7.2 SR 06-01-2020Request for Action
To
Item Number
Mayor and City Council
7.2
Agenda Section
Meeting Date
Prepared by
Public Hearings
I June 1, 2020
Zack Carlton, Planning Manager
Item Description
Reviewed by
Tall Pines Second Addition
Cal Portner, City Administrator
Reviewed by
a. Zone Change: Business Park to Planned Unit
Development
b. Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit
Development
c. Preliminary Plat of Tall Pines Second
Addition
Action Requested
The Planning Commission recommended denial of the Zone Change,
Conditional Use Permit, and Preliminary Plat citing:
1. Inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan
2. The potential to detrimentally impact the use and enjoyment of
other properties
3. A detrimental impact on the normal and orderly development of
the remaining vacant parcels
If the Council concurs with the Commission, they should direct staff
to prepare a resolution making findings of fact denying each
application, citing specific conditions or standards associated with the
review of each application. These standards are outlined in the staff
report to the Commission. The resolution and findings would be
considered by the council during the June 15, 2020, meeting.
Alternatively, if Council supports the project, the conditions outlined
in the attached memo to the Planning Commission should be
included in a motion to approve.
Background/Discussion
The applicant, Roger Derrick with the Pines at Elk River, LLC, is
Figure
proposing to develop a 6.33-acre parcel along Line Ave with 29
residential townhomes on 40-foot-wide lots. The project will be like the Tall Pines subdivision just south of this
project on 183Td Circle also developed by Mr. Derrick. Kliever Lake Fields, West Oaks, and Miske Meadows
have also included detached townhome units like those proposed with this project. The property is zoned
The Elk River Vision
A nelcoming community nvith revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional p o w E A E u e T
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity g /� URE
Business Park (BP), and a zone change to support the proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) is required
and the townhome use is supported by the Comprehensive Plan. The city has also approved three other
residential PUD developments within this block since 2016 — Tall Pines, Elk River Senior Living, and Mulvaney
Point Townhomes.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comp Plan guides this area as Mixed Use which allows a mixture of housing, jobs and/or retail services
uses within proximity to each other. The area also provides another setting for high density residential land
uses. The proposed use and rezoning to a residential PUD is supported by the Comp Plan.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission held a Zoom public hearing on April 28, 2020. Staff received one emailed comment
regarding concerns with traffic along 5"' Street NW which was read into the record. The current plans for the
Highway 169 interchange improvements include a Line Avenue cul-de-sac south of the intersection with 5"' St
NW. This would eliminate the traffic from this development along 5`' St.
The Commission noted concerns with the private street, specifically fire access and plowing, traffic, and
impacts on adjacent properties. Fire access compliance is a requirement of any project and adjustments would
be made to the plans. The city will not plow the private streets and snow storage will be a concern for the
property management company.
The applicant completed a traffic analysis to address previously stated concerns about traffic. The Council had
proposed denying this project in 2019 citing concerns with traffic along Line Ave and the unknown public
improvements associated with Redefine 169. The traffic study was reviewed by the public works director who is
comfortable with the findings in stating that the development will not place undo burden on the adjoining road
network. Additionally, MnDOT is looking to finalize their interchange plans, which propose closing Line Ave
just north of this project — directing all traffic south to Main Street.
Commissioners discussed potential impacts on adjacent businesses, specifically limits on their ability to expand
in the future if they are now located next to a residential area and expressed a feeling of spot zoning. They also
discussed the vacant lot to the south, which would be the last developable business park lot, and said it would
be difficult to develop should this project be constructed.
The applicant noted that the setbacks and distances between buildings are the same as Tall Pines and West
Oaks. He reiterated that the rezoning is allowed and that his request is consistent with the Comp Plan, like his
first project, Tall Pines, constructed immediately south of this property.
The Commission moved to deny all three applications, Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit to establish the
PUD, and the Preliminary Plat. The motion passed unanimously 6-0.
Since the meeting, staff has received numerous letters from residents expressing support for the project. Many
of them note there are already residential units in the same block and that they would like to see more of the
same types of housing options. The applicant and his representatives have also submitted additional
information related to the proposal, which are included.
Financial Impact
None
N:\Public Bodies\Agenda Packets\06-01-2020\Fina1\7.2 sr Tall Pines 21id.docx
Attachments
■ PC Packet dated April 28, 2020
■ Public Comments from Residents
■ Applicant letters dated May 26, 2020
N:\Public Bodies\Agenda Packets\06-01-2020\Final\7.2 sr Tall Pines 21id.docx
Request for Action
ver
To
Item Number
Planning Commission
6.1
Agenda Section
Meeting Date
Prepared by
Public Hearings
Aril 28, 2020
Zack Carlton, Planning Manager
Item Description
Reviewed by
Pines at Elk River, LLC —18461 Twin Lakes Road
Chris Leeseber , Senior Planner
Reviewed by
■ Zone Change from Business Park (BP) to
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.), Case No.
ZC 20-02
■ Preliminary Plat for a townhome development
to be known as Tall Pines P.U.D. 2nd Addition,
Case No. P 20-03
■ Conditional Use Permit for PUD, Case No. CU
20-03.
Action Requested
Recommend, by motion, approval of the zone change from
Business Park to Planned Unit Development (PUD), with the
following conditions:
1. A PUD agreement must be approved by the City Council
prior to recording the Zone Change.
Recommend, by motion, approval of the Conditional Use Permit "
establishing a residential Planned Unit Development (PUD), with
a
the following conditions:
1. A PUD Agreement shall be developed and signed by both
parties prior to issuance of a building permit. RR
2. A permit from Sherburne County is required for work
adjacent the Twin Lakes Road (CSAH 13) and for Hwy 10
connection to their stormwater system.
3. Streets and access must comply with MN State Fire Code
Chapter 5 and Appendix D.
4. Provide detail connections to sewer and water systems and
ensure the watermain is looped.
5. Staff approval of all site, utility, engineering, and landscaping
plans.
6. Approval of a parking diagram illustrating a minimum of 1
off-street (Public ROW) parking space per two units.
7. Hydrants must be spaced to ensure all portions of a Figure i
residence are within 250 feet of a hydrant.
The Elk River Vision
CR 33
Mari
A welcoming community nrith revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional p p x E R E o R r
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity [14A UR
8. Wetland setbacks shall be consistent with the site plan dated 6-7-2019.
9. A homeowner's association must be established, subject to review and approval of the city
attorney, and shall be responsible for all, landscaping, snow clearing, and regular maintenance of
private drives and driveways.
10. Submit an updated landscaping plan showing additional screening along the north property line.
11. Submit elevations of townhome exteriors which demonstrate variation in building materials.
Twenty-five percent of the front building facade shall have an exterior finish of brick, stucco, or
natural/artificial stone.
12. Adjacent homes shall not be the same color.
13. Provide a trail connection from the end of the private cul-de-sac to the trail along the west side of
Twin Lakes Road.
14. No more than two of the same facade design/details shall be adjacent to one another.
15. Mailboxes shall be clustered and located on the private street.
Recommend, by motion, approval of the Preliminary Plat of Tall Pines Second Addition P.U.D
1. The preliminary plat shall include right-of-way dedication for the cul-de-sac on Line Ave.
Background/Discussion
The applicant, Roger Derrick with the Pines at Elk River, LLC, is proposing to develop a 6.33-acre parcel
along Line Ave with 29 residential townhomes on 40 foot wide lots. The project will be like the Tall Pines
subdivision, also developed by Roger Derrick, south along 183Td Circle. Some units will have the option
for a lookout basement. Kliever Lake Fields, West Oaks, and Miske Meadows have also included
detached townhome units like those proposed with this project. The property is currently zoned
Business Park (BP), and a zone change to support the proposed Planned Unit Development is required.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan guides this area as Mixed Use which allows a mixture of housing, jobs and/or
retail services uses within close proximity to each other. The area also provides another setting for high
density residential land uses. The proposed use and rezoning to a residential PUD is supported by the
comprehensive plan.
Site Plan
The 29 townhome lots are laid out along a single private street with access from the west to Line Ave.
The city will be moving forward with a cul-de-sac on Line Ave. which will require additional right-of-way
from the project area. The plat and all site plans must be updated to include the right-of-way dedication
which accounts for all standard cul-de-sac and utility designs.
Each home will have driveway access to a private street, and no additional access points to public rights -
of -way are proposed. The proposed layout is concerning as the cul-de-sac does not support an adequate
turn around for emergency service and delivery vehicles, and there are no similar private streets in town
with this many units served by a single access point to a public street.
Townhome standards require one-half guest parking space per unit in an off-street parking lot or private
drive. The private streets appear to provide this standard, but an exhibit demonstrating compliance must
be submitted.
N:\Departments\Community Development\Plaiming\Case Files\CUP\CU 20-03 Tall Pules Second Addition\4-Plaiming Commission\6.1 sr TO
Pules 2sid.docx
Delineated wetlands appear on the north and south sides of the project area, and the plans show
encroachment into the 45-foot minimum setback required per ordinance. The applicant has requested
approval of the encroachment as part of the PUD process.
A proposed drainage pond on the southeast corner of the site will be utilized for stormwater
management. City ordinances also require a 45-foot minimum setback for structures around stormwater
ponds to facilitate water quality best management practices. The site plan indicates encroachments for
two lots, and the applicant has requested approval of the encroachment as part of the PUD process.
Engineering and Utilities
Properties are graded to direct runoff to the private streets, which collect stormwater via catch basins, and
to the rear of the property. Stormwater collected in the streets is directed to the proposed stormwater
pond. All homes will be served by city sewer and water.
Landscaping
The proposed landscape plan shows several trees along the private streets, and between the townhomes.
The plan also shows the required shrubs for each townhome. Additional screening along the north
property line is recommended.
Parks
Park dedication will be required for 29 medium density units.
Applicable Regulations
Zone Change
In revienring a proposed amendment, consideration shall begiven to existing conditions nritb' the area directly and indirectly
affected by the proposal, the conservation of property values, the use to nrhich the property affected is being devoted at the time,
and relevant provisions, if any, in the land use plan.
The proposed use complies with the guidance provided in the land use plan.
Conditional Use Permit/PUD
The issuance of a Conditional Use Permit can be ordered only if the use at the proposed location:
1. mill not endanger, injure or detrimentally affect the use and enjoyment of otherproperty in the immediate vicinity or
the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience orgeneral n elfare of the neighborhood or the city.
The residential use will not detrimentally affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties.
However, the residents of the future townhomes may be impacted by the existing light manufacturing
facility directly north of the subdivision. Preservation of existing vegetation and additional landscaping
are recommended along the north property line to mitigate these impacts.
2. mill be consistent Pith the comprehensive plan.
The property is guided for mixed use where residential uses are permitted. The use will be consistent
with the comprehensive plan.
3. mill not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property.
Development of the narrow property immediately south of the subdivision may be impacted by the
proposed subdivision. However, the property has access to Line Ave, and it is unknown what type of
development will occur to the south. The property allows additional townhomes, industrial uses, and
N:\Departments\Community Development\Plaming\Case Files\CUP\CU 20-03 Tall Pules Second Addition\4-Plaiming Commission\6.1 sz TO
Pules 2sid.docx
possible commercial uses. Without knowing what use may be established on the property, stubbing in
a R/W connection, or limiting this project may not be appropriate.
4. mill be served adequately by and will not adversely affect essential public facilities and services including streets, police
and fire protection, drainage, refuse disposal, neater and server systems, parks and schools; and Y411 not, in particular,
create traffic congestion or interference with traffic on adjacent and neighboring public thoroughfares.
The use will be served adequately by and will not adversely affect essential public facilities and services
including streets, police and fire protection, drainage, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, parks
and schools; and will not, in particular, create traffic congestion or interference with traffic on adjacent
and neighboring public thoroughfares.
The City Council had previously expressed traffic concerns with the intersection of Line Avenue and
CSAH 12. Since the last review in 2019, MnDOT has narrowed in on the final design for the
interchange at Main and 169, which appears to facilitate the closure of Line Avenue with a cul-d-sac
south of 5`h Street. The applicant has also submitted a traffic analysis which shows no significant
impact to the surrounding road network.
5. mill not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to
any persons or property because of excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, dust or vibrations.
The proposed residential use will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment, or
conditions that will be detrimental to other properties.
6. mill not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance.
Grading is proposed to create minimal impacts to natural areas, and the use will not result in the
destruction of scenic or historic feature of major importance.
7. mill fully comply with all other requirements of this Code, including any applicable requirements and standards for
the issuance of a license or permit to establish and operate the proposed use in the city.
The conditions included in the recommendation for approval will ensure the subdivision will fully
comply with all requirements of this code.
Additionally, Sec 30-1564 describes the standards for establishment of a PUD district.
9. Land will be honed into the PUD honing district only upon approval of a conceptplan for the PUD, pursuant
to the procedure set forth in this section. A PUD will be authorized on land in a PUD Zoning district only upon
issuance of a conditional use permit, pursuant to the procedure set forth in this section.
A Conditional Use Permit will be issued in accordance with the above standards.
2. The uses allowed in a PUD shall be limited to land uses consistent nith the city's comprehensive plan and land
use map, and to those uses identified in the concept plan for the PUD Zoning district and the conditional use
permit for the PUD.
The Comprehensive Plan and land use map guide this area for mixed use, which includes
residential uses.
3. The area of land to be included in a PUD shall be in uniform control of the applicant.
The applicant will be in control of all parcels prior to recording the CUP and plat.
4. A PUD shall be designed to form a desirable unified environment within its proposed boundaries, including
uniform design elements, landscaping lighting and signage.
N:\Departments\Community Development\Plaiming\Case Files\CUP\CU 20-03 Tall Pules Second Addition\4-Plaiming Commission\6.1 sr TO
Pules 2sid.docx
The PUD is designed as one project with uniform design elements throughout the project area.
5. A PUD shall not cause undesirable impacts on adjacent lands and land uses. In particular, uses on the PUD
perimeter shall be compatible with adjacent uses outside the PUD.
Nearby land uses include single-family residential, commercial development, light manufacturing,
a senior facility, and developable vacant land. All parcels are within the mixed -use area guided by
the Comprehensive Plan. The PUD will not cause undesirable impacts on adjacent lands and land
uses.
6. A PUD shall be served by adequate transortation, water, sanitary server and drainage ystems.
The project area will be served by public services and will not adversely impact transportation
networks within the area.
7. A PUD shall not adversely affect existing or proposed parks, schools, streets or other public facilities.
Existing public facilities are not impacted by the proposed project. However, the planned cul-de-
sac on Line Avenue requires dedication of additional right-of-way.
8. The council may establish varied and reasonable lot area, frontage, side yard, and setback requirements for a
PUD and may authorie a density nrhich it determines to be appropriate under the circumstances. Any permitted
density shall be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan and not adversely affect the public health, safety and
welfare.
The proposal is consistent with densities described in the comprehensive plan, setbacks from
public rights -of -way, and design standards for similar developments within city code.
9. More than one principal building may be constructed on a lot within a PUD if authori.Zed by the council.
Unless otherwise permitted by the council, a PUD shall comply n ith the schedules of dimensional regulations set
forth in this article, except that individual lots shall have no less than 80 percent of the minimum area for similar
uses.
The project does not conflict with standards described in city code.
Preliminary Plat
City ordinance section 30-375 outlines the required findings for approval of a Preliminary Plat.
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent n ith the honing regulations (article UI of this chapter and conforms in all
respects wab all requirements of this Code, including the Toning regulations and this article.
The proposed subdivision requires approval of a rezoning application. Provided the zoning is
amended to PUD, and recommended conditions are included, the proposed subdivision is
consistent with all zoning regulations.
2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable general and specialised city, county, and regional plans,
including, but not limited to, the city's comprehensive development plan.
The subdivision is consistent with all applicable plans.
3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to
erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and drainage are suitable for the type and density of development and
uses contemplated.
The physical characteristics of the site support the proposed use. Encroachments into the 45-foot
wetland setback and buffer can be approved through the PUD process, but staff has included a
N:\Departments\Community Development\Placuiing\Case Files\CUP\CU 20-03 Tall Pules Second Addition\4-Plaiming Commission\6.1 sr TO
Pules 2sid.docx
condition that encroachments closer than 25 feet from the wetland or stormwater pond are not
permitted.
4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage transportation,
erosion control and all other services, facilities and improvements otherm'se required in this article.
The subdivision includes public utilities and stormwater infrastructure that meets city requirements.
Additional permits required to comply with erosion control standards are a required and must be
secured prior to building permit issuance.
5. The proposed subdivision Y411 not cause substantial environmental damage.
The subdivision will not cause substantial environmental damage.
6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record or with easements established by judgment of a
court.
There are no conflicts with easements of record.
7. The proposed subdivision will not have an undue and adverse impact on the reasonable development of neighboring
land.
The proposed subdivision will not impact reasonable development of neighboring land.
8. The proposed subdivision is notpremature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists:
a. Lack of adequate stormwater drainage.
b. Lack of adequate roads.
c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
d. Lack of adequate off site public improvements or support systems.
The subdivision is not premature as the above conditions have been provided for.
In reviewing the standards for approval of a Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit, Planned Unit
Development, and Preliminary Plat, the proposed project meets the standards, and is recommended for
approval with the outlined conditions.
Financial Impact
None
Council Meeting
If acted on, tills item will go to the May 18, 2020, City Council meeting.
Attachments
■ Location Map
■ Applicant's Narrative dated February 2020
■ Traffic Analysis dated February 3, 2020
■ Site Plans and Preliminary Plat
■ Building Elevations and Floor Plans
N:\Departments\Community Development\Plaiming\Case Files\CUP\CU 20-03 Tall Pules Second Addition\4-Plaiming Commission\6.1 sr TO
Pules 2sid.docx
5j
4
x� - _
r 75-13-310 75
1145 ,
LL
75-1.24-41t15
1 LL s
l3� 120 L s
1 z 75-73 S-Q 105
.. 75-1563'4D1115 a i
I t y � •
t h
rig 4 -
°a
Roger rric
Zone Change, CUP, PLit, Ease ent a atioll
W�
Ad-00
— 0 lop
4 !
ib
# F, AWN
Case No 20-02
U 2-3
P 20-03 Eli -
EV 20-0 1 River
Pines at Elk River, LLC
5001 American Blvd W., #501 ♦ Bloomington, MN 55437 ♦ 952.830.0161 ♦ Fax: 952.831.1215
Tall Pines II P.U.D.
Narrative February 2020
We own property fronting on Line Avenue adjacent to Twin Lakes Road and to our original Tall Pines townhome
development. We are proposing to develop Tall Pines II into 30 detached townhome lots similar to Tall Pines and West
Oaks (29 townhomes if the City wants Line Avenue to cul-de-sac at our development).
Attached is the recent Spack Solutions traffic study showing "no significant operational impacts" on existing Line Avenue
traffic (3% or less). It will be three (3) years before Tall Pines II is fully built out, which may be irrelevant because of the
City's plan to reroute the Line Avenue cut through traffic.
We plan to offer three building designs: the Bridgeport, the Wellington, and the Hampton. Twenty-seven homes will be
one -level slab on grade, and three homes will have basements. Plans for the Bridgeport, Wellington, and Hampton are
attached, as well as our development plan showing how homes fit on each lot. Sunrooms, fireplaces, and a variety of
upgrades, as well as some triple garages are available as options. Prices will start in the $275,000 range.
As with Tall Pines, since each home is a single-family dwelling, homeowners are responsible for their own building
maintenance. The Tall Pines II Homeowners Association (HOA) will be professionally managed by Crawford Management
Company (they also manage Tall Pines). They will see to the maintenance of the grounds, including lawn care, irrigation
operations, as well as snow plowing and shoveling. The monthly HOA dues will be $100 (the same as Tall Pines).
Wetlands that are adjacent to or contained on our property were defined by Bogart Pederson in 2018. We have worked
and reworked the site plan in an effort to stay as far as away from the wetlands as we can. This is a narrow site, so we
are somewhat limited. There are four lots that we are requesting variances to encroach upon the 20 foot setbacks (but
not the 25 foot buffer). Part of the requested setback variance would not be required if we were to fill per deminimus
that portion of the wetlands. Our engineers have worked with the City Environmental Coordinator, Amanda Bednar,
going over several iterations of our plan and we all agree that it doesn't make any sense to fill part of the wetlands just
so we can limit our variance setback request.
The holding pond that we originally designed needs to be substantially enlarged due to the municipal well that is located
across Twin Lakes Road. Due to the proximity of the municipal well, the statute requires us to line our pond with clay in
order to slow down the water infiltration. That requirement necessitates constructing a substantially larger pond, which
results in the loss of one lot and impacts the fire turn -around set -back on 2 other lots. I am told that drainage ponds
have the same buffer and setback requirement as wetlands, which is difficult to understand since the purpose of the
pond is to collect all runoff water from the site, so what is there to protect?
Therefore, we are also requesting a set -back variance for two lots adjacent to the pond and for two lots adjacent to the
fire turn -around.
Pines at Elk River, LLC
As with West Oaks and Tall Pines, our buyers are empty nesters who want one -level maintenance -free living. At this
stage of their lives, they enjoy having a new home they can customize to their taste. We believe Tall Pines II P.U.D. will
be an excellent addition to the City's housing stock.
Thank you for your consideration.
Roger Derrick
Chief Manager
Pines at Elk River, LLC
Attachments:
• Spack Solutions Traffic Study
• Land Use Application (will be submitted separately with property owner's signature)
• Zoning Change Application
• Conditional Use Permit Application
• Preliminary Plat Application
• Final Plat Application
• Erosion Control Agreement
• Easement Vacation (may not be needed)
• Plans and photographs of:
o Bridgeport
o Wellington
o Hampton
• Engineering Drawings by Bogart Pederson:
o Alternate Site Plan showing an adjacent Line Avenue cul-de-sac
o Preliminary Development Plan
o Preliminary Plat
o Preliminary Site Plan
o Preliminary Grading & Erosion Control Plan
o Preliminary Utility Plan
o Preliminary Landscape Plan
Roger@chofamerica.com
From: Roger@chofamerica.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 2:36 PM
To: Justin Femrite
Cc: Patrick Kelly; Mike@chofamerica.com; 'Elizabeth Merwin Smith'; Rob DeGroot
Subject: Tall Pines 2
Attachments: Spack assessment.pdf
Hi Justin,
Attached please find the traffic assessment done by Spack Solutions.
They did their analysis based on the existing Line Avenue traffic with the assumption that we will be building 30
townhomes.
As you can see, they do not consider our site to be a high traffic generator.
They see no significant impacts to surrounding roadways or intersections due to trips generated from our development.
Spack Solutions estimates that 30 homes will increase the traffic on Line Avenue by only 3%.
It should be noted that it will take 3 years for Tall Pines 2 to be fully built out.
The schedule is as follows:
• 2020 — Governmental approval process/land development/limited initial building construction
• 2021-15 homes to be occupied
• 2022 — remaining 15 homes should be occupied
This schedule is consistent with our experience with the existing Tall Pines development around the corner.
Justin, I understand you will be discussing this with Zach and others and will get back to me with suggestions for the best
plan to move forward.
I look forward to hearing from you
Thank you
Roger Derrick
5001 American Blvd W. Ste 501
Bloomington, MN 55437
612-644-3724
l%
`�.)Spack
SOLUTIONS
Technical Memorandum
To: Roger Derrick, Pines at Elk River, LLC
From: Max Moreland, PE, PTOE
Date: February 3, 2020
Re: Traffic Assessment — Line Avenue Residential Development
Purpose of Report and Study Objectives
A new residential development with 30 townhome units is proposed on Line Avenue south of
5th Street in Elk River, Minnesota.
The primary purpose of this technical memorandum is to determine the amount of traffic to be
generated by this development and how that compares to traffic volumes on Line Avenue with
the current and future proposed layouts of that road. The proposed site plan will also be
reviewed from a transportation perspective.
A site plan dated June 7, 2019 is attached for reference.
Conclusions
Using standard trip generation data for the proposed 30-unit multi -family housing
development, the expected weekday changes in traffic volumes are:
• An increase in total daily trips by approximately 220 trips. This is equivalent to
approximately 3% of the existing daily traffic volumes on Line Avenue adjacent to the
development.
An increase in total a.m. peak hour trips by approximately 15 trips. This is equivalent
to approximately 3% of the existing a.m. peak hour traffic volumes on Line Avenue
adjacent to the development.
An increase in total p.m. peak hour trips by approximately 15 trips. This is equivalent
to approximately 2% of the existing p.m. peak hour traffic volumes on Line Avenue
adjacent to the development.
Though the trip generation from this site will cause an increase in area traffic volumes, the site
is not forecast to be a high traffic generator. No significant operational impacts are anticipated
for the surrounding roadways and intersections due to trips from this proposed development
under the current and proposed roadway configurations.
O 1 Main St SE, #204,11
Minneapolis, MN 55414 USA 1(888) 859-9425 www.spacl<sotutions.com
SpackSolutions 2 of 6 Line Avenue Residential Development
Traffic Assessment
Site Characteristics
The development site is located on the east side of Line Avenue approximately 300 feet south
of 5th Street. One access point to the site is proposed. This private roadway will serve 30
residential townhome units and ends in a cul-de-sac on the east side of the development. A
driveway is proposed for each unit along the private roadway.
Line Avenue Modifications
Line Avenue currently extends from Main Street/1815t Avenue to Twin Lakes Road and has
intersections with 3rd Street/183rd Circle and 5th Street. In an effort to reduce commuter cut -
through traffic on Line Avenue, the City of Elk River has plans to cut Line Avenue south of 5th
Street. This will result in a cul-de-sac just north of the proposed development site access. 5th
Street will still connect to Line Avenue providing the ability to get to Twin Lakes Road, but there
will no longer be a direct connection from 5th Street to Main Street/1815t Avenue via Line
Avenue.
The 169 Redefine project may lead to an alternative layout of Line Avenue, but those plans are
not yet finalized and therefore not analyzed here.
Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes were collected at Line Avenue/51h Street and other nearby intersections in 2016
as part of a Traffic Impact Study that Spack Solutions conducted for Line Avenue. Utilizing these
2016 traffic counts, a growth rate was applied to the counts to factor those counts to reflect
current 2020 conditions.
The growth rate used is based on historical traffic counts collected on Line Avenue over the last
six years. Based on that information, a growth rate of approximately 1.5% per year was
calculated. Applying this background growth rate to the 2016 traffic volumes established the
2020 traffic volumes.
The factored 2020 volumes on Line Avenue in front of the proposed site access for the peak
hours and the entire day are shown in Table 1. These volumes are shown in 15-minute
increments in an attachment.
Table 1— 2020 Line Avenue Traffic Volumes
PeriodTime
Northbound Volumes
Southbound Volumes
AM Peak Hour
144
388
7:00 to 8:00 a.m.
PM Peak Hour
475
254
4:30 to 5:30 p.m.
Daily
3,793
3,905
Spack Solutions 3 of 6 Line Avenue Residential Development
Traffic Assessment
When Line Avenue is cut south of 5th Street, there will be effectively no traffic on Line Avenue
at the site access as cut through traffic will be removed and all adjacent development related
traffic will occur south of the proposed residential development.
Trip Generation
The traffic forecasts for the site are based on the data and methods published in the Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. The ITE Trip Generation
Manual is a compilation of traffic data for various land uses from existing developments
throughout the United States. Table 2 presents the weekday trip generation for the proposed
development.
Table 2 — Weekday Trip Generation
Multi -family Housing (low
rise) - 30 Units 110 110 3 11 11
(ITE 210)
It can be seen in Table 2 that the forecast trip generation for the proposed residential building
is approximately 15 trips in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. It is noted that this development is
anticipated to have a majority of retired residents which may result in a trip generation that is
lower than shown in Table 2, especially during peak hours.
ITE's Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development report recommends a detailed
traffic impact study be done for developments generating 100 or more new trips in a peak hour.
That is the threshold where development traffic may adversely impact the transportation
system and intersection operations should be analyzed. Based on this threshold and the results
shown in Table 2, a full study would not be needed.
Impact Analysis
To see the impact of site trips on the surrounding network, vehicles need to be distributed from
the development throughout the roadway network. A trip distribution pattern for trips going
to/from the proposed residential development was developed based on location and access to
the surrounding region as well as previously collected traffic counts. That pattern is:
• 15% of the generated traffic to/from the west on 5th Street
• 10% of the generated traffic to/from the north on Line Avenue
• 10% of the generated traffic to/from the east on 1815t Avenue
• 20% of the generated traffic to/from the south on Zane Street
• 45% of the generated traffic to/from the west on Main Street
This breaks down to 25% of site traffic going to/from the north at the site access and 75% going
to/from the south.
Spack Solutions
4 of 6 Line Avenue Residential Development
Traffic Assessment
When Line Avenue is cut north of the site access, it is anticipated the distribution pattern would
be:
• 10% of the generated traffic to/from the west on 3d Street
• 20% of the generated traffic to/from the east on 1815Y Avenue
• 20% of the generated traffic to/from the south on Zane Street
• 50% of the generated traffic to/from the west on Main Street
In this scenario 100% of the site traffic would go to/from the south at the site access.
The new site trips from the residential development are shown in Figure 1 for the existing Line
Avenue layout and Figure 2 for the proposed future Line Avenue Layout.
Figure 1— New Site Trips — Existing Line Avenue Layout
AM Peak Hour
+ 00 rafto\
PM Peak Hour
n��
Daily
Spack Solutions 5 of 6 Line Avenue Residential Development
Traffic Assessment
Figure 2 — New Site Trips — Future Line Avenue Layout
AM Peak Hour
° O '° p ��li O CNN
°
PM Peak Hour
0
`J 4
o
s p $ n ---.
r
Daily
40
55�}
00 otl o�p \ "Yp
As seen in Figures 1 and 2, the highest peak hour volume increase for any movement at an
existing intersection due to the new site traffic is ten vehicles. That equates to an increase of
approximately one vehicle every six minutes for those movements. Based on these volumes,
none of the surrounding intersections are anticipated to be significantly impacted by site traffic.
Additionally, the Line Avenue/Main Street intersection was modeled as having Level of Service
B and C operations in the peak hours in the 2016 Traffic Impact Study. The amount of traffic
being added to that intersection from this development would not be expected to significantly
impact those operations under the existing or future roadway configurations.
Spack Solutions 6 of 6 Line Avenue Residential Development
Traffic Assessment
Site Review
There are currently no pedestrian or bicycle facilities on Line Avenue at the location of the site
access. The Elk River Comprehensive Plan indicates a trail facility is proposed on Line Avenue in
the future. When that facility is constructed, it is recommended that this development connect
to that facility with ADA compliant curb ramps, sidewalks, and potentially a pedestrian crossing
on Line Avenue, if needed.
Within the site, vehicles will be able to use the cul-de-sac as a turnaround point, and a
hammerhead turnaround is provided off of the private road to allow larger vehicles (delivery,
garbage collection, etc.) to be able to turn around within the site.
Attachments
• Site Plan
• 2020 Line Avenue Traffic Volumes
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING GENERAL NOTES
e
E (1) LOT.
SHRUB LAYOUT,
-THRUR I AYQUT-,
vow m—
mE (1) — 1. THE Bm.
T SkTYPE —BTIE
—
ST mWI mr
AM
7,
'N
1-d' 1 1
113 VIZ.,
v-
- — -- — — — — — — — — - —
N
--c I I A I
a
2020 Volumes on Line Ave at Proposed Site Access
Time
Northbound
Southbound
00:00
3
3
00:15
5
4
00:30
3
4
00:45
1
1
01:00
4
0
01:15
2
0
01:30
1
2
01:45
2
3
02:00
2
1
02:15
4
1
02:30
2
3
02:45
1
1
03:00
4
4
03:15
2
9
03:30
1
4
03:45
1
6
04:00
1
6
04:15
2
12
04:30
1
17
04:45
1
19
05:00
9
36
05:15
8
42
05:30
11
78
05:45
11
52
06:00
19
77
06:15
22
94
06:30
32
97
06:45
28
96
07:00
21
89
07:15
38
88
07:30
36
116
07:45
49
96
08:00
46
79
08:15
27
83
08:30
32
65
08:45
38
61
09:00
35
63
09:15
40
52
09:30
37
56
09:45
27
46
10:00
35
51
10:15
34
48
10:30
32
45
10:45
43
49
11:00
44
43
11:15
41
54
11:30
38
59
11:45
52
49
Time
Northbound
Southbound
12:00
50
53
12:15
54
59
12:30
47
45
12:45
47
50
13:00
46
47
13:15
37
40
13:30
43
44
13:45
48
48
14:00
63
43
14:15
57
46
14:30
71
60
14:45
71
58
15:00
78
47
15:15
83
53
15:30
95
61
15:45
116
63
16:00
116
73
16:15
108
65
16:30
107
62
16:45
127
68
17:00
117
60
17:15
125
64
17:30
113
64
17:45
96
68
18:00
83
67
18:15
70
67
18:30
73
54
18:45
83
37
19:00
73
50
19:15
59
39
19:30
57
35
19;45
59
30
20:00
49
24
20:15
46
32
20:30
48
25
20:45
41
21
21:00
31
21
21:15
35
21
21:30
26
19
21:45
23
7
22:00
22
11
22:15
16
10
22:30
10
5
22:45
11
9
23:00
10
6
23:15
12
5
23:30
9
7
23:45
7
1
TALL PINES P.U.D. 2ND ADDITION
CITY OF ELK RIVER
SHERBURNE COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR
PINES AT ELK RIVER, LLC.
FINAL
SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN,
STORM SEWER, GRADING & STREET
IMPROVEMENTS
JFRN CTATF�nAIFNGf A11 SHERBURNE COUNTY, MINNESOTA
TITLE & INDEX SHEET 1
Project
SITE PLAN 2 Location
LANDSCAPING PLAN 3-
ON-STREET PARKING PLAN 4
GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 5
UTILITY PLAN & PROFILE- WATER, STORM, SANITARY 6
SWPPP NARRATIVE 7
DETAILS 8-10
PROJECT
LOCATION
i
I
\ NgIN ST NW G �'�
r I
r9✓� l.NO A. NW
I
I N
SHERBURNE COUNTY NO SCALE
Section 35. Township 33 Range 26
VICINITY MAP
Z (j
OZ
R 4J
W W
CF
aQ_
F V
�. O z
Q y '-
0 y -
OQ
m Wtl
O zLd
J
ap LY Q Ld
a L.J w =
> rn
0 Cr x
N Y J 0
to Ld
W LJ z
Lil
d0Q 46
N LaJ
Q H z F
SHEET N0.
I
10
LEGEND: SITE GENERAL NOTES
EXISRNG CONTOLRS sETBncR IurDR TYPICAL LOT
EXISTING FATE HYDRANT
.. — EXISTNG —A— BLYLOMICS SHALL BE .SET BACK A M1NIMIM OF 20 FEET FROM
EXISTING MANHq-E ]IiE REAR LOT LINE$ BACK OF CLRBLINE (X PMVATE
EXISTING TREE » — EXISTING STDRN SEWER CRIVEWAY$ GUST PARKAVG AREAS AND P1.b.IC
RICH TS-GIB-WAY.
EXISTING TREE LINE EXISTING WATERMAIN MMW11M DF 10 FEET BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. PROPOSED ASPHALT DRIVEWAY
ABIYFER-T5' 0 50 IOD I50
• Fg1ND MLWIMENT a EXISTING S,NITARY SEWER —A- BIYFER SETBACK-]D'
SET MdI—r ! EXISTNG CATCH BA9N SCALE IN FEET
Fg1ND CAST 1RLW MCWLWENT E' EXISTING FLARED ENO SECBDN IS
iq EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX EXISTING PVC FENCE
M EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL DENOTES D°EN WATER 3
T SIGN DENOTE$ EXISRNG ADJgNERS
EXISTNG —1 DENOTES BUILDING SETBACKS
F EXISTING GUY ANCHOR
�o
0.
WE
(mrs n�ic�iiocx mnEn) I
13
5' (LYP
- 1Q 12
1411'
o 00 9116
— a - ine ViV rcl �o so '\ I y Na,_
_ - l- „- o sls 15 I J
oci
—� y2
-
-
cc
R1a 26 3i 4".z 5; 65 7 89 ss9 10 %11 A' w,
5. s ( M12 13' s�14 a
cc
20 00 Q
ill POND l I
o z
aw
W
z
N Y
J J
W w w z
z w Q
O Q J
l I _j w
H U 0- N
SHEEP N0.
2
l0
LEGEND:
Q PROPOSED TREE EXISTING f)RE HYDRANT
® PROPOSED SHRI.N EXISTING MANHOLE
EXISTNG CONTOORS EXISTING STORM SEWER
— EXISTING WERAN05 EXISTING WATERNAIN
EXISTING TREE a EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTNG TREE LAVE ! EXISTING CATCi BASIN
c+ EXISTING F.— ENO SECTION
• FCANO MOWIMENT
SET MONUMENT EXISTING PVC FENCE
FCANO CAST 11. MONOWENT DENOTES LVYN WATER
E EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX DENOTES -S-O ADJCNERS
M EXISTING ]ELEPHONE PEDESTAL DENOTES WIDING SETBACKS
T SIGN
EX -G POLE
r EXISTING GUY ANCHOR
LANDSCAPING GENERAL NOTES
TOWNHOME NOTE:
MINIMUM ONE (1) TREE PROPOSED WITHIN LOT. SHRUB LAYOUT: SHRUB LAYOUT:
ALSO: MINIMUM ONE (I) TREE IN THE BLVD.
ALSO: MINIMUM FIVE (5) SHRUBS PER UNIT.
TERRS 3 SHRUB TYPE SHALL BE SELECTED BY THE OWNER.
3 5
0 50 HOD 11
SCALE IN FEET
zo
E.
L� 10 �1 12
I
e=WF
Pineuiewgr e m
L
z�j
e
0
/
cz
M—
1
3 4 6 7 8 910c
CC
w
12
2 13 14 I
E5
— _
I
m
� � � � 1I II I I
m •i)
�`a
IPOND I I
z z J
_
_� --- ----�- — --- -- I --
a>> a
z E a
-----------�---
CN
J Z
v) W
W
Z W H Q
d0 u) o
J } W Z
~
Q z Q
H U 0- J
UHEET NO
3
m
LEGEND:
EXISTNG CGNTOLRS EXISTING TIRE HYDRANT
.. — EXISTING WE.— EXISTING MANHOLE
EXISTING TREE » — EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING TREE LINE EXISTING WATERMAIN
a EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
• FOlND MLWIMENT
SET MOI—r ! EXISTING CATCH BASN
rgLND CAST IRLW MCW—T E' EXISTING n.AREO ENO —IM
iq EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX EXISTING PVC FENCE
M EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL DENOTES fYEN WATER
T SIGN DENOTES -S-G A —
EXISTING —1 DENOTES fiOLDINC SETBACKS
F EXISTING GUY ANCHOR
PARKING GENERAL NOTES
sETBncK Iu
•ND PARKING' SIGNAGE NEEDED . ONE SIDE d= STREET
GUEST PARKING LDCATIOIS REWREG IS.
• GUEST PARKING SPACES FRONDED IB.
I— -- _—_
2 '3 '4 .5 6 7 8 9 13' II
10 11 12 14
ine Vi w ircl
_ 3
0 PARKING THIS SIDE
1 2 3 4 5 6 74
8 9 10 \
2 11
4 12 13 14
r- - - - - - - - - - - - --
l I POND I I
ill\I I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - I
x
0
SO
IOD
ISO
SCALE
IN
FEET
1-0
imps s
=F -
Z (j
O
y 3
¢y
W W
CF
a Q
�o
Q y '-
C7 y
Q o
Z O Q
O Z J J
P: m J d
o
Q W LLL J z
1 1'
0 F
N Y J d V)
LLJEd LLJ
ZL
W
J laJ I
Q ? Z
H U d O
SHEET NO
4
0
LEGEND:
NEW FINISH GRADE SLOPE AND DIRECTION OF FLOW •p, ExiSTiNC POE
® r EXISTAYC GUY ANCNOi
TEMPORARY SEDIMENT FILTER- HIGH FLOW � EXISTNG FADE HYOtANT
. . . . . . . .. PROPOSED TEMPORARY SEDIMENT LOGS EXISTNG MANNOE
SF — PROPOSED TEMPORARY SEDIMENT LOGS - EXISTNG STORM SEWER
—900— PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR EXISTNG WATERMARK
901 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR EXISTNG SANITARY SEWER
-S.. CATOI BASIN
® TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EXISTING FLARED END BECKON
EXISTAYG CON— EXISTNG PVC FENC£
EXISTING WETLANDS DENOTES OPEN WATER
—TING FREE — — — — DENOTES EXISTING AOXYNERS
EXISTAYG TREE LINE DENOTES BY MNG SETBACMS
• FOUVD MONUMENT
SET MONUMENT
Q FOUND EAST IROR MGKLMENT
EXISTAYG ELECTRIC BOX
GE —T.. TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
SIGN
zad
GRADING GENERAL NOTES
EROSION CONTROL NOTES
I. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTE ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN EXISTING CONDITIONS PS EXIST
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFINE CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS TO THE CONSTRUCTION/GRADING
IN THE FIELD AND PS REPRESENTED WITHIN THE PLANS PS SHOWN AND ALERT THE
UMTTS SHOWN.
2. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE MINNESOTA POLWTION CONTROL AGENCY'S STORM WATER
ENGINEER BEFORE BIDDING THE PROJECT AND BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND VERIFY ALL UTILITIES WHICH MAY AFFECT THIS WORK AND
PEIT REQUIREMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND COMPLY WITH ALL
NOTIFY OWNER OF ANY CHANGES. CONTACT LOCAL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR EXACT
PERMRMS REQUIREMENTS.
3. SITE SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO AW
LOCATIONS PRIOR TO BIDDING THE PROJECT ANO COMMENCING WORK.
3 CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PREVENT SILT AND DEBRIS RUN-OFF
DEMOLITION OR GRADING OPERATIONS AND MAINTAINED TO CONFORM WITH THE STANDARDS
SPECIFIED BY THE PERMIT.
DURING GRADING OPERATIONS (I.E. SILT FENCE, STRAW BALES, ETC.).
A. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT TEMPORARY EROSION COWRGIL MEASURES ON THE EWIRE SITE AT
EAST EVERY T DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS OF ANY MEASURABLE RAINSTORM. —ED SILT
A. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY CRITICAL ELEVATIONS TO CONFORMANCE WITH GRADING
ENSURE
PLAN, PARTICULARLY WITH EXISTING STRUCTURES AND/OR PAVEMENTS TO REMAIN. MEET
UR
FENCE OR OTHER EROSION CONTROL DEVICE OR PRACTICES SHALL BE REPAIRED IMMEDIATELY .
NSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF DEVIOES SHALL CONTINUE UNTIL THE SITE HAS UNDERGONE FINAL
STABILIZATION OF TERMINATION SUBMWED TO THE
EXISTING GRADES ALONG STREETS, PROPERTY LINES AND DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES RESTORE
ALL PAVEMENTS THAT REMAIN TO THEIR ORIGINAL IF NOT BETTER CONDITION. NOTIFY OWNER
OF ANY CONFLICTS PRIOR TO BIDDING THE PROJECT.
AND A NOTICE IS MPCA.
5. ALL GRADING OPERATIONS SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL
FDR SITE ER-DIN.
B MENT SHALL BE AND
OTIO
B TURF ESTABLISHMENT AREAS SHALL RECEIVE MINIMUM OF A" DEPTH AS MEASURED IN PLACE
OF TOPSOIL. TOPSOIL FURNISHED AND INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR. ALL GRADED SLOPES
GREATER THEN OR EOURL TO 5:1 SHALL BE HYDROSEEDED. EROSION CONTROL BLANKETED.
MAINTAINED CONFIORMAND WIITH THIE STANDARDS SPECIEEDCONTROLSBY THE MPCA.STALLED
T. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR THE DISTURBANCE OF ANY AREAS
AND MAIIJTPINED UNTIL ALL TRIBUTARY DISTURBED AREAS ARE RESTORED.
OR MULCHED TO HELP STABILIZE THE SLOPES BY GENERAL CONTRACTOR.
B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL OF ALL EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES. INCLUDING SILT FENCE AND MILES. UPON ESTABLISHMENT OF PERMANENT
VEGETATION IN SND AREAS.
9. ALL SOILS TRACKED ONTO PAVEMENT OR ANYOTHER OFF -SSE AREA SHALL BE REMOVED
DAILY.
10. THE SITE SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES FOR THE PROJECT MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO
ANYGRADING OPERATION.
11 L AREAS DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTORED AND VEGETATED AS SOON
AS POSSIBLE. ANY FINISHED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED WITHIN ] DAYS AUER
FINISHED GRADING IS COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE TO MN/DOT 2575.
12. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE REVEGETATED WITH MN/DOT SEED MIX. MULCHED. FERTILIZED
M DISK ANCHDRED, PER THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE:
SEED MIX 25-131: 22D LB/AC.
FERTILIZER 22-5-1D:35D LB/AC.
MULCH TYPE 3: 2 TONS/AC.
IY 1
x
0
1ROD
11
SCALE
IN
FEET
IS
119
II
7ta 15 A rn
c I � 4J
MsIAI
IAIO — DR ^ A• I I a s
c� 12 2 35 42 53 65 2 8 •19 µ�0 911 912 x313a I Fo }
' '�14 I .cc
4 v, >
Qy
ri i°iilEV"Ailw RRx.B m •y
r I ♦ I
I i �� �I I
I � WE, sEMxLx,A,TA, �sx ExEAF£xGr aERF,D•
,EMPDRAR. " FGNOE ouE..`. XN RDKD 1 i ¢ POND I ®I :nR QYERFLDYI DnAlu Z ..
RDOxRLE RDA r APAR, ADW,cExT ,O xE,t.xOs) 1 I I O Z J
C H9e (P.-TT, i/»A_'IF LINES. 1 PIANO
IANO /
A Ix L I J
Z
i I a w w o_
Fr
Z� oZ
TYPICAL LOT (n w w a
------------------------------
w
I PROPOSED L^B DENOTES DIRECTION Z w Q O
O DRAINAGE FLOW d 0 Z
LOT NUMBER 0
PROPOTSED RE BALDING TYPE
PAD ELEVATION FBLO - NLL BSMT LOONWT J } w Q Z
ON LOOXOIITS 696.2 SLAB = DENOTES SLAB ON GRADE Q ~ Z O
PROPOSED HSE PA
I I FBL I � 5 a o v
SETBACK 898.2 SHEET N0.
I I PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION
-CENTERLINE -
l0
LEGEND:
PROPOSED STORM SEWER EXISTING CM_
EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX
UTILITY GENERAL NOTES
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND VERIFY ALL UTILITIES WHICH
UTILITY RELOCATIONS
MAY AFFECT THIS WORK AND NOTIFY
Jr
OWNER OF ANY CHANGES CONTACT LOCAL UTILITY COMPANIES
PROPOSED WATER LINE EXISTING CULVERT
T EXISTING TREE LINE
< PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER m
fb PROPOSED FITTING FOIMO IRl9V PIPE _
FOIMO CAST IRON MONUMENT
• PROPOSED MANHOLE -INLET CASTING - <
EXISTING UNDER GROUND ELECTRIC
EXISTNG OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
TELEPHaYE
EXISTNG PEDESTAL
EXISTING STCRAI SEWER
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
FOR EXACT LOCATIONS PRIOR TO BIDDING THE PROJECT AND COMMENCING WORK.
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY CRITICAL ELEVATIONS TO ENSURE CONFORMANCE WITH GRADING PLAN AND EXISTING UTILITIES, PARTICULARLY WITH EXISTING
STRUCTURES AND/PAVEMENTS TO REMAIN.
A. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTE ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN EXISTING CONDITIONS AS EXIST IN THE FIELD AND AS REPRESENTED WITHIN THE PLANS AS SHOWN
AND ALERT THE ENGINEER BEFORE BIDDING THE PROJECT AND BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
SET, RPE
PROPOSED MANHOLE - SOLID COVER T ypL, Y
'
M NEW GATEVALVE N BOX EXISTING FENCE
EXISTING WETLAND AREA
EXISTING WATERMAIN
EXISTING MANHOLE
5. WATER LINE TO BE MINIMUM B.O FEET DEPTH BELOW FINISHED
6. VERIFY INVERT ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING SANITARY LINE AT PONT
T. ILL CROSSING ELEVATIONS OF NEW UTILITIES A SIZES OF EXISTING
B. ALL SANITARY SERVICE PIPE AND FITTINGS WILL BE PVC SDR
GRADE.
OF CONNECTION WITH NEW SANITARY
UTILITIES ARE BASED ON ASSUMED
26.
LINE PRIOR TO INSTALLING ANY NEW UTILITIES.
ELEVATIONS AND SIZES PRDVIDED BY THE SURVEY.
50®
IS
K
,M NEW WALL MOUNT INDICATOR VALVE Xe0 SqG ea4/NCS
PROPOSED RIP RAP EXISTING PIXE '}
EXISTING HYDRANT
9. ALL WATER PIPE AND FITTINGS WILL BE AWWA C-9DD.
10. ALL HOPE STORM SEWER SHALL BE DIAL WALL. ALL RCP STORM
DEWATERING REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT, THE PUMP DISCHARGE
SEWER SHALL BE CLASS 3 PIPE.
SHALL BE TREATED PRIOR
SCALE
TD BEING DISCHARGED OFF OR SURFACE
FEET
I
B PROPOSED SANITARY CLEANOUT EXISTING GUY AN—
EXISTING FLARED ENO SECTION
► PROPOSED FLARED END ENSRNG CATCH BASIN
SECITOJ
EXISTING RSV VALVE
II IF IS
THE DISCHARGE SHALL BE VISUALLY CHECKED TO ENSURE THAT IT IS VISIBLY CLEAN WATER.
12. STATIONING REFERS TO ROAD CENTERLINE.
13. DIMENSIONS ARE TO BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
14 TOP OF CURB ELEVATIONS ARE TO MOUNTABLE CURB SECTION AND FOR CASTING R-35D1-TB UNLESS
-SITE INTO A WATER.
SCALE: I" =
NOTED FOR B-61B CURB SECTION FOR CASTING R-3067-V.
5D'
1 l
_3
15. INSULATE WATERMAIN AND SERVICES AT ALL CROSSINGS WITH
r III YI III
STORM SEWER.
y 4< 5 6 ^ �I �A Ys,.'3
r2 18
I
Q -- -'" .' m
is°„�i1.
" YIII�
a
��
II
�9eic
m I
I
I
o
oa DD
�;•
.1RN
• 6
1�1� m
IN
_
POND
M s -
nD IF W'11xc Hoop
m 93
3.,
D� �c , F n czo
R �KnL
XIVEAF
W L
J "�; ' ZK ADL D 4 e 53 60 6 n 81. °.9 C. ,L DF . LE:o
2 •) NL,
�'��
A ,.
75
/ /
\
O E—IN MNITAR, LINE
o�`�MRI> D
5°xs
loxunx
smm
ss IF 1s x r a waw s nH w> ILEX RIM�°
o .
M , D,;PER O AIL,
o = Q W
—
z E
g
AEP'
-s,• -----
x ox lwB6ope
n�Xa lR wau xl;
n\ I
IV TNLRF.I
_
M
5[FWg
SAy_5
ez
t11n1\\\\�
I
Q
vv
I
I
I
_-_—
I
s$5b.
I
I
11
II
- by
_
c'� pp
I
I
gl
POND . �
y�e �N
�b
�
42 -
cn•1 F
Z
930
WATER,
1N1SF1E0 Cl GRGWJO
STORM
SEWER, SANITARY
SEWER
VERY; 5°
930
yZ
C W
mm
W ~
925
LOW: PONT E EV - 9:II:B2
LOW POINT STA - 2>n.OT
SE
925
a
PVV EV =2911.65
A.D sAx
OC
920
>
_
65
n - - 07
I.Ol vc
n a
s > `lAmm%NL. cL
/
-2.Gpg u e 5, MN 00A STM MH ION :w
muJimo
STM MH N6 : 61M MN
s g
10]
,
ON HYDRANT
* sAN MN D�
A.
920
IN
rn
O
m aiy
915
915
STM MN IOB SAN MN DW O.SDx
��
O Z U
910
APRAN
STM MH 105
IRV
R3F0
910
:AT,p Q :
BAN MN 001
: r%%% EG Ci :GRDJNb-�. STM MR 12 MN pl
H_ J J_
905
zee if IV RCP CL 3 • aSFEE
V AWWA C-9D0 WN
: I
e3 U, Ts�
a3�u I:
I
SVIS'RCP. CLSOtlF
905
0
Q > w af
> d
135 I!• PCP C, 3 a aeOR
APRON I04
PRD IN
_
In
In
900
:zee V B• ze W I.00E
I
Aa Ls Bi' ROP Cl J 1.251E
900
W W W
J
895
�D e" {
895
d O Q }
J } W J
890
:I
:I
zl
: :I :I.
890
c� a
SHEET N0.
m
6
885
- -
e. �m mw e. �. �w ea a
- ��
�w e. .
_mow
�s.
a
885
0 o 0 0 0
+ + + + +
o _ N n a
0
+
1n
0
+
Lo
0 0 o
+ + +
n Do rn
10
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN NARRATIVE:
GENERAL IufOR
PREPNED`INAPCCORGAWC 1.THENAINGNALAPOLLUPANP
FOR SPORMWPPERADISCHPRGESMASCOCIATED Ifill"DOONt
PROJECT NTA.C:APALL TPINES 2ND ADD.
LOC
C
IT
Y
TELK RIVER, MN
lMmSHIP 31 RANGE RB
LAT/LNG: 45.30.59/-93.SSOt
DESGMPTIN OE COxSTR
TALL PINES 2ND ADD. CONSISTS OF GRADING, AGGREGATE
BASE. BITUMINOUS PAVING. UTILITIES STORM WATER
MANAG
EMENT, AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT.
PINES
A9B EELK
FOIRR PC AED AHED CONIRAETSR ARE
THE INTHE OL
RSTALLATION. OSON ENiPECT&.ION AND OF IMAINCTOENTARNCE OFTI
DMP.S
BEFORE AN.
GURING
wPPSMPPPPPREPARER: CHRISIOPHER DAHN-BOGART,
A TEI TRAINING: ENGINEER ANDSWPPPDEDGMER (EXP 2020)
AGGRESS: 13078 FIRST STREET
BECKER, MN 5330E-9J22
TELEPHONE: (]61) 212-8822
MAIL, NANDERSDMWBOGART-PEDERSDI
ADDRESSONTACT SOOT AMERRRIICAN BVLDEW. SUKITESOITER LLC
TELEPHONE: G12-RAAG 3]29 u. 55A3]
BUSINESS NAME
OWNER NAME _____________
CITYING ADDRESS _____________
TELEPHONE _____________
CONTACT NAME
CITY MAILING ADDRESS _____________
TELEP
EMAILHNE _____________
QRPLETAIE DATE _ (lO BE FILLED IN BY CONTRACTDR)
PERMNENT STORuwpIER OESION CALCuuTIONS
-SEE DRAINAGE REPORT FOR STORMWATER CALCULATIONS.
-SITE SOL INFORMATION IS IN DRAINAGE REPORT.
AGGREGATE BASET BITUMNOUS PAVINGSUTILITIES IS1OF 01RM WATER
MANAGEMENT, AID TURF ESTABLIESHMENT.
PRE -CONSTRUCTION CCMSMUCToNIMPERVIOUS IMPERVIOUSAREA: 0.M ACRES
NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA: 2.38 ACRES
AREA TO BE DISTURBED: 6.14 ACRES
RECEIVING WATERS
STORM WATER FROM THIS SITE WILL BE COLLECTED IN A
CITY OF ELI RIVER SIORM SEWER SYSTEM
PuxS Au0 SPEC
THE PLAN SHE IS OFF THIS PLAN SET INDICATE THE 1 FOLLOWING ITEMS
THELOCATIONS OR`I.PERWOUS SURFACES. uM
LOCATIONS OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED (E.G, BUFFER ZONES WETLANDS ETC.)
• STEEP SLOPE LOCATIONS
• LOCATIONS OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
DI TO BE INIIALLED ON• THE DETAIL SHEETS INDICATE ERTHEOSIONEANO SEDIMENT CONTROL BNPS TO BE
f DEWLAR • ITENG IS REWIRED FOR THIS PROJECT, THE PUMP DISCHARGE SHALL BE
SLOPE DRESSING IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THE GRADNG OPERATIONS
S TIE GRADING OPERATIONS PROCEED.
IOPSOIL PLACEMENT ALONG THE EMBANKMENT SLOPES THOUGH THE WETLANDS AREA
S TO BE SPREAD BY A LOW IMPACT CRAWLER TRACTOR OPERATING UP AND DOWN
THE SLOPES SO AS TO PROVIDE TRACK PRINTS PARALLEL WIN THE CONTOURS
E INSTAL AEIOT 5 OPES DDT CATEGORY 3EiRDSO CRONTROL BLANKET ALONG THE
N ANKM N L A N H W LAN A A
ALLI.
REQUIRE AN EFFECTNE MEANS of SEDIMENT
CONTROLSUCH ASANER OIEO SLOPE. ONCONMO BLANKET COVERING OR SILT FENCE TO
AREAT ARE TE BE AUE' EDEMTTHRI ] TTO11 MOP DRAINING TOWARDS WETLAND
IMPORARY STABILIZATION WILL BE REQUIRED IN AREAS WHERE GRADING
OPERATIONS ARE SUSPENDED OR CEASED FOR A PERIOD OF ] DAYS OR GREATER.
ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE FOR SEDIMENT CONTROL IS TO BE PROVIDED AT
THE PROJECT ENTRANCE ON PARK AVENUE SOUTH.
STREET SWEEPING OF THE PAVED SURFACES WILL BE REWIRED AS DIRECTED BY THE
ENONEER.
.LT FENCE AND BILL BE INEST
RPRAP AND FILER BLAN
OF THE WILET TPLACEMENT.T WILL BE PLACED
THE CONTRACTOR MUST STABILIZE ALL EXPOSI
FOLLOWING PERIOD GREATER TTV HAN OR EQUALTO 7DAYS
CITY REWIRES STREET SWEEPING 10 OCCUR WITHIN B HOURS OF NOTICE FROM THE
nTv.
APPLYING MULCH. HYDRDMULCH. TACKIFIER, POLTACRYLAMIDE N SIMILAR EROSION
PREVENTION PRACTICES IS NOT ACCEPTABLE STABILIZATION IN ANY PART OF A
TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH N SWALE. BLANKETS N OTHER
PPRDVED, BY TIE ENGINEER, MITHOD SHALL BE USED,
ORERATIDNS. NCLUDING`WBCNTRACPORS AND UTIILITI COMPANIES. SUCHUN EROSINLNI THE KAND OF A"
EL
ANNERSEDIMENTOVERTR`LTHE DURATIONSOFRTHEPROIECT. UOPERATORSAHAVE DAILY ACCESSI TO PROJECT
SITE. THE CONTH
ENTIRE SIM HASH NCTOR DERGNE`f NEAL STABILIZATION AFULLY`NDPOR N.O.THHAS BEEN SUBMITTEDSWPPPTION TO THETIMU. LPCPE
THE CNOTRRACTp IS O PROVIDE A TRAINED INDIVIDF THE EROEBDN UUAL RRESPNIMENT CINP CONTROL BTHE IMPLEMENTATION.
INSPECTION
THAT INDIVIDUAL I UAL IS MAINTENANCE10 BEDENTIFIED AT THE PRE-CNSTiUCTON CONFERENCE AND LISTED INTHE
MINU
OF THE ENTIRE SIE AT
ONCTHE E EVERY SEVEN DAYS`DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONSIS TO PERFORM A RDUNIETION AND WINN 24
HOURST AFTER` A EAST
INSPECTIONRAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAI G5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS
PROVIDED BY
MCONTRACTOR. YDEFICIENCIES
IE
SEDIMENT CONTROL BNPS ARE TO BE NOTED ON THEINSPECTIONFORMAND CORRECTED BY
DING THEEND OF THE IEIT BUSINESS DAY
EFFECTIVE OR WHEN THECES SEDIMENA BET REACHESPONE-HALF THE HEIGREPLACEDHT OFMEN THE THEYDEVICAREExO LODGER
SWPPIMPLEMENTATION, REVISING AMENDING AND INSPECTING (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE
CONTRACTOR
NMKSEORINDIVIDUAL&NNSPE
DATE OF TRAINING CTIMG------------------
ENT, PROF GINTRAINING _________
CDNTE
AININ
TOTAL HOURS OF TRAINING _________
BNP P 5EANAINION. MAIMANTENANCE. AND REPAIR (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE CONTRACTOR)
OVERSEEING & INSPECTING
DATE OF TRAINING
AMEN INSTRUCTOR _________ ---------
ENT " PROVIDING TRAINING _________
TOTALMHOIURS OF TRAINING _________
POLLUTION PREVExI Ox
FERTILIZERS ARE TO BE APPLIED ONLY IN THE AMOUNTS AS SPECIFIED AND WORKED INTO THE SOL 10
MINIMIZE EXPOSURE TO STORMWATER RUNOFF.
NSITE REFUELING OPERATIONS ARE TO BE CONDUCTED WITH CARE. ANY INADVERTENT SPILLAGE OF
FUEL OR CHEMICALS IS TO BE IMMEDATELY CLEANED UP, REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND DISPOSED OF IN
DRIDANCE TO
RMCO FC STATE AND NETWDRLOCAL
P BEGUL REGULATIONS.
p 9 MAJOR VEHICLES SPILLS
ES ARE
T EBE REREPORTED TOO THE MPEP
LEAKSGANDRD BJJECCT I.
ROUTINE PREVENTIVE MAINTENAALLNCE EFFORTSNTO REDUCE THE LIKEUHNI OCO OF OR
PORTABLE SAMIART WASTE FACILITIES ARE TO BE PROVIDED NSITE AID EMPMED ONA BI-WEEKLY
CCRONCRETE BATCH TRUCKS BILL NOT BE ALLOWED
10 DISCHARGE DRU AND CHUM WASHOUT
DIRECTLY
LOCATION AS PROWDED BY THTHE 'WHO A POTABLEE OWNER? RECEPTACLE LEPROVIDED v H CONTRACTOR n n HE
FINAL STABIu2ATON
FINAL STABILIZATION OCCURS MIEN ]O PERCENT OF THE PERWOUS AREA IS COVERED WIN
UNIFORM. PERMANENT VEGETATION.
ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONMOL FEATURES ARE TO BE REMOVED AND THE
NPDES NOTICE OF IERNINATION IS 10 BE PREPARED AND SUBMITIED TO THE MPCA.
REQUIREMENTS IN PROJECT RAM
EI-
rd ming NRn 5
29 HOUR CA EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION
x
THE FOLLOWING OIIANITIMS IS AN ESTIMATED PRELIMINARY AMOUNT
RE THIS ESTIMATE
FOR SEDIMENT RROOVDED CONTROL
REWIRED BY THE
MINNESOT POLLUOORCT.
CONTROL AGENCY GENERAL STORMWATER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITY ANY AGGIGM L DTGCEIROMEENREPLACEMENT BMPS WANTIITIES D
THE FURNISHED
AND INSTALLED BY HE VI A A NO
ADDITIONAL COST TO
Ax hurtM EA
MEN LOSS
FSnuAIFn lu
1 IMMENUYS OPEN DRAINAGE RAYS AND STORM AID SAMTABY SEVERS DUE
BE
BE
'NPPEINxp mADlxp m DmER Ndtrc IxwLxxc DGnRBpxO DF RR NG suRFACE roMER uxm
PERPAY HALE 1 OBPNMEd FURMISH nu DOCUNEMIIIIN REWIRED ro OBlux APPU_E
I'M BY
AU,LUDMROEGAG SmRE_ LAKCS P"w' os D`PPEN ou°INUE BA FOR Rsi:%as :N `s.:"i a:TSENE .
REMOVE DEPOGTED0Mini TALOLMOR PR`GRECLUE.Ems OF`AUTIGHM, HAVING KAUGGI FOU TO NINGIr,
ESTAGUEGNE� MAINTAIN MI—ARY PREWNME MEASURES UNTIL PERMANENT MEASURE
PART 1=
GM uaDFw.
AN.3Crs;`xN LENcros PIUDG1E, FABINC I—LEUM. SEAxs mm THE
FOUL=
1. AVERAGE MG GO ED SEW. IMMUNAM. WHEN MISTED IN ACDOADANCE WITH ISTIA D47SI.
.EW.In'H1ENTESTEDIN
..CO.. EN TED IN ACCORDANCE IN All D-2.
TE DAR0. NEN EUBEDUENTANCCD FAA1` FKRT_HxESTPREPR x1ED.
e. NOOp Y BY 2 IMC [S IN
CROSS SECTION
B. RT ioLPORRIRY S DTNT LDD; �FILTERR LOGS MILL CNSIBT OF TYPE WOOD FIBER BIDROLLS AND THE
uALTE G*E DOFN.E PFER= CdTROL BY NIRCU. INC.. OR EOML
u H Sx TADA INC. M EWAL.
D,)PPROVIOF`CMRBGGPENN1 PROTECDN FUR` CUSINIINLLns BIM CURB GPENIN
M .%:.ROLL.
CoWn
BLANKET
u [) M AN N VINO FN[Rs SANONIMED Bn¢Ex AN
ATTACHED TOP AND D)TION LAYER D' NET BACKING.
2) m NNINC. EUIIIDENT UV SIABILRAFN FN BREAKDOWN TO
3) so nPtlS EANSTEEL ME
I AfNo1Rm. DEAIIL oT`�`� o1 a-S"A 11xGNU. OR HEAVTOP E BonN AFTER
ERE
BIG
INM
A) THE BR BON COOS ILANKETE
2. E FOR USE ON INs PR0. INCLUDE.
m)MORN AMERICAN GREEN - B1M�
mxpe0 OBER u u H THE FIBERS SHALL.BE CCYPGSED (0.A INCHES) IMNLE:._ N` 50.E CRC NCREMSHALLMBE REiuNED TN
FIBERS 'ALL AVERAGE T' " NDN IC DIE. ID
D IN UNIFDRN APPLICATION OVER THE SIE.
2) THE
AGRIGULF R SMB 9OD`IFOR n [RSC0.LdD BDN SHALL(� R o, D, LK2 OR tlSPERSE ELFAORS[aEAND
N.
3) THE
NEm OSLURRY SHHAALL MI O FORM A CRISP APPRNINATELY — NM (1/B ro 1/A INDIES)nNICK
A) THE MdSIWE CNTENi O lxE NAIMX MALL BE 12K H/- lK BY V[IMi.
5) m ALL —T. T' uArzB LG Awl ARE 1NK BKXIEGRANa[ AND IDEK GENEFIDAL TO
M THE xIMMI SHALL PROVIDE ICVL CNIUROMS COVERAGE AND SHALL HIVE NO HOLES GREATER THIN
IN" IN
]) THE HYNAETED 1111 D[xdTr SHILL BE APPRNIxATEO BY A vuNP TEST PMN lO APPLICATION
e) mALLGCMEEN tro GALLONS AND t23 GULN4 PFR 5hBS �FPExdxG ONTEFxICmr OF THE Pup GUCT`LS gARY
USED
9) THE BMCED FIBER IMME1 MULCH PR OU ACCEPIABIE FOR USE N NIS -CT IN:ILCE.
(e)EN
(MSdL GUARD VIA
(L)[ON- CONNED OBERS ING
MUIPEAARY
K.KD
1. =-,rN GEOMIFLE FABRIC SEIN AID A BAG USAG A DOUBLE NEEDLE IMMUNE AND HIGH STRENGTH
SEAIS SHALL HIVE AN RAGE IDN STREMGN GF -BUNCH AS PER All D4RR3 AND MEET GR
O.ED THE
1) mPER All 'D
2) PUNCTUREWM IF
TES AS PER AllD 483T.�
1) FLM RATE OF Bs OAL/uIN/9 Al PER Al. D MAB1.
A) PERMIn...W O 1.3 BE— AS PER All D AA91.
5) ADSK OF BDXTUS SIEVE A PERSIRENGN OF ASIA SI A D 1751.All O 3]M.
2. —1 LARGE ENOUGH ID A WIN SIRMP 1. IIE UNIT CLOSED.
u I1) AOF NNRNNENIAL. INC. 2811 CARDMLL ROAD. RIDHYND. NRONIA 232N. mo-99B-SB3R
p I) MDN UCCII INC. Pa — IUUD WESTERYRLE, MID —GE. mo-wl-aaBA.
. EQUAL
x0. xx mpNd. KEM AND SIGN NE NOTICE OF INTENT, OBIMM THE ONER'S LNATURC AND
SLID CA
PE OF PREWNTW ICABURES
PENDE
:1 E PLAN
PUMPED WKIER APPLICATION.
[P,E TEND G HDRELERE LONGER FULL DI,
ENT- MAY BE RECUMED"TO IRi�EOUAIELI C�xTIHE TIRES FRN THE
USE M-NAL 11 INCH HIGH MRRERS wM.M.T ED INCH LH All. ONG PUSM SPACED AT
FEET 'MUNK, SPACING
MEG M.M.M
CAE; "INlxuu.
BM MEOSRxIN DIM aBPMMCINxxm, sxucE AT PO
E OF THE
G.
FNGMN FABRIC TO
FOUR MI)514`CA�CENp08l 1/1 ONLY. OVERLAPPIG IT L%STT� INI MNCH MAMK DMIAEIER IIII aR BUTIM HEAD , I IND
LONG 'INLEAST17 N.. G-1 INCH ... 1/4 INCH
CRUAWN WIDTH D 1/2TINCH LONG LFGEL
OR oNOR U&MBEED AREA
STAKES x1EX; UK
N1TALNE.D I2%1 THE Of THE MOME PEMMEmR COMMU
USED THE PE1:1IE1 CONMPL TO HELP GTARLIGE DURING RAIN EWN1
PLACE IS RECONMENDED BY THE IMMUFACTURBER.
ISLA' :E IN" 'RE DEEPER THAN
1) IHBER
uMALL BEEm R[DD APPUCAIGRAu —Al EQUIPMENT BY A
.ANIACI2) RAINFALL M ALLOW THE EFFI a eoiae°IE Ti.E Toovn�xa v PRoxcn
1) III FINE Mro DE.AMR TH PPLIEED IN 11 1APPLUEAO11�1 III -HALF RATE) VITA
a) In
GUE
FADEB
5) THE wslpuxnON MI[ O THE BM uULM SHALL BE ss LEE PER ACRE,
1. BEPI CE THE UNIT M 1 P p` RSEDINENT NRVH[n s dR ENT HAS REDUCEDF. P ACE SENIENT IN APPROPRAM LOCAIIONS ON WIFE: GO NOT BEIGME FROM
,ME " RATE OF NE
O Z J
H M J
0
LL
aj> >
~
04 Q
J Qf
W W W Q
Z H Z
d 0 < d
_mow a
Q ~ Z
0 a V)
UIEET NO
7
D
QRPLETAIE DATE _ (lO BE FILLED IN BY CONTRACTDR)
PERMNENT STORuwpIER OESION CALCuuTIONS
-SEE DRAINAGE REPORT FOR STORMWATER CALCULATIONS.
-SITE SOL INFORMATION IS IN DRAINAGE REPORT.
AGGREGATE BASET BITUMNOUS PAVINGSUTILITIES IS1OF 01RM WATER
MANAGEMENT, AID TURF ESTABLIESHMENT.
PRE -CONSTRUCTION CCMSMUCToNIMPERVIOUS IMPERVIOUSAREA: 0.M ACRES
NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA: 2.38 ACRES
AREA TO BE DISTURBED: 6.14 ACRES
RECEIVING WATERS
STORM WATER FROM THIS SITE WILL BE COLLECTED IN A
CITY OF ELI RIVER SIORM SEWER SYSTEM
PuxS Au0 SPEC
THE PLAN SHE IS OFF THIS PLAN SET INDICATE THE 1 FOLLOWING ITEMS
THELOCATIONS OR`I.PERWOUS SURFACES. uM
LOCATIONS OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED (E.G, BUFFER ZONES WETLANDS ETC.)
• STEEP SLOPE LOCATIONS
• LOCATIONS OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
DI TO BE INIIALLED ON• THE DETAIL SHEETS INDICATE ERTHEOSIONEANO SEDIMENT CONTROL BNPS TO BE
f DEWLAR • ITENG IS REWIRED FOR THIS PROJECT, THE PUMP DISCHARGE SHALL BE
SLOPE DRESSING IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THE GRADNG OPERATIONS
S TIE GRADING OPERATIONS PROCEED.
IOPSOIL PLACEMENT ALONG THE EMBANKMENT SLOPES THOUGH THE WETLANDS AREA
S TO BE SPREAD BY A LOW IMPACT CRAWLER TRACTOR OPERATING UP AND DOWN
THE SLOPES SO AS TO PROVIDE TRACK PRINTS PARALLEL WIN THE CONTOURS
E INSTAL AEIOT 5 OPES DDT CATEGORY 3EiRDSO CRONTROL BLANKET ALONG THE
N ANKM N L A N H W LAN A A
ALLI.
REQUIRE AN EFFECTNE MEANS of SEDIMENT
CONTROLSUCH ASANER OIEO SLOPE. ONCONMO BLANKET COVERING OR SILT FENCE TO
AREAT ARE TE BE AUE' EDEMTTHRI ] TTO11 MOP DRAINING TOWARDS WETLAND
IMPORARY STABILIZATION WILL BE REQUIRED IN AREAS WHERE GRADING
OPERATIONS ARE SUSPENDED OR CEASED FOR A PERIOD OF ] DAYS OR GREATER.
ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE FOR SEDIMENT CONTROL IS TO BE PROVIDED AT
THE PROJECT ENTRANCE ON PARK AVENUE SOUTH.
STREET SWEEPING OF THE PAVED SURFACES WILL BE REWIRED AS DIRECTED BY THE
ENONEER.
.LT FENCE AND BILL BE INEST
RPRAP AND FILER BLAN
OF THE WILET TPLACEMENT.T WILL BE PLACED
THE CONTRACTOR MUST STABILIZE ALL EXPOSI
FOLLOWING PERIOD GREATER TTV HAN OR EQUALTO 7DAYS
CITY REWIRES STREET SWEEPING 10 OCCUR WITHIN B HOURS OF NOTICE FROM THE
nTv.
APPLYING MULCH. HYDRDMULCH. TACKIFIER, POLTACRYLAMIDE N SIMILAR EROSION
PREVENTION PRACTICES IS NOT ACCEPTABLE STABILIZATION IN ANY PART OF A
TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH N SWALE. BLANKETS N OTHER
PPRDVED, BY TIE ENGINEER, MITHOD SHALL BE USED,
ORERATIDNS. NCLUDING`WBCNTRACPORS AND UTIILITI COMPANIES. SUCHUN EROSINLNI THE KAND OF A"
EL
ANNERSEDIMENTOVERTR`LTHE DURATIONSOFRTHEPROIECT. UOPERATORSAHAVE DAILY ACCESSI TO PROJECT
SITE. THE CONTH
ENTIRE SIM HASH NCTOR DERGNE`f NEAL STABILIZATION AFULLY`NDPOR N.O.THHAS BEEN SUBMITTEDSWPPPTION TO THETIMU. LPCPE
THE CNOTRRACTp IS O PROVIDE A TRAINED INDIVIDF THE EROEBDN UUAL RRESPNIMENT CINP CONTROL BTHE IMPLEMENTATION.
INSPECTION
THAT INDIVIDUAL I UAL IS MAINTENANCE10 BEDENTIFIED AT THE PRE-CNSTiUCTON CONFERENCE AND LISTED INTHE
MINU
OF THE ENTIRE SIE AT
ONCTHE E EVERY SEVEN DAYS`DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONSIS TO PERFORM A RDUNIETION AND WINN 24
HOURST AFTER` A EAST
INSPECTIONRAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAI G5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS
PROVIDED BY
MCONTRACTOR. YDEFICIENCIES
IE
SEDIMENT CONTROL BNPS ARE TO BE NOTED ON THEINSPECTIONFORMAND CORRECTED BY
DING THEEND OF THE IEIT BUSINESS DAY
EFFECTIVE OR WHEN THECES SEDIMENA BET REACHESPONE-HALF THE HEIGREPLACEDHT OFMEN THE THEYDEVICAREExO LODGER
SWPPIMPLEMENTATION, REVISING AMENDING AND INSPECTING (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE
CONTRACTOR
NMKSEORINDIVIDUAL&NNSPE
DATE OF TRAINING CTIMG------------------
ENT, PROF GINTRAINING _________
CDNTE
AININ
TOTAL HOURS OF TRAINING _________
BNP P 5EANAINION. MAIMANTENANCE. AND REPAIR (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE CONTRACTOR)
OVERSEEING & INSPECTING
DATE OF TRAINING
AMEN INSTRUCTOR _________ ---------
ENT " PROVIDING TRAINING _________
TOTALMHOIURS OF TRAINING _________
POLLUTION PREVExI Ox
FERTILIZERS ARE TO BE APPLIED ONLY IN THE AMOUNTS AS SPECIFIED AND WORKED INTO THE SOL 10
MINIMIZE EXPOSURE TO STORMWATER RUNOFF.
NSITE REFUELING OPERATIONS ARE TO BE CONDUCTED WITH CARE. ANY INADVERTENT SPILLAGE OF
FUEL OR CHEMICALS IS TO BE IMMEDATELY CLEANED UP, REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND DISPOSED OF IN
DRIDANCE TO
RMCO FC STATE AND NETWDRLOCAL
P BEGUL REGULATIONS.
p 9 MAJOR VEHICLES SPILLS
ES ARE
T EBE REREPORTED TOO THE MPEP
LEAKSGANDRD BJJECCT I.
ROUTINE PREVENTIVE MAINTENAALLNCE EFFORTSNTO REDUCE THE LIKEUHNI OCO OF OR
PORTABLE SAMIART WASTE FACILITIES ARE TO BE PROVIDED NSITE AID EMPMED ONA BI-WEEKLY
CCRONCRETE BATCH TRUCKS BILL NOT BE ALLOWED
10 DISCHARGE DRU AND CHUM WASHOUT
DIRECTLY
LOCATION AS PROWDED BY THTHE 'WHO A POTABLEE OWNER? RECEPTACLE LEPROVIDED v H CONTRACTOR n n HE
FINAL STABIu2ATON
FINAL STABILIZATION OCCURS MIEN ]O PERCENT OF THE PERWOUS AREA IS COVERED WIN
UNIFORM. PERMANENT VEGETATION.
ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONMOL FEATURES ARE TO BE REMOVED AND THE
NPDES NOTICE OF IERNINATION IS 10 BE PREPARED AND SUBMITIED TO THE MPCA.
REQUIREMENTS IN PROJECT RAM
EI-
rd ming NRn 5
29 HOUR CA EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION
x
THE FOLLOWING OIIANITIMS IS AN ESTIMATED PRELIMINARY AMOUNT
RE THIS ESTIMATE
FOR SEDIMENT RROOVDED CONTROL
REWIRED BY THE
MINNESOT POLLUOORCT.
CONTROL AGENCY GENERAL STORMWATER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITY ANY AGGIGM L DTGCEIROMEENREPLACEMENT BMPS WANTIITIES D
THE FURNISHED
AND INSTALLED BY HE VI A A NO
ADDITIONAL COST TO
Ax hurtM EA
MEN LOSS
FSnuAIFn lu
1 IMMENUYS OPEN DRAINAGE RAYS AND STORM AID SAMTABY SEVERS DUE
BE
BE
'NPPEINxp mADlxp m DmER Ndtrc IxwLxxc DGnRBpxO DF RR NG suRFACE roMER uxm
PERPAY HALE 1 OBPNMEd FURMISH nu DOCUNEMIIIIN REWIRED ro OBlux APPU_E
I'M BY
AU,LUDMROEGAG SmRE_ LAKCS P"w' os D`PPEN ou°INUE BA FOR Rsi:%as :N `s.:"i a:TSENE .
REMOVE DEPOGTED0Mini TALOLMOR PR`GRECLUE.Ems OF`AUTIGHM, HAVING KAUGGI FOU TO NINGIr,
ESTAGUEGNE� MAINTAIN MI—ARY PREWNME MEASURES UNTIL PERMANENT MEASURE
PART 1=
GM uaDFw.
AN.3Crs;`xN LENcros PIUDG1E, FABINC I—LEUM. SEAxs mm THE
FOUL=
1. AVERAGE MG GO ED SEW. IMMUNAM. WHEN MISTED IN ACDOADANCE WITH ISTIA D47SI.
.EW.In'H1ENTESTEDIN
..CO.. EN TED IN ACCORDANCE IN All D-2.
TE DAR0. NEN EUBEDUENTANCCD FAA1` FKRT_HxESTPREPR x1ED.
e. NOOp Y BY 2 IMC [S IN
CROSS SECTION
B. RT ioLPORRIRY S DTNT LDD; �FILTERR LOGS MILL CNSIBT OF TYPE WOOD FIBER BIDROLLS AND THE
uALTE G*E DOFN.E PFER= CdTROL BY NIRCU. INC.. OR EOML
u H Sx TADA INC. M EWAL.
D,)PPROVIOF`CMRBGGPENN1 PROTECDN FUR` CUSINIINLLns BIM CURB GPENIN
M .%:.ROLL.
CoWn
BLANKET
u [) M AN N VINO FN[Rs SANONIMED Bn¢Ex AN
ATTACHED TOP AND D)TION LAYER D' NET BACKING.
2) m NNINC. EUIIIDENT UV SIABILRAFN FN BREAKDOWN TO
3) so nPtlS EANSTEEL ME
I AfNo1Rm. DEAIIL oT`�`� o1 a-S"A 11xGNU. OR HEAVTOP E BonN AFTER
ERE
BIG
INM
A) THE BR BON COOS ILANKETE
2. E FOR USE ON INs PR0. INCLUDE.
m)MORN AMERICAN GREEN - B1M�
mxpe0 OBER u u H THE FIBERS SHALL.BE CCYPGSED (0.A INCHES) IMNLE:._ N` 50.E CRC NCREMSHALLMBE REiuNED TN
FIBERS 'ALL AVERAGE T' " NDN IC DIE. ID
D IN UNIFDRN APPLICATION OVER THE SIE.
2) THE
AGRIGULF R SMB 9OD`IFOR n [RSC0.LdD BDN SHALL(� R o, D, LK2 OR tlSPERSE ELFAORS[aEAND
N.
3) THE
NEm OSLURRY SHHAALL MI O FORM A CRISP APPRNINATELY — NM (1/B ro 1/A INDIES)nNICK
A) THE MdSIWE CNTENi O lxE NAIMX MALL BE 12K H/- lK BY V[IMi.
5) m ALL —T. T' uArzB LG Awl ARE 1NK BKXIEGRANa[ AND IDEK GENEFIDAL TO
M THE xIMMI SHALL PROVIDE ICVL CNIUROMS COVERAGE AND SHALL HIVE NO HOLES GREATER THIN
IN" IN
]) THE HYNAETED 1111 D[xdTr SHILL BE APPRNIxATEO BY A vuNP TEST PMN lO APPLICATION
e) mALLGCMEEN tro GALLONS AND t23 GULN4 PFR 5hBS �FPExdxG ONTEFxICmr OF THE Pup GUCT`LS gARY
USED
9) THE BMCED FIBER IMME1 MULCH PR OU ACCEPIABIE FOR USE N NIS -CT IN:ILCE.
(e)EN
(MSdL GUARD VIA
(L)[ON- CONNED OBERS ING
MUIPEAARY
K.KD
1. =-,rN GEOMIFLE FABRIC SEIN AID A BAG USAG A DOUBLE NEEDLE IMMUNE AND HIGH STRENGTH
SEAIS SHALL HIVE AN RAGE IDN STREMGN GF -BUNCH AS PER All D4RR3 AND MEET GR
O.ED THE
1) mPER All 'D
2) PUNCTUREWM IF
TES AS PER AllD 483T.�
1) FLM RATE OF Bs OAL/uIN/9 Al PER Al. D MAB1.
A) PERMIn...W O 1.3 BE— AS PER All D AA91.
5) ADSK OF BDXTUS SIEVE A PERSIRENGN OF ASIA SI A D 1751.All O 3]M.
2. —1 LARGE ENOUGH ID A WIN SIRMP 1. IIE UNIT CLOSED.
u I1) AOF NNRNNENIAL. INC. 2811 CARDMLL ROAD. RIDHYND. NRONIA 232N. mo-99B-SB3R
p I) MDN UCCII INC. Pa — IUUD WESTERYRLE, MID —GE. mo-wl-aaBA.
. EQUAL
x0. xx mpNd. KEM AND SIGN NE NOTICE OF INTENT, OBIMM THE ONER'S LNATURC AND
SLID CA
PE OF PREWNTW ICABURES
PENDE
:1 E PLAN
PUMPED WKIER APPLICATION.
[P,E TEND G HDRELERE LONGER FULL DI,
ENT- MAY BE RECUMED"TO IRi�EOUAIELI C�xTIHE TIRES FRN THE
USE M-NAL 11 INCH HIGH MRRERS wM.M.T ED INCH LH All. ONG PUSM SPACED AT
FEET 'MUNK, SPACING
MEG M.M.M
CAE; "INlxuu.
BM MEOSRxIN DIM aBPMMCINxxm, sxucE AT PO
E OF THE
G.
FNGMN FABRIC TO
FOUR MI)514`CA�CENp08l 1/1 ONLY. OVERLAPPIG IT L%STT� INI MNCH MAMK DMIAEIER IIII aR BUTIM HEAD , I IND
LONG 'INLEAST17 N.. G-1 INCH ... 1/4 INCH
CRUAWN WIDTH D 1/2TINCH LONG LFGEL
OR oNOR U&MBEED AREA
STAKES x1EX; UK
N1TALNE.D I2%1 THE Of THE MOME PEMMEmR COMMU
USED THE PE1:1IE1 CONMPL TO HELP GTARLIGE DURING RAIN EWN1
PLACE IS RECONMENDED BY THE IMMUFACTURBER.
ISLA' :E IN" 'RE DEEPER THAN
1) IHBER
uMALL BEEm R[DD APPUCAIGRAu —Al EQUIPMENT BY A
.ANIACI2) RAINFALL M ALLOW THE EFFI a eoiae°IE Ti.E Toovn�xa v PRoxcn
1) III FINE Mro DE.AMR TH PPLIEED IN 11 1APPLUEAO11�1 III -HALF RATE) VITA
a) In
GUE
FADEB
5) THE wslpuxnON MI[ O THE BM uULM SHALL BE ss LEE PER ACRE,
1. BEPI CE THE UNIT M 1 P p` RSEDINENT NRVH[n s dR ENT HAS REDUCEDF. P ACE SENIENT IN APPROPRAM LOCAIIONS ON WIFE: GO NOT BEIGME FROM
,ME " RATE OF NE
O Z J
H M J
0
LL
aj> >
~
04 Q
J Qf
W W W Q
Z H Z
d 0 < d
_mow a
Q ~ Z
0 a V)
UIEET NO
7
D
SLBGRA
50' m
IB" J RIP -RAP
SITE PIPE BEDDING TO EXTEND TO
BIN ABOVE TOP OF PIPE FOR
_ NON -CONCRETE PIPE.
_
`c
FILTER FAB Ric O , _
MA. = O - _ INI IAL COMPACTION AT NI PaNT
III PIPE WITH MEOCHANICAL TAMPER
B" minlmum
MIN
P/L P/L
SECTION B-B B
- — SITE
• — ____ __ -
— — — —1
— —
/3/0'
"-2" Washed Rock Aggregot
53'
A A
--IT-
12'6" 28' B-B 126"__Ej::t
1-2% SLOPE 1-2% SLOPE
I
SITE PIPE BEDDING
ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
rcz
2.0% — `—
B
INSTALLATION:
PUNP TIE DOWN
DISCHARGE
Is
11
PLAN IwJ
1.5" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE
(MnDOT 2360 TYPE SP 9.5)
io PRA"ov SHAII BE a,AL
I MBE
>TRAs AeO.
I. REMOVE GRATE
2. DROP FLEXSTORM INLET
HOSE (\STRAP I/
uJ m
2.0" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE
Mp_RAp
J-
FILTER ONTO LOAD
BEARING LIP OF CASTING
1 /
m W j
_0.
(MnDOT 2360 TYPE SP 9.5)
��
OR CONCRETE STRUCTUREin
Ox
6" CLASS 5 GRAVEL BASE (MIN.)
i
GRATE
o =
1a
3. REPLACE
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
FILTER FAGRIt®� }
SEWN T
SPOUT ✓' `�^
It ew
8
MOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
SECTION A -A
FLE%STORM F%:STANDARD WOVEN
WATER
Boo�B
PLACE TACK COAT BETWEEN COURSES
BAG (22" DEPTH) OR EQUAL
PUNP ��
5EpWz
ez
NOTE:
NOTE:
<<5 4Z
yy
PIPE SIZEB LARGER THAN THOSE SHOWN REOIARE A SPECIAL DESIGN.
o F0 DR ED wL TO D• USE s
f
•E
s o
® FIE nu BXALL covER THE AREA
OF THE RIPRAP AID EXTEND UIDER x cu RC, APRON a FT
DANDY DEWATERING BAG
f
`[\
OR EQUAL
e 5 Z
6
/}/
FILTEREDy
�eM
TYPICAL STREET SECTION - PRIVATE STREET
RIP -RAP INSTALLATION
TEMPORARY SEDIMENT FILTER
TEMPORARY PUMPED SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICE
Z
y
I. THE SEDIMENT LOGS SHALL BE TRENCHED M" INTO
THE GROUND AND SHALL BE STAKED BY STEEL
W y
FENCE POSTS OR 2'% 2" WOOD STAKES
0 W
W H
AIx RURFPCE Lxm PtXNAx[xT LWDETATIDx
2. SOIL SHALL BE COMPACTED OIJ THE UPSLOPE
iL
Ox
RTexaN%Ie' DD. T/z' iTAIRTAa
Is EXTABLIXH[D.
tXsxc cvamo
Chan a of Covero e: For construction cis where
9 9 PrOR
the owner o! operator Changes, (eg., on oliginog
tleveloper sells portion Of the property l0 vtl i0u
homebuilEers Or sells the entire sits to o new owner)
SIDE OF LOGS.
STAKED AND ENTRNCHED
O' DIP. SEDIMENT LOG
FILTERED RUNOFF SEDIMENT -LADEN
RUNOFF
E5
O
y
Q y
a 4C
Q
U
�-
o _ -
_
��a m
A PLMPEp caxx[cTI ITXREAO
rotor shall
the current owner and the n w owner or Perot,,
EROSION CONTROL /\
_ /�
m °a
xER'
ss/Is'• GMLvj
t�
n
submit o complete permit modification o a form
by the [Dmm r. The form must be\
BLANKET/
A��YJCOMPACTED SOIL
Provided
cubm en i prioo to the new owner oar opee for no
o14
m ring c nsiruclion activity site o '
TO PREVENT PIPING
Nn GAP
e toter than 30 days otter taking own rehip of the
- WTx
.AING
e
p�operty. The owne shall provide a SWPPP to then w
TYPICAL SWALE
SEDIMENT LOG INSTALLATION
Z U
O_ Z
zL a n[
x[VX' wm
Wnel anoperator that specifically addresses the
rem° ning construction Oclivily.
N.T.
J
H M J
CMNPL mowXPEIAnxG
L.
EROSION CONTROL. FENCE
0
X.
LOT LINE
1i
£ STOCKPILE to
£
71
-
LEFTHAPdx iDTani)N
Z EC
lax
e. RED TD aknDE.
nnxDPPE •. 00 xoT xus oRAx nn[s.
c TTOI
66"R I/2 R
TOP BIT. MAT 26"R
3/8" 2'. _
/ a
PROPEX-"SILT STOP" FABRIC
2"X2"X4' W00
STAKES O 9' D.C. 10' MINIMUM
N �' J
(n J W
W W
Z H
I.L. Q �
O
a
- n a
BACKFILL
J } W F-
BASE "
tj
/..
m s 1 7 a e� 7�s'BOUND HOLES
10 1 2" 17 1 2"
ROCK —STRUCTIgJ
ENTRANCE
'✓/��. / x ./.. i_
BURY BOTTOM
EXISTING GROUND � � 6" OF FABRIC
H U d 0
SHEET NO.
^
28
DIMENT
CO TRall p j&Qii
+�
% PROPOSE
O
BALK OF CURB
EMBANKMENT
V
_
Q STREET _
_
I 0
HYDRANT DETAIL
MOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
SINGLE LOT EROSION CONTROL PLAN
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
BEARING AREA
5
azNE
DENP
DONE
DONE
EES PEWS
APPIN9 D—
E
PUN
^ A I DIIIIIII 1.1 m C-1
s9Rm
�102 eEYouo ", PATH of
-SR, FINE
4 STREET
'I
1
OF
PRINTED BLUE E POST
CON[W10T
NGs�mx, T9PpxE FILL R BOLi3
SMLAR
�I` -INN=DD,.m
TEE ORWr I
IA.•
-II/EINMA
SEWER MAIN
DOIED 2111 SPACED AT
ON-DRPPOPE'TFIE
_ SOaSD INJECTION ADHESIVETI xrt-RE
To DP4RT
ARM VTIu ESM
RNWITOHGREEN
CURB BOX
- AND STOP -
-Ixv-9m.35
SECTION A
P`ND
AALAIN�908mS MATE NC EgxTL
STEEL FENCE Po5
IGINAL GROUND
ERVICE PIPE
I--ONDISTLRBED EARTH
III PLAIN CONCRETE
p�
ul
111
OD" R IATI211 01 CENTER EACH WAY
NV-90A.50I
PLUGCONCRETE
EWER MAIN
45' BEND
.�
BRICK WATERMNN
COPPER PIGTAIL CRIMPED
PROVIDE ON - 1.0' HORIZONTAL
LOOP SER NE
SERVICE
\ w
IYPICNL 5[CTIp!
POINT WHENGBRANCH IS YAT PUGGEDS
o m w O
u
In
o9p o
o
INV-9D3.00 NR OF Rbx
s'
VARIES
1
(N.J. PLUG ONLY)
LI
RR
�
_
m
'BCE
s o c g
g
NR OF Flow-INv�sm E
Iuv= I.
rlxv
SERvICE PIPE.
wATERMAIN
_ PLAIN CONCRETE
._:. LNDISTLRBED EART
PLAINwCONCRETE nA�9
r L
C
N-� [Cl W
w/LXILN xrt-RE 5 Iu nOXESVE
NOT L
PLAN
4"1 tJ :<N�•
LNDISTLRBED EARTH
TEE. RUC ! IAPPNG 9.EFVf
gLL.
5pp k
SECTION B
PER 2/2011
RSTANOARD
2/201T
TYPICAL END
y Z
s S 5
6
-
r
TYPICAL HOUSE SERVICE
PLATE
D.
4007
�R1V Y
TYPICAL SERVICE DETAIL
sPxp Ro
3403
yz
lZanb
i'F
STORMWATER CONTROL STRUCTURE 102R1V
WATERMAIN THRUST BLOCK
_
Z
�
F A.
ALL I' F _I
AAND =1"S"RE GIFTS P s'_ - 2
IT-Lp
MNDDT IRE, „1ASTEEL IEN
` FOR GOLTE
ERO
-� o
sTUTo<ao
_
NEI
cAsw �cNIMLSEAL
AROUNDV
y
R 4J
W W
F
a a
tlJ
Hry
�naei mT: Tn
II/n'oV°N°X P0S1
ux
4DIUST NO
1 MINIMUM 5
CUT To srzE " SPRE
RINGS ACER
RINGS RINGSlz' soL1G
SECTION A -A
STEPs PE�
PE n AoiONs
-
TERNAL µL Ixxcv CASE
SEALIN9 PEB
I27 w C. 'ENN L
srcuElrwTlms
O G
m Rb"¢
oz
-
M. I y«x Axnw
2 , �
GROUND RINGS
SECTION A -A
A
ERnnxe
c[M[xT xdrrnR OR x9rfsxNNR
sT EaxrnnE AmsTNENT BNcs
O Z J
TRANSITION rouPLER
PRECAST ECCENTRIC
CONE -
RB-SA (MODIFIED)
Lla IWHITE ON BLI£ RI_I
WIN—N
E ON
o M 1PEURBEo
- T No
JOINTS�FPINEO
BELOW CONE SECTION
PRECAST CONCRETE
�PIPFD �1 m5 xnxxMF
N! TO )] unLWE ID NTO
~ J
0
0
RED
ASTM c-aTa
Q ;
A
Z y d'
A
PE",AATlous A y/Y�
-
..
CWI
Y J
V) W W
BD 80"
// UNDISTURBED
���
PRECAST OR BLOCK
.�R I —METE NA.— SHALL uEET A- uTe A. nsiu uDT.
Z
o O 4 U)
GROUND LINE IT
CROLNO LINE
/ RANULER FILL
PREC4ST DROP,
A SAND CU2N10IN
- �E
J } W F
Z w
�c-)a o
�RMIED
AN'LOPROVa
M XOLE IN SXALLOA R
SO UR LOPED TO PROVIDE s
FLOW FROM INLET TO OUTLET
G
Tom%
FLOW FROM INLET ToFIRE7
PONT
-
CONCRETE Ex
SHEET NO.
NO PARKING SIGN STOP SIGN
2/20n
: 2/2Dn
4.
OUTSIDE DROP MANHOLE
STANDARD
TE
PNO.
STANDARD MANHOLE
STANDARD
PLATE
10
STORM SEWER MANHOLES
SITE SIGNAGE
i
4004
R1V i
2501
C.—DABE-1.1E.
nEELAxPFLE—E
A:
1
— . H I.
E'. E D, ED-)
NIN DIE1M
IDEDE
PVC_E_�E AL
PV ... MEREIE 1IDE ME. 1)
III[
I ,
D1.1-C. -El
DIE.D_ NMRN..E-GA.,-� E. E
_,M,,DR MV
= r. -- � _'% ll'� 1=1
........... E 7=..At==,
Nwxx
� =S� TI-1 t D. ZE--_r DIM. xT
I EMME1.11 11 nh
DEIIE
�AE
,xE
Rmz
BOOT STYLE PIPE SEAL
CORRUGATED HDPE WATERSTOP PIPE SEAL
11 ERE I 1::,l -1 1— HPI ww
11IDN 11 ME I V1 DHMN E
IE IANDIDUE IILL
lAlEll" E'
I., PIDE V SEAL OR
11D M ..MEIE PIPE
MM
.O M M.mW x M.Ewx�mNm, ,wLxx Rnx w
:: DE ILIDED
xwL.w� .ML�xroNwm..xxx�roEMxxm
61
Z
11� m
ED
ZO
�o�=o
�h
IV-1- HIDRA-�C EEW-
(lEAPLUG
B� I.A. 'EDOIS R E-L)
q
z
WATERSTOP PIPE SEAL
PIPE CONNECTIDNS TO MANHDLES
EROSION CONTROL
MATTING
z
ISANITARY -ER SHALL BE INSIAATEDj
IIEN SANDIAl LINE 11 LEI THEN ..B'
1R.. FINISH GRADE ELEVAT.Ry
POND LINER SHALL MEET LEVEL 2 LINER REQUIREMENTS
1) �MINIDPEMILINERA TrCRITERIA:
HIC NESS SHALL BE AD MILS OR GREATER.
• SHALL BE
SILT/CLAY LINER CRITERIA: SO PERCENT FINES (200 SIEVE). OR 2D PERCENT FINES AND A PI OF T.
-SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A THICKNESS OF 2'.
0 Q
'm
LLI
iL -C
c;
0
.
IB.
ELEI. - IMDD (DIIERE PMEEMU)
DF E ElR.
.IR LIVER " I—L
,.PE ER ED E"L
PAN ERFL. EL.AIIM
M MN/:UE'FLlER F-A
N/:._.lUE'FLlER
X
DEED FE.IL.El.
.11. ELEV DED.
._ER IREV.
ft.. R!.
EVE
z z
0 _j
LLJ
< > >
z
v) _j
LLj LLI
SHALLOW SANITARY LINE INSULATION
-/DHT
SEEEL
z ILL.
FL 0 <
,
_j LLj
< K
5 o_
SHEET NO
10
10
WEIR OVERFLOW DETAIL
STDRMWATER PDND WITH LINER
The Bridgeport
1563
1M FOR IJ IMI FM IN U FM
INS IJ U NO 0 U IMI I01
The Wellington - Porch - Ridgeview Highlands
1544 SQ. FT.
OPTION.LL.
ENLARGED BEDRbt
RIDGEVIEW HIGHLANDS
RM RE 115911 F. UJISEN
RM Rml 1101 F. M OUR
--
- III All
�J,u
�,•�
nc Cal.®It
a
a.*
III III
�i
k%Nlq,kwiw.w
KELLERWILLIAMS.
David Christensen (612) 280-1924
Barbara Thies -Christensen (651) 324-2224
e
AALk
ilk
-IN W-111i
!`'� '� _.� ro. �•. sue' rx`t. r 3j`$ �r
T � � �� I r •*9 'i�•ryr. U. r�,' � •I 4. �. � � .rTal - �" w •t
,yam, � f• Si � l � 19 '�. i tc
,_ 11 �, l6• _ T ,k f i it r ; f- _ :'t
1
From:
Debbie Carlson
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Cc:
Prank 6buildwithmaiestic.com
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Tall Pines II development denied?
Date:
Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:56:44 AM
Dear Zach, I am copying my husband in this email.
Is it true that Planning has denied the approval for an extension of Tall Pines? We purchased a
townhome on Wilson Circle with the hopes to retire there. If Planning thinks more commercial is
needed, I need to know why. More commercial near by will devalue my property. More single family
near by will give my property better value.
Especially in the times we are in when small businesses are not valued by our Governor as he is not for
opening up MN, why would Elk River need more commercial space? During my years of selling Real
Estate, the demographics of our aging home buying prospects are looking for:
• The ease and/or necessity of a one level design
• The preference and privacy of "detached" homes versus a shared wall with cluster housing
• The ability to choose options, upgrades, finishes etc. to customize to your decor and lifestyle
• Friendly neighbors that are in a similar age group
• The location being convenient to shopping and major highways
• Not to be located by light industrial commercial or other commercial.
I strongly object to more commercial near by our property!!!
Debbie Carlson
Your Trusted Referral Source
D: 763-234-8088 1 F: 763-241-9234 1 DebbieCarlson@edinarealty.com
Edina I,e^ ty l,efeIn,ail I etwoi,k
"For hie hiimself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall
of separation" Ephesians 2:14
From:
DENNIS EHLERT
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Tall Pines II on Line Ave
Date:
Monday, May 11, 2020 3:27:26 PM
Zach,
I would hope that the Elk River City Council would approve this development as I see
many positive measures for approval namely:
• The ease and/or necessity of a one level design
• The preference and privacy of "detached" homes versus a shared wall with
cluster housing
• The ability to choose options, upgrades, finishes etc. to customize to your decor
and lifestyle
• Friendly neighbors that are in a similar age group
• The location being convenient to shopping and major highways
Sincerely,
Dennis Ehlert
18311 Xavier Circle NW
Elk River, MN 55330
From:
Diane K. Tetens
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] TWIN LAKES AND LINE AVENUE
Date:
Tuesday, May 12, 2020 10:09:29 AM
Hi Zach,
As a new owner and resident of Elk River, I wanted to give you some insights on why I chose to live
here.
Although my parents grew up along Highway 10 near Wadena Minnesota, I grew up in the Cities and
have always lived close to where I could find work. As a child, we would always pass through Elk
River to visit my grandparents. It has always been a dream of mine to eventually live in a rural area
when I retired. In 2005 1 was able to purchase a townhouse in The Lakes in Blaine, and then I retired
a few years later. In 2020 1 moved to Elk River to fulfill my dream. There is more to this story, but to
keep it short - Elk River is a beautiful historic river town, continues to have a rural feel to it, is close
enough to the Cities for me to see friends and get to the airport within a reasonable amount of time,
and surrounds itself by lots of nature. It did not take me long to decide on Elk River.
But while looking, I encountered some drawbacks. There were very few one -level townhouses in
this area for sale and not many builders at all in this area. There was much more commercial than I
had anticipated, and these commercial areas looked very worn down. But after all the looking, I
came back because I could still look out back in this townhouse and there was not much noise, the
area looked like a park, and commercial was far enough away from my home. When I asked if
anyone could build behind me, I was told not directly behind me. That was enough for me to
purchase. The positives outweighed the negatives: I would be living close to an old town along the
river with easy access to 169 and 10, businesses would be far enough away from my house yet close
enough for me to get the services I needed, and where my house was located still had that rural feel
about it.
If areas off Twin Lakes will be sold for development between Line and Main Streets, I hope you push
for residential rather than commercial keeping it feeling like a historic river -town feel. Many young
aging retirees are looking to move into rural -like areas. It is one of your greatest assets. If you take
that away, it will become like any other town. I did not have the luxury to live in a small town when I
was younger. I love living here now because I am still young enough to explore this area at a time
when I can still enjoy it.
I really love where I am living, and I hope not to move anytime soon. As a new resident, I wanted to
give you some insight as a new owner and retiree to the area and some reasons why I moved here.
With all the work soon to be scheduled on 169, 1 hope the City of Elk River not only looks at how to
build their infrastructure with commercial businesses in mind, but also the people who are drawn to
your City to support businesses.
Thanks for reading my views.
Sincerely,
Diane Tetens
Xavier Circle NW
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From:
Elizabeth Merwin Smith
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Tall Pines II
Date:
Tuesday, May 19, 2020 10:30:41 AM
Good Morning, Zach: I am the realtor that does all the marketing and sales for the detached townhomes
for Roger Derrick and Tall Pines first addition. We have worked together for 25 years and have
completed 7 one level, association maintained communities.
The purpose of my email is to inform the City of Elk River of what my experience has been helping
people transition to this type of lifestyle. The common conclusion from the potential buyer, is the Ilk of
available housing. I would also like to point out that the age group is getting younger as well. We don't
only see the retired population, but people in their early 50's. The desire to have a low maintenance
lifestyle is becoming more prevalent, along with a one level home to ensure longevity to their housing
requirements. People are living longer and want to stay in their homes as long as possible.
I have been amazed at how quickly we sold the homes in Tall Pines. We already have a list of buyers
and real estate agents waiting for information on Tall Pines 11. We would all appreciate the approval to
move forward with this community. The parcel is in an excellent location for residential housing. I would
encourage City Council to drive through the communities Roger Derrick has created in our city. I am
sure they would agree they all add to the perception of Elk River being a beautiful, friendly and safe
community.
:RI[JL.....� Y IR(Xf II:), Iliac
Broker Associate/ Realtor/ Senior Real Estate Specialist
3495 Northdale Blvd NW- Suite 200
Coon Rapids, MN 55448
:161763.286.3729/ Office 763.432.7640/ 763.856.3508
beth@b2!.hrn,e,rw .Jf].:.co.r n.
w v vr.bcthrner..AJrn.ccrn
.............................................................................................................................
From:
ELLEN CARLSON
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Proposed Detached Townhome Development
Date:
Sunday, May 17, 2020 9:48:12 PM
Hello Mr. Carlton,
My husband and I are in the process of purchasing a beautiful new detached townhome in Elk
River. Our dream home is in the Tall Pines development on 183rd Circle. We had been thinking
about downsizing to a townhome for a few years but my being diagnosed with rheumatoid
arthritis last year was the push we needed to finally make the leap. After 37 years in our single
family home in Coon Rapids my husband was not excited by the thought of common walls,
possibly noisy neighbors, postage sized lots and large maintenance fees. My doctor told me I
was five to 10 years away from not being able to do stairs so I kept pushing to get us out of
our family home asap.
We found the Tall Pines development through a listing that our real estate agent had set up
for us. We walked through the model, which was well above our price range, and then we
walked through the house we decided to buy while it was under construction. It's a beautiful
slab home, absolutely no stairs, not even to get into the home! We had capped our purchase
price at $300,000 or less. We say we don't want to lose a spouse and then the house, so we
were keeping costs manageable for one of us to stay when the other one passes on. We are so
excited, we found a wonderful home on a nice sized lot. We got a lot of our wish list items,
upgraded cabinets, granite countertops, luxury vinyl plank flooring and a beautiful open
concept home with a vast vaulted ceiling and we will have a fireplace for the first time in our
lives. Best of all it's a small community of mostly retired people. We loved that it isn't a vast
development of 200 or 300 homes. We love the fact that it's small and quiet yet so close to
Highway 10 and 169.
We feel very fortunate that we found our new development. It's hard to find a single level
home on a private lot in a reasonable price range. Please know that finding a nice detached
townhome in small development was not an easy task. We were looking for months and we
are now looking forward to spending our retirement nestled into our quiet neighborhood
knowing that all the services we require as we age are all close by.
I'm sorry this got so long, can you tell I'm a little excited? Thank you for your time, please keep
adding quality developments for people like us.
Thanks again,
Ellen Carlson
2231 112th Ln NW
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
763-757-8015
coming soon to Elk River!!
From:
Marie Gerads
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Revised Letter / Tall Pines
Date:
Monday, May 18, 2020 4:02:09 PM
Elk River City Council
We have lived in Ells River since 1988 in a single family home raising our
family. Many of our friends and other retirees have decided at this time to downsize
to a patio home or one level detached housing. In trying to stay in the Elk River area,
we have found very few areas that have one level detached housing.
Our investment in staying in Elk River requires an additional cost, which means we are
investing in the community. Some of the features we have looked for include one
level detached housing, location being close to shopping, close proximity to major
highways, and neighbors that are in our age group.
We feel fortunate that we found those features in the Tall Pines II development and
looking forward to moving in very soon. We are now in the process of selling our
two-story home. We were pleased to hear that the close surrounding area would
include more one level patio homes, which would add to the value in the future of the
detached patio home that we purchased in Tall Pines IL Even though the detached
patio homes are somewhat identical, the developer has done a wonderful job of
keeping the number in each area down, and individualizing each detached
home. Having light or commercial buildings surrounding us is not what we were
looking for when we were looking to downsize. We need the city to remain supportive
of our investment and the future value of our home.
I remember the sign entering Elk River vividly when we moved in: Where the City
and the Country Flow Together. Tall Pines II and the next development of Tall Pines
is an investment in the future of the community.
Thank you,
Ron and Marie Gerads
From:
mn
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Date:
Monday, May 11, 2020 5:50:26 PM
Mr. Carlson, we moved to Tall Pines this March. We looked for a plan like we have here in
Elk River, & knew instantly this was the place for us. Our Realtor, along with Beth, made our
transition so easy. We love our new home & would highly recommend a similar development
be constructed in the proposed area. Sincerely, Richard & Ruby Babst 18301 Xavier Circle
NW.
From: Robert Deoroot
To: Carlton. Zachary; Roger Derrick
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Tall Pines II
Date: Thursday, May 28, 2020 8:42:17 AM
Good Morning, Mayor and Council Members,
On behalf of RND Construction and all of the subcontractors that are building these great
townhomes, (many live in Elk River and the neighboring communities) we ask that you pass
the Tall Pines II development. It will not only benefit the city but bring in a core of retirement
folks that spend their hard earned dollars in our city and will do no harm to anyone or cause
any problems.
RND Construction who has built the detached townhomes at West Oaks Dev. and Tall Pines
Dev. both in Elk River, is asking the city council to allow us to build more of the same in Tall
Pines II. It will give the community a pleasant aesthetic, currently it is a field. It will benefit
the city and keep my crews working in Elk River, close to their homes and spending their
dollars in our community. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Please vote,
YES.
Rob DeGroot
RND Construction Inc.
From:
Rooer Hermanutz
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Tall Pines second addition request.
Date:
Saturday, May 16, 2020 9:14:11 AM
Mr. Carlton, I would like to see the area remain a habitat for wildlife and possibly the
establishment of a small community park. If, however, a Tall Pines 11 is approved, I would hope that
(1) Tall Pines I would be totally completed before the beginning of Tall Pines 11 and (2) that the
irregularities of the present Tall Pine I Association's financial position be corrected. Thank you.
Roger Hermanutz
18321 Xavier Circle NW
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From:
Roper Hermanutz
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Date:
Saturday, May 16, 2020 8:33:54 AM
Mr. Carlton, I live in Tall Pines and would like to say that I am hoping we will have the 30 homes built
in Tall Pines 11 rather than an industrial sight that the city is planning on. I do not want to lose the
value of my home. Thank you, Brenda Hermanutz
18321 Xavier Circle
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From:
Sonda Bennett
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Tall Pines II
Date:
Monday, May 11, 2020 3:50:10 PM
Zach,
My husband Tony and I bought our townhome in Tall Pines last October. We moved from a
split entry home with stairs and wanted something without stairs. Our detached townhome
home is perfect. The people in our neighborhood are similar in age so it's nice and quiet.
We believe that letting light industrial business in next door would decrease the value of our
homes.
Our hope is that more townhomes will be our neighbor instead of industrial.
Sonda and Tony Bennett
From:
sashmannnC�aol.com
To:
Carlton. Zachary
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] tall Pines resident
Date:
Friday, May 15, 2020 3:16:32 PM
I am in favor of adding more one level housing in Elk River,there is just not enough of it here. They are
close knit but that makes for meeting great people. Please make this a residential area
Thank you Terry & Teresa Coleman
18397 Xaziver circle N.W.
From: Terry Lundby
To: Carlton. Zachary
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Pines at Elk River LLC Case No P 20-03
Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 1:30:19 PM
Honorable members of the Planning Commission,
While I realize that the growth of Elk River is inevitable and for the good of all I do have
concerns with the Pines at Elk River LLC development proposal.
I live on the frontage of 5th Street NW. This street connects Twin Lakes Road via Line Ave.
with northbound Highway 169.
Since the re-routing of Line Ave and the denial of access to Main St. from Baldwin Av.
around 12 years ago, 5th Street NW. is the traffic bearing road of the area.
Fifth St. NW bears the traffic from Nowthen and eastern Elk River to and from northern 169.
In twenty years at this location I have seen and hear 5th St. turn into an acceleration lane for
teenagers driving modified pickups with extremely loud exhaust pipes to 60+ Boomers on
Motorcycles with extremely loud exhaust pipes.
My concern with this new development is increased traffic, the attendant danger from speeders
and the nuisance of pointless noise, up to 90 db.
Has the Planning Commission considered these issues in its deliberations? If so, has it any
plans to mitigate these issues?
My hope is that the Planning Commission will not only address my concerns but act positively
as well.
Sincerely,
Terry Lundby
520 Auburn Pl. Apt. B
Elk River, MN. 55330
Kelly & Lemmons, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Patrick J. Kelly (651) 224-3781
pkellyC&kellyandlemmons.com
Licensed in Minnesota and Wisconsin
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River MN 55330
May 26, 2020
Re: Our Client: Roger Derrick VIA EMAIL
Tall Pines at Elk River
Dear Mayor and City,
Please be advised that I represent the Applicant, Roger Derrick, with the Pines at Elk River,
LCC. The proposal is to develop a 6.33 acre parcel along Line Avenue with 29 residential town
houses. This development is similar to the Tall Pines Subdivision which was developed by Roger
Derrick south along 183rd Circle. Mr. Derrick has developed a number of quality projects in Elk
River which include Tall Pines I, West Oaks, and Elk Run Village. He is known as an experienced
and consciousness developer with projects in the metro -area.
This proposed development will employ 30-40 individuals for the various sections of the
local labor market.
On March 28, 2019, this project was proposed by Roger Derrick and was approved by the
Planning Commission with the following recommendations:
1) Zone change from Business Park to Residential Planned Unit Development;
2) Conditional Use Permit establishing a Residential PUD; and
3) Preliminary Plat of Tall Pines Second Addition.
Subsequently the application was withdrawn after the City Council meeting because Roger
Derrick wanted to address concerns involving traffic problems on Line Avenue and assurance that
MnDOT's plans would be stabilized in the immediate area.
Roger Derrick reapplied for the project with additional supporting documents by his traffic
engineer which verified the development would have nominal impact on Line Avenue. In addition,
there was a stabilization by MnDOT that MnDOT's plans would not have an impact on the
development. Also, per the City a cul-de-sac design on Line Avenue would lesson traffic.
The Elk River planner, who is well respected after evaluating the details of the project
specifically the Comprehensive Plan, the surrounding neighborhood, zoning conditional use
2350 WYCLIFF STREET - SUITE 200 e SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114
TELEPHONE 651-224-3781 FACSIMILE 651-223-8019
www.kellyandlemmons.com
permit with PUD, and preliminary plat; he recommended the following:
1) Approval of zone change from business park to Residential PUD;
2) Approval of Conditional Use Permit establishing a PUD with conditions;
3) Approval of the Preliminary plat of Tall Pines Second Addition.
Roger Derrick supports the Planner's recommendation and agrees to the suggested
conditions as stated in the Planners Report.
Given the past hearings by the Planning Commission and the Planner's recommendation to
approve the application the Planning Commission, without any rational and legal sufficiency
denied the zone change, the conditional use for Residential PUD and the preliminary plat. The
Planning Commission ignored the Cities' Comprehensive Plan and the change in the
neighborhood to residential, and a solution that addressed their past concerns with respect to
traffic. The proposed residential development had no factual issues that involved health, safety,
and general welfare like Roger Derrick's past developments and other residential developments,
there are no facts that support an issue with health, safety and welfare.
denial.
Planning Commission member Jill Larson -Veto made the following confused motion for
"I'm going to make a motion to recommend denial on the basis that the application
does not meet items 1 and 3, I don't believe it's in accordance with the
comprehensive — or that's number 2 in accordance with the comprehensive plan. I
do think that it could detrimentally impact the use of other properties and I do think
it could have a detrimental impact on the normal and orderly development of that
area."
Her motion was not clear on whether it was zone change or two of the factors necessary for
approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Also, the confusion is that she thought that the project was
not in accordance with a comprehensive plan. The Chair had to clarify her motion that this was a
denial of the zone change subsequently denying the Conditional Use Permit and Plat, see attached
Planning Meeting Transcription of April 28, 2020.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The proposed residential development is designated as correct land use according to the
Elk River Comprehensive Plan.
"The Comprehensive Plan guides this area as Mixed Use which allows a mixture
of housing, jobs and/or retail services uses within close proximity to each other.
The area also provides another setting for high density residential land uses. The
proposed use and rezoning to a residential PUD is supported by the Comprehensive
Plan", see Planner's Report.
The Comprehensive Plan with a mixed -use designation allows for a residential land use.
Also, it should be noted that the mixed -use designation allows for development of the vacant 2.5
acres south of the project.
The Elk River Comprehensive Plan has a number of important statements that supports and
2350 WYCLIFF STREET - SUITE 200 e SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114
TELEPHONE 651-224-3781 FACSIMILE 651-223-8019
www.kellyandlemmons.com
guides the Council in reviewing decisions for a zone change.
1) The Comprehensive Plan is one of the most important tools for guiding the
development and redevelopment in Elk River (Chapter 3 — Using the Plan Pg. 19);
2) Therefore, the successful implementation of this plan requires the City Council,
Boards and Commissions, City Staff and others, to consider this plan as a whole when
making decisions (Chapter 3 — Using the Plan Pg. 10).
ZONING RELATED ORDINANCES
The Comprehensive Use Plan addresses the importance of harmony between a zone and
the plan.
"Zoning and Related Ordinances
The City has adopted zoning regulations for the purpose of carrying out the policies and goals of
the land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan. The application of zoning districts and the
specific regulations must support the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. As a result, an
outcome of adopting the Plan will be the review and modification of the Zoning Ordinances as
necessary.
The land use plan provides the basis for guiding zoning decisions that will be made by the City and
private property owners. Minnesota Statutes Section 462.356 states that ...... the planning agency
shall study and propose to the governing body reasonable and practical means for putting the plan
or section of the plan into effect. Subject to the limitations of the following sections, such means
include, but not limited to, zoning regulations, for the subdivision of land, an official map....."
This statute anticipates that the zoning regulations will be reviewed and updated to ensure
implementation of the land use plan. In a broad sense, this review of the zoning ordinance should
examine the following items:
• The regulations for each zoning district should be reviewed to determine if they fit with the
intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
• Zoning districts should be examined in relationship to land use designation. Changes in
zoning districts will be needed to match zoning with land use.
The City will need to thoroughly review and update its Ordinances to address
inconsistencies and conflicts to integrate the concepts described in this Comprehensive
Plan. Updating the Zoning Ordinance will be a large undertaking that will require
significant input, time and energy.
One of the policy decisions the City will need to make is how to implement the land use plan
through the zoning map. Unlike the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (Minnesota Statutes Section
473), which requires consistency between the land use plan and zoning in cities within the Twin
Cities metropolitan area, Elk River may choose to take a number of implementation strategies. Elk
River has historically chosen to have zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Each has
varying implications for existing property uses and the current zoning. The strategies include, but
are not limited to, the following:
2350 WYCLIFF STREET - SUITE 200 e SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114
TELEPHONE 651-224-3781 FACSIMILE 651-223-8019
www.kellyandlemmons.com
• Keep current zoning in place until such time as the use terminates or redevelopment is
initiated.
• Rezone property to a zoning district compatible with a land use plan category.
• Develop an interim strategy to address current use situations as they relate to long term
objectives." Chapter 3: Using the Plan Implementation Pg. 16.
The Comprehensive Plan also assists business owner, developers in acquiring property
incardinating development plans with existing with future city infrastructure (Chapter 1: Pg. 2)
The plan also considers market and demand, and as such the development community on
redevelopment proposals must insure consistency with the plan and overall community vison. As
a result, the City must also update the zoning ordinance to address inconsistencies and conflicts
that may exist (Chapter 5: Land Use Pg. 4). It is also important to note that the plan addresses
housing objectives specifically stating in the implementation to promote the redevelopment of
existing vacant or under-utilized vacant property to include moderate to high residential housing.
The Comprehensive Plan designated the land use for the Applicant's property, and as stated in the
land use document the Applicant has applied and is conformity with the surrounding residential
uses, neighborhood to the east, west, south and southeast.
RELATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ZONING
Once a City adopts a comprehensive plan as stated in the Elk River plan it means a mean
of obtaining development goals as stated in the plan. Zoning provides a means for implementing
the plan. The rational to conform zoning to the Comprehensive Use Plan was addressed in the case
of Mendota Golf, LLP., v. City of Mendota Heights, 708 N.W.2d 162. Although the case centers
around the Metropolitan Land Planning Act 473.858 it stresses the importance to resolve the zone
which is in conflict with the plan. Case law supports zone change to conform to the
Comprehensive Use Plan.
It is understood that a rezone of property represents a legislative act and needs to have a
rational basis relating to public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. This residential use will
not endanger, injure, or detrimentally affect the use and enjoyment of other property in the
immediate vicinity or the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or genal welfare of
the neighborhood or city.
The rezone to mixed use allows residential use. The independent residential town houses
at market rate allow new families and empty nesters to have a home. The private streets ensure
safety of traffic for residents. There is no rational basis that a residential development properly
planned as in this case impact any health, safety, morals or general welfare. With the global
pandemic as stated in journals there will be a flight from the Cities, to suburbs and towns. It has
turned the real estate market upside down with a new direction, and a need of independent housing
versus high density grouping of apartments.
It is important to note that the residential development will not have an impact for the
orderly development and improvement of the 2.5 acres. The vacant parcel has been vacant since it
has been zoned and the property can be developed. Although restricted by size according to the
mixed -use zone including town houses, industrial uses and possible commercial uses, Planner's
Report.
2350 WYCLIFF STREET - SUITE 200 e SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114
TELEPHONE 651-224-3781 FACSIMILE 651-223-8019
www.kellyandlemmons.com
Finally, in reviewing the zoning map of the neighborhood, there have recently been four of
seven vacant parcels zoned BP rezoned to mixed use. The rezoning of the application parcel
would be the fifth. Traffic on Line Avenue has been addressed with agreement of the developer
with a cul-de-sac. The Application satisfies PUD requirements of a conditional Use Permit.
Finally, the preliminary plat meets all platting requirements.
Case law supports conformity of zone changes in order not to conflict with the
Comprehensive Use Plan.
Elk River is, as with all cities, is faced with the challenges of a global pandemic. There is
no issue that we are all in a crisis. This crisis will and has impacted a change. The economy is in
crisis specifically impacting the commercial development of real estate. The demand for office
space and commercial property is being rethought. Professionals are realizing that existing office
space is becoming a problem due to remote and safe distancing. The new corporate business
models are valuing working remotely and as a result it will probably be some time before there is
a need for new office space. Landlords are already finding it problematic to keep existing office
space fully rented. The mixed use designation allows more flexibility for development.
Roger Derrick had the development and financing ready to go according to the
comprehensive plan that is a reality and a certainty. The residential development provides a
stabilization of the property and in accordance with the surrounding residential.
Respectfully yours,
KELLY & LEMMONS, P.A.
Is/Patrick J. Kelly
Patrick J. Kelly
Attorney at Law
PJK:ran
cc: Roger Derrick
Peter Beck
2350 WYCLIFF STREET - SUITE 200 . SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114
TELEPHONE 651-224-3781 FACSIMILE 651-223-8019
www.kellyandlemmons.com
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 28, 2020
(John Jordan recused himself due to probable litigation between homeowners and builder. Zack muted
the audio and video.)
Zack: All right, so 6.1, it's a Tall Pines PUD Second Addition. It's located generally north of where the
first Tall Pines project was, just south of the light manufacturing facility. It's also located on Line
Avenue. We did look at this one about a year ago, it's now coming back. The applicant had
previously withdrawn their application due to — to wait for an understanding of where MNDOT
was going to provide access to 169 as far as interchanges and how that would affect some of our
local road networks. So they had withdrawn it and now they've resubmitted it.
The proposal is for 29 residential villas. It's on 40' lots, very similar to the Tall Pines @ Elk River
First Addition. It's the villa style detached townhomes which we've seen in a number of other
locations, including Cleaver Lake Fields and West Oaks. This is the same developer that
completed West Oaks as well as the Tall Pines First Addition.
This would be developed as a PUD or planned unit development and it does require a zone
change to PUD, a conditional use permit to establish that planned unit development, and then
also a preliminary plat.
The only street in the subdivision would be a private street and that would connect directly to
Line Avenue. There would be no particular access east onto Twin Lakes Road and there will be a
right-of-way dedication for a future cul-de-sac of Line Avenue which is part of the larger
transportation changes that are resulting from Highway 169 improvements.
This will all be served by city utilities.
So there are some concerns with some wetland buffer setback impacts. However, after working
with the environmental staff and the consultants for this applicant, we feel we've come to the
best solution for this particular case. There are alternatives, but that would include filling
wetlands which none of us want to do, so we're comfortable with our proposal with some
encroachment into that 45' setback; there are no encroachments into the 25' setback.
The comprehensive plan guides this area for mixed use which does support higher density
residential land uses, but it's currently zoned business park.
Here's the site plan as it is today.
Here's the cul-de-sac on Line Avenue so the connection north -south would be terminated and
that would be at a later date. Here's a better image showing that, so you can see Line Avenue,
and 51" Street would become a through road while this cul-de-sac would push all the traffic to
the south so it would eliminate that cut -through traffic on Line Avenue. It's part of the plan
improvements as a result of Highway 169.
1
So that's kind of a larger overview here, we can see how it ties into Line Avenue and how it
relates to other uses in the area.
This is a light manufacturing facility on the north end. I was contacted by the property owner
regarding site lines and potential noises or odors as a result of his facility.
We would look at that as we're approving this PUD with the understanding that this light
manufacturing facility is in operation and plans to continue operation.
I've also spoken with the applicant for this project and we would meet onsite to discuss
landscaping and how we can best do some site -line mitigation to update the landscape plan if
the project were to be approved.
So on transportation, MNDOT continues to study Main and 169 interchange. Right now it looks
like they're essentially at their final design which does include that cul-de-sac on Line Avenue
There is likely no MNDOT impacts to the site, specifically for the highway project, but again our
local circulation will change.
So here's where it is in relationship to that site and where that cul-de-sac would be.
So the first one would be the zone change, it would be residential PUD, it's consistent with land
use and comprehensive plan, again the comprehensive plan calls for a mix of uses to include
higher density residential.
Staff has included a number of conditions to address concerns with the adjacent land uses and
to maintain higher design standards for the PUD. For example, changing the facade and color
for each townhome so they're not the same looking building every single one in a row.
Also the right-of-way dedication for a cul-de-sac which preserves local road options after
interchange plans are finalized.
In the preliminary plat, so with the conditions outlined in the memo, the standards for approval
of the plat are satisfied. Again that works as a larger development package with the PUD and
the zone change. So staff's recommendation is to approve the zone change, conditional use
permit and preliminary plat with the conditions outlined in the memo. We'll review this again in
case anybody new watching so why not postpone this particular meeting and this particular
hearing. State Statute does provide a mandatory timeline, that we must review each
application, that's either 60 or 120 days, and that has not been waived by the state during this
pandemic.
So a public hearing, we are reserving the zoom meeting to staff and planning commissioners
only due to growing security concerns with the zoom meeting, but we are looking to accept
public comments at this point in time right now by either emailing, the email on the screen, or
by calling 763-703-9083, and we are — someone will answer that phone call if there are any
comments for this particular item. So with that I will look to the commission for any questions.
Eric: Thanks Zach, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Anybody wishing to comment can have
an opportunity to call in or send Zach an email. While we're waiting for comments, I'll open it
up to the commission. Any comments, questions or concerns on any three of these items?
I feel a little bit more comfortable with it this time around knowing kind of what the end result
of Line Avenue is going to be. I still have a little concern being close to the industrial property to
the north. I know that they've got some really bright lights on each side of their building. But I
think that can be mitigated with some mature trees and a good landscaping plan so I feel
comfortable moving forward.
Nate: A couple questions, Chair. Zach, what changed in this plan from the previous one?
Zack: It's very similar. The plan is essentially the same. The change at this point in time from when
the council looked at it last time is that MNDOT has provided us the guidance for what is going
to happen to our local road network. Last time we looked at it there was an unknown as to
where Line Avenue would be cul-de-saced, if it even was.
Nate: Eric, perhaps you don't recall from last time but you did have concerns about screening of this
development so from Twin Lakes Road as well on the east end. I don't know if that's been
addressed, and Zach, counsel, Jen Wagner and Westgard, brought up concerns about sidewalk
for a walkable pathway down to Walmart and what not and how could we — would there be a
walkway there with the property owners to the south?
Eric: Those are good points, Nate. I know the walkway or pathway was a concern too during the plan
commission meeting.
Zack: There's been a condition to add a walkway from the end of the cul-de-sac over to the trail along
the west side of Twin Lakes Road. That doesn't show up on these updated plans but that is a
condition of approval. Right now the plans do not show a trail on Line Avenue as that would
again likely reduce traffic, but we could absolutely add a condition to put a trail on Line Avenue.
That would only address this particular portion of the property — of the street, it wouldn't go
down to the parcels to the south.
Eric: So the path that's recommended, to connect to Twin Lakes Road, is that behind — between the
industrial property to the north and this area?
Zack: My best estimate right now is that it would either occur south of parcel — as what's identified on
this particular image as Lot 16, so I've spoken --
Eric: Gotcha.
Zack: We could put a trail right here just outside this wet pond area where they potentially move
some lots around and bring it this way.
There is also a significant topography in this area so how that trail gets down it might have to do
some angles here. That's also to the site lines too so this is a lot higher than Twin Lakes Road.
Eric: I still do have some concerns if you look at the development just to the south, Xavier Circle,
where some of those have fairly good screening to Twin Lakes Road, some of them don't, I
notice that Lot 16 is going to be fairly close but I'm guessing that meets setback requirements.
Zack: Yes, it meets the minimum setbacks too, yes.
Rob: I have a little broader concern just because this is a mixed -use area and you're putting industrial,
retail, high density, kind of all in the same boat here, and I know this is a difficult one to deal
with. Has anyone talked to ABRA about their concerns and vice versa? They're a paint shop.
Has there been any complaints in the past and what's going to happen if you plug in some more
— this is geared I presume towards families and perhaps older generation here, but is there
anything that could come off of these two, Dytek and ABRA, that is going to affect or have an
impact that you can tell or have been made aware of?
Zack: All I can speak to at this time, is that the public meeting notices went to everybody within 500
feet. We did not receive any comments from ABRA, so they would have received that public
hearing notice.
Eric: If you can remind me, Zach, the property in between ABRA and this proposed development,
what is that zoned?
Zack: It's zoned business park and it meets the minimum lot sizes for business park but it's privately
owned right now.
Eric: Okay. I guess I still have a few concerns with it but I'm more comfortable knowing how Line
Avenue is going to end.
Nate: Is this the same lot depths as the Xavier Circle, are those all 40' lot widths?
Zack: The lots widths should be same but the depth is going to be different due to the configuration.
Xavier Circle one looks deeper but yes, the widths should be generally the same.
Eric: Where else have we done the 40' widths, Zack? We've done a few others, right?
Zack: West Oaks has some 40' wide lots.
Nate: How about the length of cul-de-sac with this width? We looked at a similar development out
over by the Gateway Church. That was 65' lots and one thing we were concerned about was
queuing in overflow parking capacity. To me there is no off-street parking really here, the only
parking there is, is in the driveways.
Eric: So this is showing, Zack, a car — essential cars parked on one side of the cul-de-sac.
Nate: Okay that's what this is?
Eric: Does anything prevent cars then from parking on both sides?
all
Zack: It would have to be signed that it's parking on only one side. That goes back to Fire Department
standards for fire truck access. When you go to a private street and you go to a reduced width,
you can see a sign right here, it says "No Parking", "No Parking This Side of the Street" so it
would have to be signed as such. But it's parking on this side, and this is the parking graphic we
asked them to put in place due to those parking concerns because yes, it does get pretty small.
And they also have to address Minnesota State Fire Standards as far as parking and access
circulation as one of the conditions of approval.
Eric: It ends up being a private street, so snowplowing will be done by an association?
Zack: Correct, the city will not be plowing this.
Brad: On that, so I don't know if it's a concern for us so 1, is now I see the cars there — so with the cars
there and how it's drawn, then a firetruck could get in, turn around and come back out
supposedly, and to the question of snow removal, where would they put it? Maybe that's not
our concern?
Zack: It's private from the right-of-way in so that would be their responsibility for where they put the
snow. They may have to truck it out. They may have to push some into these areas here or in
between the driveways. Yes, it's all private street and that would have to be on them to address
that, but that's a good comment I'll discuss that with the applicant.
Brad: It just looks really narrow once you get in, even to navigate by car, it seems if people would start
parking— which they would — to Nate's comment about that development down by the Gateway
Church, thanks for the reminder on that, this kind of feels the same, maybe too much, not
enough kind of space.
Eric: Now when you kind of see the layout of the houses and how they're kind of packed in, it's a
little bit more of a concern.
Zack: The houses do have to meet a minimum of 10 feet apart which is the minimum per building
code for fire standards. The buildings would be at least 5 feet apart-10 feet apart, excuse me,
5' setback, 10 feet apart.
Rob: Lots 8 and 9 on the south side look like you could get in there with a micrometer to measure
that.
Eric: Right.
Zack: I do have one — since the public hearing is open, I did receive one comment from the public If
you would like me to read that now?
Eric: Absolutely.
Zack: Sure. It says while I realize that the growth of Elk River is inevitable, and for the good of all I do
have concerns about the Pines of Elk River development. I live on the frontage of 51" Street NW,
5t" Street connects with Twin Lakes Road via Line Avenue with northbound Highway 169. Since
the rerouting of Line Avenue, and the denial of access to Main Street from Baldwin Avenue
around 12 years ago, 51" Street NW is the traffic -bearing road of the area. 5t" Street bears the
traffic from Nowthen and eastern Elk River to and from northern 169. In 20 years at this
location I have seen and heard 5t" Street turn into an acceleration lane for teenagers driving
modified pickups with extremely loud exhaust pipes, to 60+ boomers on motorcycles with
extremely loud exhaust pipes.
My concerns with this new development is increased traffic, the attendant danger from
speeders, and the nuisance of pointless noise up to 90 decibels. Has the planning commission
considers these issues in its deliberation, if so, has it any plans to mitigate these issues? My
hope is that the commission will not only address my concerns but act positively as well. I
believe he's speaking to 5t" Avenue being turned into more of a through street and obviously in
the new condition this would not be there because access to 169 will be eliminated.
Eric: Just out of curiosity, it's hard to see from this view, Zach, but this new development, they could
go down, take a right and go kind of by — and be able to get out to 5t" Street from Baldwin,
right?
Zack: You could have a round -about way that yes, you could go south, take a right and then take a
right back onto Baldwin and get to the north, yes.
Eric: I would assume anybody that wants to go to School Street or the frontage road of Dodge
Avenue, that's the preferable path, right? Likely the only path?
Zack: Yep. The other option would be to go down to 169, use the entrance ramp, get onto 169 and
exit onto School Street.
Eric: Or go out to Main Street, go up to Twin Lakes and around?
Zack: Yea, the two quickest would be to either utilize Baldwin and Dodge, or get onto the interchange
onto Highway 169.
Eric: Any concerns with increased traffic on Baldwin?
Zack: I would say Baldwin would see an increase in traffic regardless of any use that goes into this one
in general, but I mean — I think the goal at this point in time for this particular plan was to
address Line Avenue concerns because, as we know, that particular roadway receives more
traffic than Twin Lakes Road does in this area.
Rob: Are these scheduled to be done before the cut-off or circle on Line Avenue, or is Line Avenue
and these apartments going to be concurrent or what's the projection?
Zack: Construction timing moves around a bit. There will be some overlap but right now — again
things can change obviously— but it looks like the cul-de-sac would be put in before full build -
out of the subdivision but not before any homes go in so there's also been a traffic analysis that
was completed by the applicant to look at potential traffic impacts of this use on this site. Their
traffic analysis did not show any negative impacts and that showed preconstruction as well. I
think that traffic analysis was also attached into the staff report.
11
Jill: What type of residential — like how many residential units could go in there right now without a
PUD?
Zack: Right now it's zoned business park, so it would have to be rezoned to a residential district. I
would say it would have to either be an R-3 to be townhome standards or R-4 high density
residential, but it would have to be rezoned. Right now it's a business park with underlying land
use of mixed use residential. So it could be different, it could be townhomes, it could be an
apartment building, it could be other options but as it stands today, without some sort of
change, it would only be a business park use.
Jill: Okay. I was just thrown where it said that it's guided for mixed use and residential uses are
permitted. But it isn't actually permitted right now, it would need to be rezoned?
Zack: Correct, it's permitted under the land use guidance, not under the current zoning.
Jill: The only comment I would want to add, we've had some experiences as a city where we've put
PUDs in industrial parks, and then when those industrial locations look to expand or change or
do anything different or request CUPS for themselves, it creates a significant amount of tension
between homeowners and business owners. As I look at this, that's what I'm concerned about, I
think about over by Casey's and the PUD we have over in that area and the sheer volume of
high-tension issues that we've had between business and homeowners. I know we don't have a
crystal ball to see the future but I'm a little bit concerned about this, going in there and just
creating problems from here on out. Because it is right in the middle of business park, an
industry, and those businesses have a right to expand and change and do things differently in
the future as well. So that's my main concern with it
Rob: I have to echo with Jill, that's kind of where I was headed with my question. Is the inconsistent
businesses on each side of this, are we creating a problem where we're making another
exception in an area it's not suited for? I know technically, but realistically, what's going to
happen if someone else wants to put something in that's incompatible with both of the other
two uses but we've already set a precedent for that. I just get concerned about shoving that
many people in to that area and then expecting everyone to be able to get in and out of there.
Eric: I guess to that too, both Jill and Rob bring up an interesting point, when you look at the property
directly to the south, if a business park were to go in there, how would that affect all these
residents having even something noisier closer by.
Nate: In effect it's almost a spot zone. If you insert residential in between two industrials like that.
Eric: Right. Well business park and industrial.
Nate: Well yea, yea, exactly. That's a great point, Jill.
Rob: But effectively we have done that with Xavier Circle down there already, but --
Eric: But to the south of that is also residential. It's not quite as boxed in as this development would
be. But this is a lot more homes you're talking about, 29 verses whatever was there.
Rob: It just looks like shoe -boxed together there, if you're going to do that, make some nice
apartments like we've already done down on the south end of ABRA across the street, but that's
me, we're trying to fix something here but, I just don't feel comfortable with that property in
there.
Eric: When you explode the view and you look at the street itself and how parking would line up, that
would be one of my main concerns. Was the applicant, Zack, -- would they be interested in
wider lot widths or anything like that, or are they pretty set on the layout?
Zack: This is the application they put forward so I'd say this is their most preferred option. They
haven't been asked by the commission or city council to look at larger sized lots, but I would also
add that our RFP is also out right now for our comprehensive plan which could look at land -use
updates for this area as well for our comprehensive plan guidance.
Eric: I'd almost be in favor of waiting to see what happens with the comprehensive plan and what
they would designate here. And I see the one drawing here, you're showing — oh, theyjust have
them numbered differently.
Zack: Yea, this is a —
Eric: But this is down in the 30's.
Zack: It's 29. It's Lot 1, which you would see right here, would be removed in the event of — two
different drawings, two different iterations of it, but it would be the cul-de-sac here so this lot
would go away which would drop this lot count down to 29.
Eric: All right. After, I mean Jill made some really good points. I'm just not convinced it's the right
thing to move forward with that right now until maybe the comprehensive plan is revisited to
see what best suits that area holistically.
Zack: Chair, we did get one more public comment. It was the applicant and wants to provide some
additional feedback on it.
So he stated that the setbacks and the distance between buildings is the same as Tall Pines and
West Oaks. So it's similar to projects that have gone in. He says a 4-unit building — if you were to
put multiple 4-unit buildings in here that would be multiple buildings with no distance in
between them, but essentially instead of a townhome it's a common wall, so more space
between buildings.
His third comment was the rezoning is allowed, it's consistent with the comprehensive plan as
was Tall Pines. It was the same building down there so it's the same. It's the same situation
that was done for Tall Pines, the first addition. So that's the feedback that he had.
Eric: And Tall Pines is the development to the south?
Zack: Correct, that was the first addition, this would be the second addition.
E:j
Eric: Based on those comments, any other feedback from the commission? I'll close the public
hearing, bring it back to the commission, we'll look for any other — a motion of recommendation
either way?
Jill: I'm going to make a motion to recommend denial on the basis that the application does not
meet items 1 and 3, 1 don't believe it's in accordance with the comprehensive — or that's
number 2 — in accordance with the comprehensive plan. I do think that it could detrimentally
impact the use of other properties and I do think it could have a detrimental impact on the
normal and orderly development of that area.
Zack: For clarification was that regarding the preliminary plat or the conditional use permit? There are
three different items on there.
Jill: I'll make a motion to recommend denial of the zone change from business park to PUD.
Eric: Because of that, that would directly affect the other two, correct?
Zack: Yes.
Rob: I would second that motion.
Eric: So we have a motion and a second recommending denial of the zone change. I'll take votes on
that. Perry, how do you vote on the recommendation of denial?
Perry: I'm in favor of the denial of the motion.
Alex: I'm in favor of denial.
Eric: John is abstaining.
Jill: In favor of denial.
Rob: I'm in favor of denial.
Brad: In favor of denial.
Eric: And aye, Eric Johnson, am also in favor of denial. That is six recommendations of denial. So this
was a final recommendation of denial to the city council and that will be reviewed on June 1.
Zack: That was for the zone change?
Eric: For the zone change, correct. Do we need to do that for the preliminary plat and the conditional
use permit?
Zack: Yes
Eric: Can we take those both together, Zach? Or motion for each of them?
A
Zack: Motion for each of them.
Jill: I'll make a motion to recommend denial of the preliminary plat.
Alex and Perry: I'll second that motion.
Eric: We have a motion and second to deny the preliminary plat: Perry, how do you vote?
Perry: In favor of the denial.
Alex: In favor.
Eric: John is abstaining.
Jill: Aye.
Rob: Aye.
Brad: Aye.
Eric: And aye, myself, Eric Johnson, recommend denial for the preliminary plat. So that was six
denials. We'll move on to the conditional use permit.
Jill: I'll make a motion to recommend denial of the conditional use permit.
Alex: I'll second the motion.
Eric: Motion and second. Perry, how do you vote?
Perry: In favor.
Alex: Aye.
Eric: John is abstaining.
Jill: Aye.
Rob: Aye.
Brad: Aye.
Eric: And myself, Eric, aye. That's six ayes in favor of denial of the conditional use permit. This will be
reviewed at the city council meeting on June 1.
Zack: No, this would be May 18, chair.
Eric: Okay, it will be reviewed on May 18.
10
Pines at Elk River, LLC
City ofElk River
13O65Orono Parkway
Elk River, IVIN 55330
RE: Tall Piney U
Dear Mayor and City Council:
Thank you for considering our proposal for one -level detached townhomes. You will hear testimony
discussing the profile of our more than 140 Elk River buyers in Tall Pines 1, West Oaks, and Elk Run
Village (where they lived before, why they decided to sell their family homes and move to their new
tovvnhomes in Elk River). These one -level tnwnhomesare attracting residents from many other
communities, helping Elk River grow and prosper,
When we purchased this land, we relied on the fact that the comprehensive plan shows mixed use, the
same as was shown for the adjacent Tall Pines I land, which was previously rezoned to mixed use.
City staff recommends approval of Tall Pines 11 based upon the city's objectives being met, which are
addressed in the staff report and the fact that our rezoning request is in compliance with the city's
comprehensive land use plan. The staff report describes numerous conditions which weneed tomeet,
all ofwhich vvehave agreed to.
We feel it is important to discuss the recent Planning Commission vote recommending denial of our
project. This year's Planning Commission vote was a surprise to us, because last year the Planning
Commission voted 4to1for approval for the same development. This year, Commissioner Johnson who
dissented last year, said he was satisfied that his concerns about traff ic and a walkway to the Twin Lakes
trail system had been satisfied. During the meeting many questions were asked and all seemed tobe
adequately addressed, sothe vote todeny came asashock. VVehad the Planning Commission minutes
transcribed so we all have easy reference to the Planning Commissioners' comments.
The Planning Commission's denial of our second application note no specific findings;however,
paragraphs #1and #3ofthe staff report were cited intheir motion 1odeny. Nnevidence orfacts were
presented to support their motion, and it is a contradiction to the city's professional planner's
recommendations contained in the staff report.
Our development offers stability for the subject parcel, providing affordable market rate housing to
future residents and anincrease inthe citvstax base. |tprovides anopportunity for Elk River residents
to change from their older residential homes to updated new maintenance -free living while staying in
City ufElk River
May 2h,2O2O
Page
Elk River. There is certainly no evidence that would support Planning Commission members' claim that
our proposed land use would negatively affect adjoining property values.
The vacant parcel to the south would not be impeded nor depreciated in any way with our townhome
development. The parcel owner would still be free to build an office park that would conform with the
existing zoning or pursue rezoning to a nnid-orhigh'density residential use.
We hope you recognize the value of providing affordable housing to older citizens, many of whom
expect this to be the last home they ever own. | myself am in this category. My wife Pat and |
purchased our one -level tovvnhome17years ago when | was 6Zyears old.
|fyou permit the townhouses atTall Pines Utobebuilt, hwill be, asother townhouse projects have
already demonstrated, an asset to the City of Elk River.
Thank you for your consideration.
PINES AT ELK RIVER, LLC
w�
Roger Derrick
Chief Manager
RDD:sja