthwest Quarter of Section 2 all in Township 32, Range 26, Sherburne County, Minnesota. The center
line of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at the intersection ofthe South line of Section 2 and the Westerly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 10; thence northerly
along said westerly right of way line, a distance of 546.28 feet; thence westerlydeflecting 90 degrees left, a distance of 33.00 feet to the beginning of said center line to be described;
thence northerly and parallel with said westerly right of way line to the north lineof the South 830.55 feet of said Government Lot 1; thence West along said north line, a distance
of 150.00 feet and said center line there terminating.The side lines of said easement are to be prolonged or shortened to terminate on a line drawn perpendicular from the points of
beginning and terminus.ANDThat part of Government Lot 1 of Section 3, Township 32, Range 26, Sherburne County, Minnesota lying North of the South 830.55 feet thereof, Southwesterly
of State of Minnesotaright of way and East of a line bearing North 19 degrees 58 minutes 27 seconds West from a point on the North line of said South 830.55 feet of Government Lot 1
distant 151.19 feetWest of the Westerly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 10 as measured on an assumed bearing of West along said North line.Property Description per Title CommitmentPrepared
by Knight Barry Title, IncCommitment No. 710727Dated: 6/17/2006(TRACT C)Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, THE CROSSROADS, Sherburne County, Minnesota.Property Description per Title CommitmentPrepared
by Chicago Title Insurance CompanyAgent File Reference No. E-1744Dated: 9/09/2015(TRACT D)Lot 1, Block 2, THE CROSSROADS SECOND ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder, Sherburne County, Minnesota.
SHERBURNE COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PART OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 3, T 32 N, R 26 W
Sherburne County, MN
VICINITY MAP
Sec. 2 & 3, Twp. 32, Rng. 26
_________________________
transfered entered this ________ day of _________________, 20_____._____________________________________________
COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURERI hereby certify that the taxes payable in the year _______ on lands herein described are paid in full and there are no delinquent taxes andSherburne County Auditor/TreasurerC
OUNTY RECORDERI hereby certify that this instrument was filed in the office of the County Recorder, for recorded this ______ dsay of ________________, 20_____, at ________o'clock ____.
M. and was duly recorded as Document No. _________________, 20_____.Sherburne County Recorder
That Elk River Lodge & Residential Suites, LLC and , a Minnesota limited liability company and Sun Rae Apartments, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company,
__________________ ____________________________________________ ______________________________
________________ Attest______________________________________________________________________________________
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:owners and proprietors of the following described properties situated in the County of Sherburne, State of Minnesota, to-wit:That part of Government
Lot 1, of Section 3, Township 32, Range 26, Sherburne County, Minnesota, lying North of the South 830.55 feet thereof, southwesterly of State of Minnesota right of way and west of a
linebearing North 19 degrees 58 minutes 27 seconds West from a point on the North line of said South 830.55 feet of Government Lot 1 distant 151.19 feet west of the westerly right of
way line of U.S. Highway No. 10as measured on an assumed bearing of West along said North line,.ANDThat part of Government Lot 1 of Section 3, Township 32, Range 26, Sherburne County,
Minnesota lying North of the South 830.55 feet thereof, Southwesterly of State of Minnesota right of way and East of a linebearing North 19 degrees 58 minutes 27 seconds West from a
point on the North line of said South 830.55 feet of Government Lot 1 distant 151.19 feet West of the Westerly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 10as measured on an assumed bearing
of West along said North line.And that Sun Rae Apartments LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner and proprietors of the following described properties situated in the County
of Sherburne, State of Minnesota, to-wit:Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, THE CROSSROADS, Sherburne County, Minnesota.ANDLot 1, Block 2, THE CROSSROADS SECOND ADDITION, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Sherburne County, Minnesota.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as RIVER COMPLEX and do hereby dedicate
to the public for public use forever the walkway easement as shown and easements as shown on this plat for drainage,utility and drainage and utility purposes only.In witness whereof
said Elk River Lodge & Residential Suites, LLC, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer hereafter afixed, this _____ day of _______________, 2017.Elk River Lodge
& Residential Suites, LLC____________________________________Pat Briggs, PresidentCOUNTY OF ________________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day
of _______________, 2017 by Pat Briggs, President Elk River Lodge & Residential Suites, LLC a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of said company._____________________________
_____________________________Notary Signature Notary Printed NameNotary Public, ____________________
County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires _____________________In witness whereof said Sun Rae Apartments LLC, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer hereafter afixed,
this _____ day of _______________, 2017.____________________________________Pat Briggs, PresidentCOUNTY OF ________________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before
me this _____ day of _______________, 2017 by Pat Briggs, President, Sun Rae Apartments LLC,a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of said company.__________Notary Signature
Notary Printed NameNotary Public, ____________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires _____________________I hereby
certify that I have surveyed and platted the land or directly supervised the surveying and platting of the land described on this plat as RIVER PLAZA; that this plat is a correct representation
of the boundarysurvey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on the plat and that all monuments depicted on the plat have been correctly set; as of the date
of this certification, all wet lands and waterboundaries and all public ways are shown and labeled as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subdivision. 3.__________________________________
____________________________Barry R. Dorniden, Licensed Land Surveyor,Minnesota License Number 23044COUNTY OF BENTONThe foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day
of ___________________, 2017 by, BARRY R. DORNIDEN, Licensed Land Surveyor, Minnesota License Number 23044.__________Notary Signature Notary Printed
NameNotary Public, Benton County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ___________________
STATE OF MINNESOTASun Rae Apartments LLCSTATE OF MINNESOTASTATE OF MINNESOTA_______________________________________________, 2017.__________
CITY COUNCILApproved and accepted by the City Council, Elk River, Minnesota at a meeting held this ________ day of _________________, 2017.Mayor
ClerkCITY ATTORNEYI hereby certify that proper evidence of title has been presented to and examined by me and I hereby approve the plat as
to form and execution this ________ day of _________________, 2017.Elk River, City AttorneyCITY ENGINEERI hereby certify that this plat has been reviewed by the office of the City Engineer.
Dated this ________ day of _________________, 2017.Elk River, City EngineerCOUNTY SURVEYORPursuant to Sherburne County Ordinance Number 006, I hereby certify that this plat has been
checked and approved as to compliance with Chapter 505, Minnesota Statutes this ________ day ofSherburne County SurveyorMinneosta License Number _____________
January 14, 2019
Sun Rae Apartments, LLC
VIA EMAIL: dj@thebriggscompanies.com
Attn: Dan Anderson
633 Upland Ave NW, Suite C
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit Application, Easement Vacation, and Plat.
Dear Applicant,
Thank you for submittal of updated plans and drawings on December 15, 2018. Staff reviewed the
updated drawings and has the following comments. Please note that many of thecomments are
similar to the comments noted on August 15, 2018, and December 7, 2018. Many of the comments
have not been addressed and additional drawings are required to establish an understanding of the
project.
Please address these comments in a response letter and on future plans/submittals:
General Comments:
1.Submit an updated plat reflecting the lot lines shown on the submitted plans. The plat needs
to include all of the necessary drainage and utilityeasements.
The preliminary and final plats include the proposed lot lines shown on the revised plans. This information is
contained within with this submittal.
Drainage and utility easement vacations and proposed easements are not shown.
2.A cul-de-sac will be required at the north end of Zane Street. Update plans and the
easement vacation request to reflect thechange.
The proposed driveway accesses and drive aisles for the Riverwalk Apartment site should be sufficient for
emergency vehicle turnaround at the north end of Zane Street. A fire truck turning plan can be submitted
separately to verify vehicle movements through the site.
The cul-de-sac is required to ensure public(i.e. garbage trucks, buses, tractor/trailer) turn
around can occur within the public right-of-way and accommodate maintenance by public
works vehicles.
3.The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the project on November 14, 2018, and
recommends Park Dedication be satisfied through cash dedication and trail easements. The
trail easements must be included in the updated plat.
The revised plans and updated plat show a 30’ trail easement between the Riverwalk Apartment and the Lodge
sites.
Easement is not shown on either plat.
Phone: 763.635.1000
www.ElkRiverMN.gov
4.What does the “lower drive” connect to? The plans show it leaving the site. Will this be
constructed as part of the project?
The “lower drive” has been removed from the preliminary plans and a 30’ trail easement has been added.
Easement has not been addedto either plat.
5.Need a formal access agreement between the new 4-story apartment and the 4-story
apartment addition in order to share access point between them.
A formal access agreement between the Riverwalk Apartment site and this project will be completed during the
construction documents phase.
Access agreement can be a condition of approval –prior to recording plat.
6.Site plan does not match the renderings. Example, the south garage entrance on the 4-story
apartment addition building is shown in a different location.
The civil and architectural plans will be coordinated to match. The south garage entrance as shown on the
rendering sketch does not work for the existing site conditions; hence the architectural plans will match the site plan
in this instance.
Updated elevations and renderings are required.
7.The minimum parking setback is 10’ from property lines. If the deviation is to be a part of the
PUD, please specify a setback distance. Include the proof-of-parking locations for Elk River
Lodge in site plans for this project.
The minimum parking setback as shown on the plans is 5’ and will be part of the PUD. The existing
parking stall counts for Elk River Lodge have not changed from prior submittals; a total of 67stalls (25
covered stalls and 42 surface stalls).
Parking setback and stall countswill be noted in required PUD agreements.
8.Plans identifying the portions of the Saxon building being removed should be submitted.
An existing conditions plan is included with this submittal that shows the proposed removals.
Complete
9.Please submit floor plans for the Saxon Apartment building. The plans should show the
relationship between the storage area and apartments. Identify the square footage/unit
count for the storage portion of the building.
Floor plans will be submitted separately that will show the relationship between the storage area and
apartments with the square footage/unit count for the storage portion of the building identified.
Floor plans have not been submitted and are required for review.
10.Ordinance requires 2.5 parking stalls per unit, or 258 spaces for Riverwalk and 190 spaces
for Saxon Apartments. The parking requirements are not satisfied.
These projects are proposed as a PUD with a current ratio of 2.06 parking stalls per unit for the Riverwalk
Apartments and 2.26 parking stalls for River Plaza (Saxon Apartments).
Parking deviations must be approved by City Council. Approved counts will be memorialized
in a PUD agreement.
11.Ordinance requires one covered parking stall per residential unit. The Riverwalkbuilding
meets this requirement, but the Saxon Apartments do not.
River Plaza has been revised to show additional underground garage parking within the proposed building
addition and adetached garage building.
Approved parking counts will be memorializedin a PUD agreement.
12.The parking requirements do not include the storage component of the building.
Floorplans identifying square footage of the storage areas are required to review the parking
requirements.
The parking requirements for the storage component are included with the 8 parking stalls adjacent to that
area. With a storage area of 18,670 SF, this results in a ratio of 1 stall per 2,500 SF of storage area.
Submit floor plans identifying residential and storage areas within the building.
13.Submit landscape plans for review and comment. This is a requirement for approval.
Landscape plans will be submitted separately.
Landscape plans have not been submitted.
14.Submit lighting plans for review and comment. This is a requirement for approval.
Site lighting plans will be submitted separately.
Lighting plans have not been submitted.
15.Submit colored architectural elevations identifying material and color selections for all
elevations. Façade improvements/modifications to the existing Saxon building must be
detailed. This is a requirement for approval.
Colored architectural elevations identifying material and color selections for all elevations are included with this
submittal.
Architectural elevations have not been submitted.
16.Include proposed signage on site plans and elevations.
The proposed signage is shown on the site plans and building elevations.
Building elevations have not been submitted.
17.The Saxon Apartments no longer provide emergency fire access to the rear of the building.
Please update the plans to demonstrate access for emergency vehicles.
The plans have been updated to show emergency fire access to the rear of the building via a Grasspave system
similar to the Riverwalk Apartments.
The updated site plan does not satisfy the minimum fire access requirements along the south
and west side of the building.
18.Additional comments will be provided upon receipt of referenced plans and changes.
So noted
19.Staff reserves the right to continue review of all site, grading and utility plans.
So noted
Public Works:
1.Identify all existing utilities and corresponding drainage easements on an updated survey
that includes the lot lines shown on the updatedplans.
This information was included on the original Certificate of Survey and is shown on the Preliminary Plat.
Plat documents continue to show existing easements running beneath proposed buildings
and revised stormwater plans outside of existing easements. Update plans to satisfy the
requirement.
2.A formal agreement for the proposed shared storm sewer system between the two
properties must be formalized in an easement and agreement.
A formal storm sewer system agreement with easements between the two properties will be completed during the
construction documents phase.
Comment may be satisfied through condition of approval, prior to recording of the final plat.
3.Proposed lot lines must have standard drainage and utility easementsdedicated.
Standard drainage and utility easements along the proposed lot lines are included in the preliminary and final
plats.
Easements are not shown on the preliminary or final plat.
4.Parking bump-outs are not permitted on the public roadway in front of the proposed 4-
story apartmentbuilding.
According to City Code Sec 74-95 – Angle and parallel parking: Angle parking may be permitted on
any street by ordinance of the council. On any such street, everyvehicle parked shall be parked with the
front of the vehicle facing the curb or the edge of the traveled portion of the street at an angle of
approximately 45 degrees. On all other streets, cars shall be parked parallel to the curb or edge of the
roadway in accordance with law.
These parallel parking stalls are requested as part of the PUD.
The request must be approved by the City Council.
5.Sewer service shown off the north end of the 4-story apartment addition building extends off
of the proposed lot. All services (sewer and water) must remain within their own lot and
connect to the public system in the roadway adjacent to said lot.
The existing sanitary sewer service as shown of the north end of the Saxon building was for the connection when it
had a septic system. During the construction documents phase, it will be determined if this sanitary service is still
necessary. If it is, a new sanitary sewer will be installed within the proposed River Plaza lot.
Plans need to be updated to include all proposed service lines.
6.Submit grading plans for the new 4-story apartmentsite.
The preliminary grading plan has been revised to show spot elevations on the Riverwalk Apartments site.
Additional spot elevations, proposed grades and contours will be included in the construction documents for both
projects.
Full grading plans are required.
7.Proposed contours must be shown in all areas.
Additional spot elevations, proposed grades and contours will be included in the construction documents
for both projects.
Full grading plans are required.
8.Further detail grades on the grass pave area and the entrance to it from the paved drive
lane.
Additional spot elevations for the Grasspave areas will be included in the construction documents for both
projects. Curb and gutter in these areas is proposed to be surmountable (MnDOT D412).
Full grading plans (with contours) are required.
9.Need to reestablish the capacity and functionality of the existing storm water pond below
bluff. It seems the proposed access drive is conflicting in location.
The existing stormwater pond below the bluff will be expanded and redesigned to meet the City’s current
stormwater requirements. The proposed access drive has been removed.
Complete
10.Detail the design of the retaining walls along south side of project.
The proposed landscape retaining walls (less than 4’ high) will be design-build and will be included in the
construction documents phase.
Full grading plans (including construction details) are required.
11.Submit full updated civil/site plans for the proposed 4-story apartment building.
The preliminary plans have been revised to show the Riverwalk Apartments site along with the River Plaza
(Saxon Apartments) site. Construction documents for both projects will be submitted separately after PUD
approval.
Updates required.
12.Show all proposed grades in dark solid lines.
Proposed spot elevations and pond contours are shown in dark solid lines.
Full grading plans (with contours) are required.
13.Additional comments will be provided upon receipt of referenced plans and changes.
So noted
14.Staff reserves the right to continue review of all site, grading and utility plans.
So noted
Stormwater:
1.Stormwater management requirements need to be met as listed in Ordinance Sec.78-503.
-Stormwater and urban runoff control. and Sec. 78-504. -Post construction
stormwater management for proposed impervious surfaces. http://mn-\\
elkriver.civicplus.com/Document Center/View/3180.
The preliminary plans and stormwater analysis, design and report have been revised to meet the current
stormwater management requirements. Additional stormwater information (MIDS results, storm sewer sizing
calculations, etc.) will be included in the construction documents phase.
Complete stormwater plans have not been submitted for review. The review will be completed
once the all pertinent documents have been received.
2.Explain in detail the pre and post impervious surface is sq. ft. in the submitted stormwater
report. Also, separate the projects as phase 1 and phase 2 or explain the how the
stormwater infrastructure works together.
The preliminary plans have been updated with pre and post hardcover calculations forboth projects and the
stormwater report has been revised to match. The proposed stormwater basin will work together for both projects.
The existing/proposed hardcover calculations show a reduction. Staff cannot verify these
numbers. Please the hardcover numbers.
3.Within the stormwater report, include pre and post for volume and water qualitytreatment.
The stormwater report has been revised to include this information.
The report does not match calculated hardcover existing/proposed numbers. The discrepancies
need further explanation.
4.MnDNR will follow up with comments regarding requirements for state floodplain and
the Mississippi River Wild and Scenic and Recreational requirements.
So noted.
DNR comments were received on January 11, 2019. See attached. Include a response to all of
their comments.
5.The project must meet all state and city ordinance requirements for the floodplain regulation.
No site improvements, including stormwater basin expansion and construction, are proposed within the
100-year base flood elevation boundary.
Any improvement within the floodplain will need approval prior to installation.
6.Submit soil borings and infiltrometer tests for all proposed infiltration basin areas.
A geotechnical report was completed in 2017 for this site but does not include the area below the bluff (where the
infiltration basin is proposed) or the area between the existing parking lot and the Elk River Lodge site. This
report will be amended to include soil borings in these areas and submitted separately.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
7.Submit soil borings for the proposed infiltration basin (within proposed area) in order to
identify water baring soils. The infiltration basin details must meet state requirements and
have a separation of 3’ from the proposed bottom of the basin and water baring soils.
Please refer to the response to the previous plan review comment. The infiltration basin will be designed,
expanded and constructed to meet State and City requirements for groundwater separation.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
8.Stormwater pre-treatment is required prior to any proposed infiltration basins.
Stormwater pre-treatment will be provided using manhole sumps and sized using the MIDS calculator
during the construction documents phase.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
9.The plans show a basin bottom of 861.00 but the stormwater report lists 860.00. This needs
to be addressed.
The proposed infiltration basin will have a sloped bottom from elevation 863 down to elevation 862 but
with no area that the 862 elevation. A basin profile detail will be included in the construction documents.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
10.The proposed 18” FES needs to discharge within the basin sidewall, not short of the basin
within the hillside, also, include energy dissipation according to city standards.
The preliminary plans have been revised to show the proposed 18” FES discharging within the basin
sidewall and energy dissipation via a 4.2’ invert drop in the upstream manhole (CB #7).
Ok
11.Will the existing 18” FES and stormwater system stay on-line or be abandoned? If so, Hydro
CAD needs to be included for this and the basin needs to be cleaned out to original design or
enlarged based onrequirements.
The existing 18” FES and stormwater system will be removed and this is shown on the existing conditions
plan. As stated previously, the existing stormwater basin will be expanded based on the current City
requirements.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
12.The proposed stormwater lines show it tying together at CB #8, provide detail of how this
will work.
CB #8 is proposed to be built over the existing storm sewer pipe because there is insufficient depth within
the existing system to accommodate the proposed improvements. A detail of CB #8 will be included in
the construction documents.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
13.Provide pipe sizing chart report.
Storm sewer sizing calculations will be completed during the construction documents phase.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
14.Show parking lot contours, direction of flow and grade percentages. Also, show pipe slope
percentages.
As stated previously, final contours, grades and flow arrows will be included in the construction documents.
Pipe slopes are shown on the preliminary plans.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
15.Indicate where all roof drainage is being directed to, and not which CB#.
Existing and proposed roof drainage will be directed to locations of the Dura-Slope trench connections.
More detailed information will be included in the construction documents for each project.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
16.The city was not able to review the proposed stormwater system for the ‘proposed 4-story
apartment building’ because it is cut off on page C-2, update accordingly.
The proposed storm sewer system for the Riverwalk Apartments project is included in the revised preliminary
plans.
The plans do not match calculated hardcover existing/proposed numbers. The discrepancies
need further explanation.
17.Submit long term maintenance plan for all BMPS.
Long term maintenance plans for all proposed stormwater BMPs will be completed during the construction
documents phase.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
18.Submit full MIDSreport.
A full MIDS report will be completed during the construction documents phase.
Staff will review these documents once they have been submitted.
19.Staff reserves the right to continue review of all site, grading and utilityplans.
So noted
Environmental:
1.MnDNR will follow up with comments regarding requirements for state floodplain and the
Mississippi River Wild and Scenic and Recreational requirements.
So noted
Comments were received from MnDNR on January 11, 2019. Please review attached letter and
respond to their concerns.
2.Provide before and after hardcover calculations for the Saxon site. Ordinance limits impervious
surfaces to 25% or no net increase.
The preliminary plans have been updated with pre and post hardcover calculations for both
projects.
The plans show a 30.5% hardcover calculation, which does not meet city standards. Please
verify your hardcover calculations.
3.Section 30-2022 requires a 30 foot setback from the top-of-bluff. Move structures outside of the setback.
Both of these projects are proposed as a PUD which includes the flexibility of building
within the 30’ setback from the top of bluff.
A deviation from the standard will require approval from the DNR and City Council. Any
approved deviations will be memorialized in a PUD agreement.
4.Submitted plans showing the hardcover calculations. Sketches indicate the area inside the
building, courtyard, will have impervious surfaces.
a.If land along the river is dedicated for park use, the hardcover calculations will change.
Updated plans will be required based on park recommendations.
The preliminary plans have been updated with pre and post hardcover calculations for both projects.
The plans do not match calculated hardcover existing/proposed numbers. The discrepancies
need further explanation.
5.The proposed site does not meet setbacks from the Mississippi River, does not meet bluff
setbacks and potential grading plans are concerning from an environmental standpoint. Bluff
destabilization is the biggest concern overall for proposed project. There is no wetland
delineation on file for this site. Any encroachment into the bluff setback or bluff area may
require approval from the Department of Natural Resources. As submitted previously, there
are height restriction concerns as well. Structures along the Mississippi like this may not be
higher than 30 feet tall.
The only proposed site improvements within the 100-foot setback from the 100-year base flood elevation
boundary is the expansion of the existing stormwater basin below the bluff. The existing bluff will be protected
and monitored by an independent testing company during construction. A wetland determination was completed
for this site with no wetlands identified. Height restrictions for both of the proposed buildings will be met.
If hardcover is proposed within 45 feet of a suspected wetland, a wetland delineation will be
required. Building elevations showing the proposed heights have not been received and will be
reviewed upon receipt. Please review the DNR comment letter dated January 11, 2019, and
provide additional responses to their comments.
The recommended environmentally beneficial practices listed in the City’s plan review
comments will be considered as possible options within the PUD to offset any mutually
determined negative environmental impacts resulting from deviations to the City and
State regulations. These environmentally beneficial practices will be addressed in the
PUD and implemented accordingly.
Additional comments provided by MnDOT or MnDNR will need to be addressed as part of an
approved project. Unaddressed comments may be included as conditions for approval. Staff
reserves the right to continue review of all site, building, grading and utility plans
Thank you, and please let meknow if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Zack Carlton, Planning Manager
763.635.1035
Ecological and Water Resources Division
1035 S Benton Dr.
Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
January 11, 2019
City of Elk River Planning Commission
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River MN 55330
RE: MISSISSIPPI RIVER DEVELOPMENT CUP for PID # 75-521-0110, 75-521-0120, and 75-704-0205
Dear City of Elk River Planning Commission,
I have reviewed the newly submitted plans with the addition of the parcel to the south for a CUP to construct a
multi-family development unit along the Mississippi River. This letter is an addendum to the letter I sent on
August 31, 2018, I have found the following issues in these new set of plans.
The construction plans do not show the height of the building, but the plans do show that the building will be a 4
story building. I do not know if this building will meet the height restriction of 30 feet per Sec 30-2022 (c). A
Height greater than 30 feet could alter the scenic, historical, natural value that was outlined in Minnesota
Statute 103F.315. Typically 4 story buildings are a greater height then 30 feet.
The plans show a line denoting the 30 foot set back from the top of the bluff. This setback line is found to bisect
both the first addition the second addition and the Northeast parking lot. Having these structures built here
would be in conflict with Sec 30-2022, 2024. Sec 30-2022 which requires a setback of 30 feet from the top of the
bluff. Sec 30-2024 states roads, driveways, and parking areas shall meet structure setbacks and shall not be
placed within bluff zones. This is again stated in Sec 30-2135. In addition Sec 30-2023 does not allow for
intensive vegetation clearing within the bluff impact zone. Which by placing a parking lot and structure would
require complete removal of vegetation. Having these structures located here will also require grading and
filling of the bluff area which could destabilize the bluff.
In addition to the structures being placed within the setback the plans show that there will be a parking lot
constructed to the west of the multi-family units. This parking structure is shown to be built into the side of the
bluff which could also further destabilize the bluff. This is in conflict with Sec 30-2135. The driveway that gives
access to this parking area is also down the bluff which would require manipulation of the bluff which could
destabilize the bluff. This parking structure could also be in conflict with Sec 30-2023 Intensive vegetation
clearing within the shore and bluff impact zone. As a parking structure would require the complete removal of
vegetation.
Sincerely,
James Bedell
Area Hydrologist
|1035 S Benton Dr.| Sauk Rapids, MN 53379 | (320) 223-7850 | james.bedell@state.mn.us |
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Division of Ecological and Water Resources
800 Oak Savanna Ln. SW Cambridge MN 55008
CC: Tim Crocker DNR EWR Region 3 North District Manager
Dan Petrik DNR EWR Land Use Specialist
Ceil Strauss DNR EWR Floodplain Hydrologist
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Division of Ecological and Water Resources
1035 S Benton Dr. Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
PUD
ZC,
EV, P,
River Walk Apartments
Two phases of developmentComp. plan and zoning support residential. Proposed PUD for mix of uses. Vacation of a portion of the Zane Street ROWPlat to configure lotsZone change and CUP
to establish the PUD district
Proposal for two apartment buildings on Saxon PropertyConvert existing Saxon building to mixed use storage and residential.Project requires:
Background
Documents become part of PUD
Guided for high density residential.Need additional documents to understand facility.
Does Council support a PUD that mixes ministorage with a residential use?
Land Use/ Zoning
outs
-
sac required at end of Zane Street.
-
de
-
DNR concerned about stability of bluffOrdinance states 2.5Floor plans showing unit types help understanding
CulImpacts to bluff/setbackBuilding height along river (30’ limit)Parking bumpParking requirements at 2.06/unit and 2.26/unit
Site Design
General support for project concept?Comments to concerns from staff.
Council Feedback