5.2. SR 01-20-2009~/
City of
Elk -,--,
River
REQUEST FOR ACTION
To Item Number
Ci Council 5.2.
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Communi Develo ment anua 20, 2009 Chris Leeseber ,Park Planner-Planner
Item Description Reviewed by
Request by Fred McCoy (McCoy's Pub) for Conditional Use Jerem Barnhart, Plannin Mana er
Permit for Patio Addition, Case No. CU 08-24 -Public Reviewed by
Hearing
Action Requested
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the City Council deny the conditional use permit request
for a building expansion as illustrated on drawings dated 9/29/08 for the following reason:
1. Inconsistency with the shoreland setback regulations (Sec. 30-2022). Encroaches
approximately 30 feet past the bluff line.
2. Inconsistency with impervious surface regulations (Sec. 30-2025). Exceeds impervious
surface by approximately 33%.
3. Inconsistency with Downtown Design Guideline approved materials (Section 30-1026).
Should the City Council approve the conditional use permit, staff would suggest the approval be
conditioned on the following:
1. Approval of a formal variance from the shoreland setback regulations and the impervious
surface regulations.
2. All requirements of the Building Code shall be met, including egress.
3. City Engineer shall approve, prior to construction, a bluff re-stabilization plan and stormwater
retention plan.
Summary
The applicant is proposing approximately a 1,000 square foot building addition. The proposed addition
would be 36 feet from the rear of the existing structure and approximately 30 feet past the bluff line. The
existing building and proposed addition will cover approximately 58% of the property. The building is
currently a nonconforming structure as approximately 30 feet of the rear (south) end of the building
encroaches into the bluff line setback.
One issue that complicated the discussion was the presentation of a revised survey by the applicant. This
was not included in the original Planning Commission packet, and is included in the Council packet for
reference only. Staff and the City Engineer have not analyzed the revised survey, nor has the DNR
offered comments relative to this drawing.
If the revised drawing reflects a revised application, the applicant should waive the 60 day rule timeline
and the revised plan should be reviewed by staff and the DNR, with a recommendation going back to the
Planning Commission.
S:AYLANNING bIAIN\Case piles\CUP\CU U8-24 McCoy\CU 08-24_CC.doc
Public Comment
Fred McCoy, the applicant, introduced himself and had several questions on how the Bluffs project was
approved and built. He felt his project was going to have far less impact than the Bluffs project did. In
response to the building material suggestions, the applicant was acceptable with the proposed
recommendations.
Ron Touchette spoke on behalf of the Bluffs building citing possible noise, lighting, and parking issues.
He was concerned with the residential units facing the subject property and how they would be affected
by possible late night noise on the deck. He felt the extra traffic generated from the proposed addition
would take away from parking for other businesses.
Planning Commission Discussion
Most of the discussion focused around the second survey that staff received after the planning packets
had been sent out. The second survey had conflicting information with the survey that was included with
the application. Staff clarified that the Planning Commission should be reviewing and making their
recommendation on the original survey that was part of their memo.
The main difference reflected on the revised survey shows a variation from the definition of bluff, from
which the bluff setback is measured. The survey included in the Planning Commission packet indicates
the bluff line as defined by the DNR regulations.
One commissioner commented on the possible noise and stated that tenants purchasing a unit in an
urban setting should expect some level of noise; citing train and highway noise as more obtrusive.
Another commissioner stated he would like to make a recommendation of approval and then let the City
Council/DNR work it out. Several other commissioners stated their job is to make recommendations
based on the ordinance and felt denial was the proper recommendation.
The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request by a 5-1 vote.
Attachments
• Staff report to Planning Commission dated January 13, 2009
• Updated survey submitted on January 9, 2009
Action Motion by Second by Vote
Follow Up
S:\PLANNING MAIN\Casc Filcs\CUP\CU 08-24 McCoy\CU 08-24_CC.doc
.^~/
Elk
River
REQUEST FOR ACTION
FILE COPY
To Item Number
Planning Commission 5.1.
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Plannin Items anu 13, 2009 Chris Leeseber ,Park Planner-Planner
Item Description Reviewed by
Request by Fred McCoy (McCoy's Pub) for Conditional Use erem Barnhart, Plannin Mana er
Permit for Patio Addition, Reviewed by
Case No. CU 08-24 -Public Hearing
Action Requested
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Conditional Use Permit
request for a building expansion, as illustrated on drawings dated 9/29/08, for the following reason:
1. Inconsistency with the Shoreland setback regulations. (Sec. 30-2022) Encroaches
approximately 30 feet past the bluff line.
2. Inconsistency with Impervious Surface regulations. (Sec. 30-2025) Exceeds impervious
surface by approximately 33%
3. Inconsistency with Downtown Design Guideline approved materials. (Section 30-1026)
Should the Planning Commission support and the City Council approve the Conditional Use permit, staff
would suggest the approval be conditioned on the following:
1. Approval of a formal variance from the Shoreland setback regulations, and the impervious
surface regulations.
2. All requirements of the Building Code shall be met, including egress.
3. City Engineer shall approval, prior to construction, a bluff re-stabilization plan.
Background/Discussion
The primary concern with the application is its inconsistency with the environmental regulations. In 1991
the city adopted the Shore Land Ordinance and Impervious Surface regulations that the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) established. These regulations, in part, pertain to bluff line setbacks and how
much of the property can be covered with impervious surfaces. Although the city did not create these
regulations, the city does have an obligation to enforce them.
In 1999 the DNR amended the Wild and Scenic line to accommodate all the existing structures in
downtown. The Wild and Scenic line used to run approximately down the center of Main Street. This
request is not affected by this line. The concern of the proposed addition is the setback from the bluff
line.
Secondary to the environmental implications are the typical conditional use permit concerns: Light,
noise, traffic, etc.
Case File: CU 08-24
Page 2
Attachments
• Location Map
• Memo from Environmental Administrator dated January 8, 2009
• Memo from the DNR Area Hydrologist dated December 12, 2008
• Proposed Addition Drawings
• Site Images
• Site Exhibit
• Site Plan
General Information
McCoy's Pub
Fred McCoy
Applicant ,Fred McCoy
60 Day Rule The application has been deemed complete as of October 9,
2008. An extension letter was mailed to the applicant. The City
must take action b anu 28, 2009.
Requested Action Conditional Use Permit fox Building Addition
Location and Size Approximately .11 acres in downtown Elk River.
Location Existing Use Land Use Plan Designation Current Zoning
Subject
Property Commercial Old Town Downtown District
North Mixed Use Old Town Downtown District
South River Old Town Downtown District
East Commercial Old Town Downtown District
West Commercial Old Town Downtown District
Overview
The applicant is proposing approximately a 1000 square foot building addition to the rear of the
existing restaurant. The proposed addition would be 36 feet from the rear of the existing structure
and approximately 30 feet past the bluff line. The existing building and proposed addition will cover
approximately 58% of the property. The building is currently a nonconforming structure, as
approximately 30 feet of the rear (south) end of the building encroaches into the bluff line setback.
The interior of the addition will be primarily for storage which would be accessed from the
basement of the existing building. The top/exterior of the addition would be a flat deck space fox
customers to utilize.
S:\PLANNING MAIN\Case Files\CUP\CU 08-24 McCoy\CU OS-24_PC.doc
Case File: CU 08-24 McCoy's Pub
Page 3 Fzed McCoy
Analysis
Environmental
The proposed addition is in conflict with the Bluff regulations, Section 30-2132 and Section 30-2022
(a)(2). These sections do not allow an expansion of a principal building on the lot, due to the
buildings proximity to the top of bluff line. The concern is the potential damage to the highly
erosive steep slopes, and the necessary excavation will further damage the banks of the Mississippi
River. Additionally, the deck over a room addition will increase the impervious surface, in conflict
with the maximum 25% for the property. The existing building and proposed addition will cover
approximately 58% of the property.
The applicant may apply for a variance from the setback requirements; however, the city cannot
issue a building permit without first giving the DNR the ability to comment The DNR map deny
the request. (Section 30-2092 (d) 1-5) The DNR has indicated, with their memo dated December
12, 2008, their opposition to the request.
The Bluffs building (directly east of the subject property) was allowed to be where it is because it did
not encroach any closer to the river/bluff than did the buildings existing on the site prior to that
project. The setback was established by the previous buildings on those properties. There is no
indication on the subject site that any type of structure was in the proposed expansion area.
Conditional Use Permit
From a neighborhood standpoint, the expansion of storage does not cause real concern. However,
the expansion of the bar to the outdoors raises concerns due to late evening noise and lighting as
there are residential units to the east (Bluff Block) and to the west (Cinema building). Staff has
received some question from neighboring properties relative to this issue.
The expansion of the bar area will generate the need for an additiona122 parking spaces. These
parking spaces will not be provided on site, they will be provided in the municipal lots and on street.
Recent studies have indicated that there were sufficient openings in these lots to accommodate these
cars; however, the build out of the vacant adjacent commercial spaces will reduce this.
Applicable Regulations
Conditional Use Permit
The issuance of a Conditional Use Permit can be ordered only if the use at the proposed location:
7. 1.Ylill not endanger, injure or detrimentally affect the use and enjoyment of otherpropery in the immediate
vicinity or the public health, safety, morals, com, fort, convenience orgeneral zvelfare of the neighborhood or the
city.
2. 1-Vill be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
3. 1-Vill not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property.
4. mill be served adequately by and avill not adversely a~ect essential public facilities and services including
streets, police and fire protection, drainage, refuse disposal, water and server systems, parks and schools; and
will not, in particular, create tra~zc congestion or interference with tra~zc on adjacent and neighboring public
thoroughfares.
S:\PLANNING MAIN\Case Files\CUP\CU 08-24 McCoy\CU 08-24_PC.doc
Case File: CU 08-24
Page 4
McCoy's Pub
Fred McCoy
5. 1~ill not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be
detrimental to anyperso~is orproperly because of excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, dust or
vibrations.
6. bill not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance.
7. 1.Ylill fully comply with all other requirements of this Code, including any applicable requirements and
standards for the issuance of a license orpermit to establish and operate the proposed use in the city.
Sec. 30-2022. Placement, design and height of structures.
(a)(2) Additional structure setbacks The following additional structure setbacks apply, regardless of the
classification of the water body:
a. Setback from top of blu~ 30 feet. (I'he building is proposed to be approx. 30 feet past the bluff line)
Sec. 30-2025. Stormwater management.
(2) Specific standards.
a. Impervious surface coverage of lots shall not exceed 25 percent of the lot area. In lieu of meeting this impervious
surface requirement, a properly may submit a stormwater drainage plan to the city for review and approval which
.restricts the developed five year frequency event peak discharge to a rate no greater than the five year historic
undeveloped peak discharge. To the maximum extent possible, the drainage plan must also provide for methods of
runoff settlement andl or filtration prior to discharge to the receiving water.
Sec 30-2092 Development permit• certificate of zoning compliance• certification of land use
decisions.
(c) Certfication by commissioner required for certain land use decisions.
(7) Certain land use decisions which directly a~ect the use of land within the designated land use districts and involve
any of the following actions must be certified by the commissioner as described in subsection (d) of this section:
a. Adopting or amending an ordinance regulating the use of land, including rezoning of particular tracts of land.
b. Granting a variance from a provision of this division that relates to the honing dimension provisions of this
division.
c. Approving a plat that is inconsistent with this division..
(2) No such action shall be ~ective until the commissioner has cert~ed that the action complies with the Minnesota
mild and Scenic Givers Act (Minn. Stars. ,~ 103F.301 et seq.), the statewide standards and criteria, and the
management plan.
(d) Cert fication procedure.
(7) A copy of all notices of any public hearings or, where a public hearing is not required, a copy of the application to
consider honing amendments, variances, or inconsistent plats under this division shall be sent so as to be received by the
commissioner at least 30 days prior to such hearings or meetings to consider such actions. The notice or application
shall include a copy of the proposed ordinance or amendment, or a copy of the proposed inconsistent plat, or a
description of the requested variance.
(2) The city shall notify the commissioner of its final decision on the proposed action within ten days of the decision.
(3) The commissioner shall, no later than 30 days from the time he receives notice of the final decision, communicate
either cerl~catiosa of approval, with or without conditions, or notice of nonapproval.
(4) The action becomes ~ective when and only when either.
a. The final decision taken by the city has previously received certification of approval from the commissioner;
b. The city receives cert~cation of approval after its final decision;
c. Thir y days have elapsed from the day the commissioner received notice of the final decision, and the city has received
from the commissioner neither certification of approval nor notice of nonapproval,• or
d. The commissioner cert~es his approval after conducting a public hearing
S:\PLANNING MAIN\Case Files\CUP\CU OS-24 McCoy\CU 08-24_PC.doc
Case File: CU 08-24
Page 5
McCoy's Pub
Fred McCoy
(5) In case the commissionergives notice of nonapproval of an ordinance, amendment, variance, or inconsistent plat,
either the applicant or the city may, within 20 days of such notice, file with the commissioner a demand for hearing If
the demand for hearing is not made avithin 30 days, the notice of nonapproval becomes fznal.
a. The hearing aa~ill be held in an appropriate local community zvithin 60 days of the demand and after at least tavo
weeks' published notice.
b. The hearing will be conducted in accordance avith Minn. Stats. ,~ 103G.3 7 7, subds. 2, 6, 7.
c. The commissioner shall either cert~ his approval or deny the proposed action urithin 30 days of the hearing action.
Timeline
• Decision is made by the City Council (approval or denial)
• The city must notify the DNR commissioner within 10 daps of its decision
• DNR commissioner has 30 days to notify the city:
0 of approval, with or without conditions
0 or denial
• The City Council action is effective once certificate is received from the DNR commissioner
agreeing with the City Council or if nothing is received from the commissioner after the 30
days.
• Earliest building permit may be issued.
• If DNR commissioner gives notice of nonapproval (when the City Council gave approval)
of an ordinance, amendment, variance, or inconsistent plat, either the applicant or the city
may, within 20 days of such notice, file with the DNR commissioner a demand fox hearing.
• If the demand fox hearing is not made within 30 days, the notice of the DNR
commissioner's nonapproval becomes final.
Downtown Design Standards
The proposed materials for the addition do not meet the downtown design guidelines. Plain
concrete block is not one of the approved materials.
Section 30-1026 (f) states:
`The restoration, remodeling and/or expansion of eacisting buildings shall, to the maximum extentpossible, bring
exterior facades back to the appearance they had when they avere originally constructed, or maintain a similar
architectural style to the original construction, or comply to the extentpossible za~ith these design standards and
guidelines. "
This seems to support the rehabilitation of the exterior far~ade. In staffs opinion, this maybe
inconsistent with Council policy of reducing non-conformities in scale with the proposed
development. Staff does believe it appropriate that the rear of the building, as well as the new
addition comply with the Ordinance.
Due to meeting timing, the Heritage Preservation Commission will forward their recommendation
directly to the City Council.
If denial of such a permit should occur, it shall accompany recommendations or determinations by
findings or a report stating how the proposed use does not comply with the standards set forth in
Section 30-654.
S:\PLANNING MAIN\Case Files\CUP\CU 08-24 McCoy\CU 08-24 PC.doc
Case File: CU 08-24
Page G
McCoy's Pub
Fred McCoy
Comprehensive Plan
The Old Town land use category reflects the unique land use mixture in and around the
Downtown...A variety of uses fit into the Old Town designation: community-scale retail.,
professional services, public/civic uses, park, offices, dining and ente+-tainment, banking, lodging,
and housing. Uses need to be compatible with the character and scale of the Downtown area...
This area provides the greatest opportunity for improved access and connection with the Mississippi
River. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Natural Resources
The challenge to the site is the impact on the bluff. The memo from the DNR Area Hydrologist
further addresses concerns with the natural recourses.
In the review of the standards for a CUP, the Downtown Design Standards and Sections 30-2022,
30-2025 and 30-2092 as previously outlined, it appears that the request could:
1. Cause destruction, loss or damage of a nat[irai, scenic or historic feature of major
community and regional importance ~
2. Exceed the allowed impervious surface coverage for the lot
3. Not achieve the previously set forth design standards
Action Motion by Second by Vote
Follow Up
S:\PLANNING MAIN\Case Files\CUP\CU 08-24 McCoy\CU 08-24_PC.doc
Wd 9E~95~ZT 8002/OT/TT '6n~p deW uoile~o~\~o~~W bZ-80 fly\d(1~\sapd ase~~gNINNVId\~S
~ ~ ~ ,- ~ - ~ - x~~
~"'.nt' ~i ! ~_ /yam' r ~, i / / ~~ -~.. ~ .~ _~ ' '- ~ ~Y -s:
= ~ y r - ~ 1 ~
z ~~~~ ~~ °y -/ ~ ~ ~ - ~ _
f r t ~ ,. r _~ a
a
<-
.:. r
,,
ver
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeremy Barnhart, Planning Manager
FROM: Rebecca Haug, Environmental Administrator
DATE: January 8, 2009
SUBJECT: CU 08-24 -Fred McCoy
CU - 08-24 -Fred McCoy -This application does not meet the Shoreland
Ordinance. The Environmental Division does not support this application due to the
amount of impact to the bluff. The bluff setback of 30' has been set due to the
instability of the bluff. Bluffs are inherently much steeper and sensitive to impact than a
hill or steep slope. Also, with any river, there is a chance for meandering and thus
making this bluff even more susceptible to impact. It appears after inspections of the
site that this area is on an outside curve of the river which creates more chance for
meandering. Hence, the bluff setback protects the river by reducing the chance for
erosion and bank sloughing.
If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you for the opportunity to review
the applications.
12/15/2008 MON 12:57 FAX 320 255 3999 MN DNR Sauk Rapids ~J002/002
1vlinnesota Department of Natural Resources
DNR Waters
940 Industrial Drive S., Suite #103
Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
December 12, 2008
Rebecca Haug
Environmental Administrator-City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: McCoy's Pub Addition Proposal
Dear Ms. Haug,
I am writing in regard to the proposed addition to McCoy's Pub in the "old downtown"
portion of the City of Elk River. The Recreational reach of the Mississippi River's
protected Wild and Scenic corridor encompasses the site.and immediate area. The "old
downtown" has been allowed to have buildings closer.to the river based on having been
there. In the case~of McCoy's Pub, upon my field inspection on December 11, 2008 there
is no recent indication that the Pub occupied the portion of land they propose to put their
addition on. Furthermore, the proximity to the bluff would have no setback when it is
supposed to be 25 feet. The portion of the bank, at the full extent requested, 36 feet out
from the existing Pub shows signs of slumping and erosion as well. I would recommend
that the proposed addition extend no more than 24 feet from the existing Pub toward the
river.
Mn. Rule 6105.0230 requires that a.final decision on a variance, within the Wild and
Scenic corridor, be given to the Commissioner of the DNR within 10 days, Upon receipt
the Commissioner has 30 days to certify with or without conditions or provide a notice of
nonapproval.
Sincerely,
/~ _.
Roger Stradal
Area Hydrologist
. cc: Dale Homuth, Regional Hydrologist
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1-888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484 1-800-657-3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer ...._........... __......... ~~ printed on Recycled Paper Containing 2
Who Values Diversity ~ ~®~ Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste
~ ~gn Ss~s~se (~gl-J xv~ ss~z-9s9 (~9L1 ~~va/rd ~g11 ~ `~
a ~ „~ 86sSS~~G/ NVlre~YrZ ~jvao J.~aGv3~ 6zz9z S'O SV' m6v13U cca ®naL'ddo' ~`u ~
~o-s9i ~zxva a-toow ~
5~~11~1~~ ~NICI~11~1~ CI311~1~1
.173^OMd 'LB AMVa'O
4
w0
~ U
a
pmw
QL~
aLLa
~:o
o d y
a ~Q
w d
w
Y
Lg ~ Z
a
S ~ d
T
~_
8m
po
iw~~
~~®o
m~~pp
U~Y
vary
~ma~
~y
Ada
La
rc
mwo
zp~
r~~
2
~~
Q
0~~
<O?
~ ~ P J
~o
0 0
J ~
F
1° q Q
" o~
® o
~~
o.
g~ `~
u~ mi w
n~2~pp ~
:~ F O i K
sm mL a
4
w
n
3 zz
O 0
ffi
o u a w ~-
~ga° '4
m~ ~ ~ ®~~
>~ 3~ ~ KLLd
~ ~~ s X33 a
0
~~~ ~
~,~
~~~
L
a
K
s~z
°=8
Q~Y
Z_2
rcwa
K
mL0
o
F U zQ
~mmrim o0m
oo=~~~~Q9
~mssj~p~o
a-wxGarc ~
z~~oQ,~n~g
~~~-`003L8~
O_
~~
b~~~
oCa$
mrc~~
9~~~
~~~.
oaQ~
c §~
u ~
LL n
Q
4 U
m 0
w~
~ z 4
w ` ~ ~ >
N"v U~~
N ~zd
o ~ a~-~
~~ ~n~z
_~ ono
N U ~
Z
Q 0 Q
~ ro
~~
4 4
+~-
ui ~
0
z~
0
~ ~fln SS~S-gss (~9q xv.~ SSSZ~Se (~9LJ ~~~rd ~9n Q
. ~,„~ 86655/~lVrIVIN~'17Z 3/1/d01JJDlN32J~c5ZZ9Z ~sr.-.~rwz •iE~ oa~ddr ~
~o-sgi -rzxva ~o~ix
~`~`~ 5~311~3~ ~1~lICQ~11~1~ ~~111~1~1
goad ua ernrro Q
O
U
U
Q.
U1
N..
i~R-
0
' '~
M
0 Z
O p
n
nZ~
Qo~
z
n~o
ono
n
ado
~~~
IY N ~
} N t-
-~ z
'~ o
0
z
F-
0
Z
W ZIOLpw
z~w D
~w~~4
~
=
-t7
~Q
r
~~K~W
wdz=
~~~o~i
~ 3 ~ LL
~ m F ~
~ J
O
Om ~
m~-~
J 0 ~ V
~~ ~>~yw
mrc
~ wOw~1
?d~w
_
°g 0
nN~~
K J
J
~
~
' al
0 ~ w
I ~~
0 0 ~w
~ O,
~ O~
~~
I
i
i
L _
Vp
2~
~o
~o
~u
z
0
~-
> ~o
!U - O
~ v F 0
~~ r
O .wl~ Q
4 ~ S 6!
N Z = Q
~~
x~
O~
mrc
~o
=o
•u
~m
m ~
=o
:~
<°
rc
~ o
°
~~
8
~~ i~oi
odd°u
t
w
~
~ mKpG
i
w°g pkp
Z ~ m ~ ~pK3
w N ~ ~
z z
'Q Q
} _
J
n
-
~ W
~ lil
~
~
m ~ l
~
'^
a >
~ ~
~
~
e
z
O
~ 0
}
~ ~
~- w
~~
~ U
n~
~ ~ ~
Z~
U
~ _
_
m ~
X ~ o
w ~ o m
~.~,~.,~ ~, m~
s..,. - ~ ~..~
,.. ~~ men ssss~se (~9q •xv~ sssz-95a (~9LJ'~VD/7d ~~n
86sSS/~v Nz 3jvz01/~1h~~
6ZL9Z
:~ aw a:sic~a
u= mnorddr 4
`~
_
fm ~ ~.~ ; -}
}~ ~ }+~
S ~~ ~ I `~~ / ~ I `L ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ 1..1~ ~ ~ 1 `i I ~ ~o-s9i
.1~3f02td ~zxba ~ootx
1®/MJV2(O ~,
Q
m z
a ~
3 a
z ~ Q
m
w O
J
LL
~
z~
' a
~N
0 z
0 0
Q ~
n~,~
'40~
Z
QtuO
Z F U
~ II O
1 ~
~ Q O
~ _N ~
} ~ ~
N
~ O
0
Z
•JNIN3d0 mLl9ili 'JNI191X: 11d Ol
bOOG 12LLN8'Cia16119N
a Y Y
u u
0
m m
e~
a a
w
pp~~ L
U f~ ~ 0~ U
_
d
~ ~
d ~
T m~ z
rc ~
;° rc T Q
p
ag V Fyn ~
~ ~ 3
u w
a Z a
re rc
P o
u ~ ~
~ ~
g a
;y a
w ~
~ u
u
y SiN3W331111~3213007
~u of 1H~]I3N . x wu . wa
L L L L
,~,oc
V
~ N
~ ~.
~ @'
.~
W
~-
~8~z
9~~u
~rc~
e~~~
~~~~
oQS5St
S 5a
~ $
0
~ g,„' -
- -
- ~9n 86~55/~GY~B (GV~1dN2 ~ SSSZ~ (1i9O1v~1~ 6ZZ9Z ~~n
5~311~~~ ~i~i1CI~t1~1~ CI~111~~1 ~~ sv ~siv~
L°~91
.1~3'OL'd ue a~oa~ddv
~"~°-,~~~"
•1B NaVtlO ~
O
W
o' }
a
~ ~
0 ~
~ m
~ J
a a z
a z Z ° ~
w m ~u Z ~
3
W X X m
zzo O
°
Z W W
•-~ ~~
m ~
`
=i
m
~ C
Q
^
x Q
~~o Z ~
' °^a O v
,~
M1
O z
O O
n
nZ~
~ ~ N
N
Z
Z ~ O
~ Q
0
4 q O
~ N a.
? ~ ll~. t
W Z
0 O
z
i
~
~ _. ~ a~
wg
mad U ia~
Q~~ ~ ao~
dzu~i ~ dzw
~w~ ? as 1
~¢ 1- ~tt3 i
~
~O m ~0
~
~_~
~W_ -- _
----------- --------------
------T - -- - --- ,
~i
~ ~
~~ ~~ i~ i
~a o~ ~p i
m
=
w0 ~ >
bQ ~ og
~S ~g
Z G Nin a~vvds ,ui i
4 i
a
a
W
a
m
o
~
~W~
3~~~ o
i ~3pW w6 ,,~,
n ~i ~ ~mO~ 0 ~w i
a~
and
q
X'"W
~i >
z0~:
i~<O~ I,
i~ t70 pLWm ~~
=m ~ ~p ~
i
~
m ~ l
wwi0m~3' ~~
~~ -
ma
~
'd
~
d ~
d Cm
~ m LN¢
~a~o g~ .~a-°°w°
~
u
m =
3 m n 4 X m~ a
~m
rc w `°~ m
~ ~
~~ ~ Z m m B~ ~
a,~=
°~
~
- - -- -
(2L3~03N ~ fJ
9EOr19
,q9',£ x . y,6 '021
,o-,e ,a,a
,o-,oE
'iF
~ y
s~
~`
W ~
w 4
o~~~
owls
mz~~
w°~~
'~=3
~a~3
U
- .-
~-~
SIT EXHIBIT ~~ 1r,.~~,<z,'%f~~~~~ay ;;
/ ~' ra ra,C7 ~'r ~ 1/; ~
i /
i/ ./(J.a
BL F SET, BACK <<, : ~
i
l1rJ.~a,~ ~?~~
entry j•
t! ~ $82.9 -_. ~;
.-~ :!
/~ / ~ /
ExTENSroN aF ~` /r
BACk' LINE OF /f3~ ~ 4 ~ 1
NE1GIf9LN?1NG -LC'(~!G'j./(r1(~'j c4~9. G c 5
BL4LO/N6 , j~'1 .. Ei~~ , Relarnrng
i Woll
ij 1. J
r1 ti 1. Vl ~-.
-~LGr,~,/,~,•, , , rY/y y/
ToP aF etc r~F~PER
ARTICLE !-GENERAL
OHW AT GRADE C1~ANCE
(VISUAL TOP OF 8L UFF)
APPROx WILD &
SCENIC RIVER-.....
100 YR
365.2 i~
Map No. 27l41C0990 E
8b'g ?
I
f
f
f
100 YR
365.2!
~ ', -Mqp No. 2714100390 E
s ~
'VI~IL^ $t SCENIC AaPRax wiLa ~
----SCENIC RIVER
~ ~?. 2
-- ~ ~ - enge of rrorer as ~ d-
loroled 417,/08
efev = 457.2
iuff xh®b®t
~
for
BUILDING SETBACKS ~r~d IV/~
V~y
FROM TOP OF BLUFF 30 FT i
MISSISSIPPI WILD AND City of Elk River
Minnesota -
Sherburne County
SCENIC RIVER ,
,
DISTRICT FROM
THE OHW 50 FT
z-~ ARTICLE 1-GENERAL 0 20
DOWNTOWN DISTRICT TOP OF BLUFF-fhe higher point of o
SURVEYOR NOTE 50-foot segmont with an overoge
-A7 LINE A AND C THE GRADE 75 OVER l8% fMMED/ATELY slope exceeding l8~
l lr)Ch = ZO Feef
OFF THE BACK OF THE BUILDING {so there is NO 50 (t PROPOSED ADDITION
segment used here)««. 36x30 FOOT
8
89p8 McCoy
propert
EXTENSION DF
BACK LINE OF 88J 4
NEIGHBORING ii
6 ~~
87y 4
TOP OF BLUFF PER ~ j
ARTICLE l-GENERAL 1
'1
Finished
Floor
entry
El = 882.9 .
/~i
i 884, 8,
ed ~
y ~_
/ ~ N
~.R80.0 ~~~~~~
- ,grode ~ Jooo ~ X~I .~I_ _
1 ~ 1 ~~ ~!
1. 7~ - - _..___~ / ~_!- ~ .~
8 ---_-- _.! x87`""-,-,_ ~.-
1 ,, -I .-
_. _~
OHW AT GRADE CHANGE / X 875: ~~ , %_-- - ---------- a------ -_.._---- _ ~ ~-_-..~ , i ... -I
(VISUAL TOP OF BLUFF) I_,~_, - ~-.-_- -------- t _ -- _ '---I-.._.__- ~-''~ I_
I ~ -~- 7----._.__. ' ~ -
APPRDX WILD & I ~- -~ _"-. ~..~_ ~= --t_..._.- ~ I
SCENIC RIVER "y~._--a7a ~; • -- -~.~_. _--_ ~"~---~ tl'"--_~... _ .''.i",t`
~~ 6p~ I
-_..
--- f-_ - - _.__.
/ _ -- _- I
B75' 8
_ .. ~ _ --
l00 YR I - __- - -_ ------= - ---- - - `- --- I "'- t! 100 YR
985.2% i.~----' .--- --'- I - 965.2Y
- ~'' -
-------- ~ -'--- '- ---I- ~,_, ."~ '~.~, No. 27/4fC0390 E
Map No. 27/4/C0390 E I __..._ '' - '-
Ar8~------' -` _ - - -toe slope ~ ~'`~-8@0 I - ~ t APPRDX W1L0 &
'F°' ~ SCENIC RIVER
1 ~_
I 1 . ~ .. ,~_`J
I g56.0 I I 55.6 l'~.,-.
i ~ I g56 7 g56 0 I `J~ -edge of~'.,rt ~-..
l' - --------- - -r'' - J ~ g52
- I- -----_ ---'-
1 _ _ I 2
~ _ -_. ~- ~ 852.2 ~ g52.1 I 852 ~.~
- i ' 2 _ _ _ -~-- -
g52 ._ _-
~_ ~ _ _ E
~ ~ ~ -edge of water os D
B locoted 4/7/08
elev = 952.2%
FIELD DATE:
BK/PG:
DRAWN BY: BOGIART, PEDERSON
CHECKED BY: p_ ;- ~~._ ~c ASSOCIATES, INC.
REVISIONS: L /2.c~ 1~ C. LAND SURVEYING
t --.1../_O CIVIL ENGINEERING
MAPPING
13076 FIRST STREET, 6ECKER, MN 553D8-9322
TEL: 763-262-8822 FAX: 763-262-6644
DRAWING FILE: FILE N0.
MCCOYS PLACE 08-0064.00
-Disfin[~
~ 1 chonge in
/ grode
~ I /aa.7
REV I
'
SURVEY Bluff .Exhibit
,'
SEp ~ .
Fred McCoy
BUILDING SETBACKS City of E/k R/ver, ShBnbume COtv-fj, MhrnBBOta
FRO,u roP of ecu~F 3o FT
MlSSISSlPP/ W/LD AND
SCEN/C RIVER ARTICLE I-GENERAL
DISTRICT fROM TOP ~ BLUFF-the higher painf of a 0 20
THE OhIW 50 fT 50-/oot segma7rt with an atrorage
ZONI s/q~e exceeding /8X
Do
owN aSTRiCT PROPOSED ADDITION l inch = 20 Feet
36x30 Fi~OT
DATUM
NGVD /929
`} ~_ I ~ ~.
Elk~
~ I
-- h/
~ 30,_
' ~ ~
River
/ .
McCoys ii ,
~
Chiropractic -~ Jems, inc. n
"
~ Ofice
h
3
i
~
Finished
_
y floor ®
`~
~~ ~
a -sans. ' ~ m
~
Cinema ~
~' ~ m
Pro fession al
'
Building
' ~ I~-Reto/ning
•~
'
EXTENSION OF
'~ Woll
~ - -
BACK LINE OF l Proposed
_ ~ - -' ~a`
N£/GH80R/NG _
~oj ~ T36X30 ~ e
s L
- 0L - _
' ~' ~
BCNLD/NG -~
~ ~
~ / Additlon~
~ sa
_~ ~ ~
~ ;~~
~ ~
~ - ~ ~ c a
w
~ oo ~ , o ~~
,/ x
. ~ •~
~
J Q
I o~_ ~
I
~ _ ~.
s~ _ -~
- ~
~~~~ -....
... \
~~~~
1 _- - _~ .._..-- VISUAL TOP
~' ~__
~ -.._....
- _, - ~_ ~ ~
_ ~ BLLFF
~ ~
_
. `.
r
_
_ _ _ .
.
!n
- _
_~
_
_.._
m ._ _. ~-EXrEN570N OF
f
-.- ~
_
~ I _._._. -..__ ~ _
., BACK UNE OF
'.
.._.. ~ , , _.. NEIGHBOR/NG
_.
~_ , ...
-m ~ .._... _ ~ ~ BlHLOING
._. ...:...
=
. ~~"
865.2 .,_.. - .~
_ ~ - __ _
._.
- ` ~ - ,
~- '
Map No. 27/4/C0390 E ~
_ _ -- --
_
_.. '-
_______ ""~-^ ~ _.
_
~ -~OHW Q£V 8685
FIELD DATE:
BK/PG:
DRAWN BY: ! BOOART, PEDERSON
CHECKED BY: ~~ O~ ~ & ASSOCIATES, INC.
REV SIO S: // GVID aiCRJNEEWNG
1027108 Edit elevations. add MnaalNc
datum info. show toP of ~~~ 13076 FlRST STREET, BECKER, MN SSS08-9342
TEL 783-262-6622 FA%: 783-262-88F4
21 .~ 08 edits to line#,yRgs
DRAWING FILE FILE NQ_