HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.13.19• ak-;
N Lw
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Agenda
August 13, 2019
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7.00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Approval of Minutes — July 23, 2019 Regular Meeting
4. Public Hearing: Interim Use Permit (IUP) — Land Reclamation — 4239 165`h
Avenue NW — Bobby Petersen
5. Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) — Interim Performance Standards
— 3017 161" Avenue NW — Erik Hicks
6. Other Business
7. Adjournment
ANLb
Y O F 6VE
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Stephanie L. Hanson, City Planner
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes — July 23, 2019 Regular Meeting Minutes
DATE: August 13, 2019
RE UEST
The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to approve the July 23, 2019 regular meeting
minutes.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 PLANNINGAND ZONING COMMISSIONMEETING – JULY23, 2019
9
10 The Regular Bi -Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
11 called to order by Chairperson Bert Koehler IV on July 23, 2019, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover
12 City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
13
14 Commissioners present: Karen Godfrey, Scott Hudson, Nick Loehlein, Jeff Sims,
15 and Mary VanderLaan
16
17 Commissioners absent: Dean Daninger
18
19 Also present: Community Development Director Joe Janish
20 City Planner Stephanie Hanson
21
22
23 PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE
24
25 APPROVAL OFMINUTES
26
27 July 9, 2019 Regular Meeting: Correct as written.
28
29 Motion by Godfrey, seconded by VanderLaan, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion
30 carried on a 4 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2 -present (Loehlein, Sims), 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
31
32 PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit – Rezoning Request - Rezone from R-1
33 Single Family Rural to R-4 Single Family Urban — PIN' s 13- 32- 24- 32- 0001; 13- 32-
34 24- 32- 0002; 13- 32- 24- 32- 0003 Nathan Fair (Applicant– Villas at Crosstown Woods,
35 LLC).
36
37 City Planner Hanson noted the applicant's name is Nathan Fair rather than Nathan Jones,
38 indicating a typographical error was made. She oriented the subject property, consisting
39 of approximately 20 acres, on a location map and stated the request from R-1 to R-4 may
40 be approved if the City shall find one of two findings provided by state statute: 1) The
41 original zoning was in error, which is not applicable; or 2) The character of the area or
42 times and conditions have changed to warrant rezoning. The property is located within the
43 Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and is also in a current stage of sewer expansion
44 and municipal services. The Andover Comprehensive Plan guides this area as Transitional
45 Residential, which contains properties within the MUSA, currently zoned rural but are
46 guided for urban development, and rezoning this property will prepare it for urban
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 23, 2019
Page 2
1 development. The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to consider recommending
2 approval based on this information. She said the applicant is available for questions.
3
4 Chairperson Koehler stated this request is to rezone the property and does not have
5 anything to do with the development of the property, which is the next item on the agenda,
6 and anyone wishing to comment regarding the development should wait until that time.
7
8 Commissioner Hudson stated he heard or read information indicating the parcel is 20 acres,
9 which City Planner Hanson confirmed as correct.
10
11 Commissioner Hudson asked why the map indicates the parcel as ten acres. City Planner
12 Hanson stated that was another typo; in the Public Hearing Notice she stated ten acres but
13 it is about 20 acres.
14
15 Chairperson Koehler said the Comprehensive Plan states the property is to be changed to
16 either residential or commercial and asked for confirmation that the request is in
17 compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. City Planner Hanson confirmed that as correct.
18
19 Motion by Hudson, seconded by Loehlein, to open the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. Motion
20 carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
21
22 There was no public input.
23
24 Motion by Loehlein, seconded by VanderLaan, to close the public hearing at 7:07 p.m.
25 Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
26
27 There was no further discussion.
28
29 Motion by Loehlein, seconded by Godfrey, to recommend to the City Council approval of
30 the rezoning request. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
31
32 City Planner Hanson stated this item would be before the Council at the August 5, 2019
33 City Council meeting.
34
35 PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat/Planned Unit Development (PUD) — The Villas
36 at Crosstown Woods — Landmark of Andover, LLC — Nathan Fair (applicant).
37
38 City Planner Hanson indicated the subject property on a location map titled The Villas at
39 Crosstown Woods, consisting of 12 single-family homes and 36 villa -style units. As
40 background information, the sketch plan was reviewed at the Planning and Zoning
41 Commission meeting on January 22, 2019, and the City Council reviewed the sketch plan
42 on February 19, 2019. Council provided recommendations to the applicant which included
43 enhance architectural standards; internal trails and a trail connection to Crosstown Blvd; a
44 gazebo, grills and tables, some type of gathering place; and a tree preservation plan and
45 buffering to provide separation from the Miller's Woods development. The developer is
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —duly 23, 2019
Page 3
1 requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The PUD is a common planning tool used
2 in communities and provides more creativity and flexibility when a plat is being designed
3 than the strict application of the regular City Code. The PUD must be demonstrated to the
4 satisfaction of the City Council that a higher quality development will result because of it.
5
6 City Planner Hanson said the Andover Review Committee (ARC) reviewed the preliminary
7 plat and PUD and submitted comments to the applicant. It is in conformance with the
8 Comprehensive Plan: 1) The property is located within the MUSA; 2) Pending tonight's
9 action, the property is being proposed to be rezoned from R-1, Single Family Rural, to R -
l0 4, Single Family Urban, to accommodate urban development. The low-density
11 development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. A map was used to show access
12 to the development using Crosstown Blvd through the Miller's Woods development and
13 then Olive Street, and a new access using Constance Blvd/161st Avenue and Norway.
14 Since the new access is on a county road, Anoka County Highway Division (ACHD)
15 reviewed and provided access requirements to the applicant. The ACHD is requiring a
16 right -turn lane and a left bypass lane at Norway Street and Constance Blvd. At the time of
17 the sketch plan review, City Council supported the two existing accesses within Miller's
18 Woods, Olive Street, and Norway Street, to be extended to the north to make the connection
19 to this development. The proposed city streets within the development meet City Code
20 requirements. Each of the lots will be served by municipal sewer and water, and there are
21 48 sewer hookups allocated to accommodate the housing in the development. The property
22 needs to be rezoned from R-1 to R-4. The applicant is proposing to deviate from the R-4
23 lot standards, including size and setback. City staff is concerned about the buildability of
24 Lot 8 because of its shape; it appears the lot may not be wide enough for a home. The
25 applicant indicated Jonathan Homes has a floor plan that would fit on the lot.
26
27 City Planner Hanson provided a map of the landscape and tree preservation plan and stated
28 the developer would like to preserve as many trees as possible. However, most of them will
29 be removed because of requirements for stormwater treatment and grading purposes. She
30 indicated on the map the trees that will be saved which will serve as a buffer between the
31 Miller's Woods subdivision; those trees will be preserved with a Conservation Easement.
32 She indicated the trees at the intersection of Crosstown Blvd. and Constance Blvd. that will
33 also be preserved. Trees will be planted in each of the front yards to comply with City
34 Code. City Code also requires screening between the rear yards and the adjacent street on
35 double -frontage lots, and she indicated that area on the map. City staff has concerns with
36 the planting of large -species trees such as the oaks and Kentucky coffee trees, as there may
37 not be enough open space for the trees to meet their big width, as well as the trees will hang
38 over the Right -of -Way and the roofs of the villas. The developer may want to consider
39 looking at different species of trees for that area. Staff is also recommending the developer
40 provide a landscaping plan for base plantings, at a minimum, within the front yard of the
41 villas. With the PUDs and other detached villas in the City, it has been typical for City staff
42 to get landscape plans on what type of plantings will be there.
43
44 City Planner Hanson said the plat is in the process of being reviewed by the Coon Creek
45 Watershed District (CCWD). The developer will be required to meet all the conditions and
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —July 23, 2019
Page 4
1 obtain the proper permits prior to site work. The Park and Recreation Commission
2 reviewed the request on February 7, 2019. The Commission is requesting cash -in -lieu of
3 land for the development. However, the Commission discussed and acknowledged the need
4 for a trail on the western side of the plat to connect with a future trail at Crosstown Blvd.,
5 which City Planner Hanson indicated on a map.
6
7 City Planner Hanson stated the City regulates the findings that are required for a PUD to
8 be approved. The applicant has addressed some of the findings such as: 1) The proposed
9 development is not in conflict with the goals of the Comp Plan. According to the Comp
10 Plan, the property can be developed as commercial or residential. The City is in favor of
11 urban residential development in the area, and the overall density will match the Comp
12 Plan. 2) The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and
13 unified environment within its own boundaries. The PUD will provide a buffer with
14 existing vegetation to provide privacy from the adjoining properties, especially separation
15 from Miller's Woods. The smaller footprint of the lot and home provides an open space
16 feel, and that will be managed through the Homeowner's Association. The 12 single-family
17 homes will be of similar design and architectural standards as the single-family homes
18 located to the south, within the Miller's Woods plat. 3) The proposed development
19 demonstrates how each modified or waived requirement contributes to achieving the
20 purpose of the PUD.
21
22 City Planner Hanson used the overhead projector to show the table depicting the proposed
23 PUD standards and where there are deviations. She stated there are Design Qualities
24 identified by City Code to be considered when looking at a PUD and said the developer
25 responded to those. She listed the qualities/responses such as: A) Achieves efficiency in
26 the provision of streets and utilities and preserves area to achieve the elements of design
27 qualities described in this Chapter. The developer is going with a cluster design technique
28 which allows for woodland and open space preservation. There will be a trail easement to
29 access Crosstown Blvd. B) Provides convenient and safe access for vehicles and
30 pedestrians and all types of activity of the development. With the proposed wider streets,
31 which meet city street standards, there will be safe access for vehicles and pedestrians.
32 There will not be a lot of traffic in the development, so it provides a walkable, pedestrian -
33 friendly neighborhood. They are hoping to encourage neighborhood gathering points on
34 the street with the smaller yards and the houses set closer to the street. C) Provides a tree
35 line buffer between the backyards of back-to-back lots. Through the use of the PUD,
36 buffers are being provided where possible of existing vegetation. Using the map, she
37 indicated the woodland trees along the south property line, which will be protected through
38 a Conservation Easement, and the buffer area in the northwest corner. D) Preserves existing
39 stands of trees or significant trees and provides additional planting. As mentioned, there
40 will be stands of trees that will be saved. The developers are proposing the landscape plan
41 will meet City Code; however, City staff is requesting a more detailed plan. The overstory
42 trees will be a 2 -inch caliper, which is larger than the required 1'/z inch. As part of the
43 landscaping, there is a custom designed monument with a large planting bed within the
44 villa lot. City staff will make sure it meets the sightline triangle so it does not cause a safety
45 issue when approaching the intersection. She stated the Planning and Zoning Commission
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 5
1 is asked to hold a public hearing related to the preliminary plat and PUD, discuss the
2 proposed PUD standards, and make a recommendation to City Council. The applicant is
3 available to answer questions.
4
5 Commissioner Loehlein asked whether a developer wishing to build a villa -style
6 development in Andover has to do so via a PUD since the City has an R-4 for single-family
7 houses but no zoning specific to villa -style housing. City Planner Hanson stated he was
8 correct and added the City has an M-2 zoning which allows for attached townhomes but
9 there is nothing regarding detached townhomes.
10
11 Commissioner Loehlein commented that the table showing the R-4 standard against the
12 villa area is helpful because often, when looking at a PUD and trying to assess where things
13 are going differently than what the code prescribes, it is possible to assess for the single -
14 family area but difficult when comparing the villa area to anything in terms of the standard.
15 City Planner Hanson agreed and said she maybe should have put on the M-2, because there
16 would have been more deviations for a detached townhome, rather than the R-4.
17
18 Commissioner VanderLaan pointed out what she thought was a consistent typo, stating
19 "Miller Woods" should be "Miller's Woods" and said, in the interest of accuracy, the
20 developer should be communicating with Engineer Berkowitz to add the "s" so it is spelled
21 correctly.
22
23 Commissioner Godfrey stated fire safety/consulting with the fire chief was not addressed
24 in the information and asked whether additional hydrants would be installed and where the
25 nearest hydrant would be in comparison to the new homes. City Planner Hanson answered
26 that she would have to look at the utilities plan to find the answer but the fire chief has
27 looked at the information and, even with the requested side yard setbacks, there were no
28 concerns from him.
29
30 Commissioner Sims asked whether a calculation was done regarding how many homes
31 could be built if a PUD was not done. City Planner Hanson stated she did not do a complete
32 calculation, but a calculation was done regarding density and the developer meets the
33 density requirements. Also, R-4 zoning allows 1.5 to 3.6 houses per acre, and this plan
34 comes in at 2.5 houses per acre.
35
36 Chairperson Koehler stated the developer's narrative indicates a traditional R-4 zoning
37 would provide 41 single-family lots with no open space. City Planner Hanson commented
38 she was going off the land use, and the developer can go up to 3.6 houses per acre, per the
39 Andover Comp Plan, and still be in compliance.
40
41 Commissioner Sims asked why the PUD is needed if the developer could build anyway.
42 City Planner Hanson said anything over a certain threshold needs to come in as a PUD.
43 The developer is meeting the threshold; if they wanted to come in higher than 3.6,
44 technically they could if it was approved per the PUD.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 6
1 Chairperson Koehler stated the list on the screen are things not met in the R-4 standard, so
2 a PUD is required to get the smaller lots to create a villa -type feel. City Planner Hanson
3 agreed with Chairperson Koehler's statement. Chairperson Koehler stated that although the
4 plan meets density requirements, it does not meet setback requirements in most areas, nor
5 does it meet lot depth or double -frontage lot depth.
6
7 Commissioner Sims questioned whether, to meet the zoning requirement, the applicant
8 could go with less units without a PUD. Chairperson Koehler said the applicant could as
9 long as all the requirements on the screen were met; however, the requirements are not
to being met, which is why the PUD is required.
11
12 Commissioner Sims asked whether the PUD would allow for more units than the zoning
13 allowed. Chairperson Koehler clarified it is within the density requirements but, among
14 other reasons, smaller lot sizes and keeping some open space for the neighborhood requires
15 a PUD. Basically, the density matches but nothing else does. Community Development
16 Director Janish added the reason the dimensions do not match the typical R-4 is to create
17 a detached villa -type development. He stated a City Council member, during a meeting,
18 had asked why they were deviating in so many locations. As City Planner Hanson had
19 noted, there is not a zoning district that allows for a detached villa. By going with the R-4
20 zoning, there are fewer deviation from the Code, the density still matches what the Comp
21 Plan allows, and with fewer deviations from the code, they went with the R-4 zoning
22 district to evaluate a detached villa product.
23
24 Commissioner Sims wondered if the City Council was interested in establishing zoning,
25 so a PUD was not necessary for this type of development. Community Development
26 Director Janish stated originally the City Council did not know if it was worth it. The
27 PUD allows for additional review by the City and the applicant has to show that a PUD is
28 warranted, so it is an additional review step the developer has to provide. He said this
29 project may result in additional conversations in the future, but at this point the PUD is
30 the only tool available to the developer to move forward. If the City were to create a
31 zoning district, it would take several months.
32
33 Chairperson Koehler stated he asked the same question before the meeting.
34
35 Commissioner Godfrey, referencing the chart on the screen, wondered whether 20 feet was
36 sufficient for a sightline on a corner lot in a busy area and asked if the 20 -foot number was
37 used before. City Planner Hanson said the 20 -foot number has been used previously and
38 staff has no concerns. Chairperson Koehler said he believed corner lot sightlines are a
39 minimum of 15 feet, because he lives on a corner lot so he remembers the number.
40
41 Commissioner VanderLaan commented that Community Development Director Janish
42 provided a very comprehensive Memorandum and wondered if he was going to do a
43 presentation or if the Commissioners should ask questions at this time. Community
44 Development Director Janish stated he would respond to any questions the Planning and
45 Zoning Commission may have.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —July 23, 2019
Page 7
2 Commissioner VanderLaan, focusing on the gathering space, stated there were bits and
3 pieces of ideas and a plan from the developer but wanted what the developer envisioned to
4 be on the record. Community Development Director Janish said the City Council, during
5 the sketch plan process, had discussions about the developer providing mowed trails or
6 some sort of trail system within the proposed Outlot A and perhaps a gathering space with
7 some benches, a shelter, and BBQ units. The developer responded that Outlot A would be
8 created and it would be up to the Homeowner"s Association (HOA) to determine the
9 amenities they want within Outlot A.
10
11 Commissioner Godfrey asked how Outlot A would be accessible as a gathering spot.
12 Community Development Director Janish, referencing the overhead map, indicated the
13 HOA access would be via Olive Street, and stated property owners abutting the gathering
14 area may also be able to walk there.
15
16 Chairperson Koehler referenced the landscape plan which City Planner Hanson stated
17 needed to be discussed and wondered if, when evaluating PUDs in the past, there was ever
18 a time when a landscape plan was not provided. City Planner Hanson indicated landscape
19 plans are standard.
20
21 Chairperson Koehler asked if anything was missing from the packet other than the
22 landscape plan. City Planner Hanson answered in the negative.
23
24 Motion by Loehlein, seconded by VanderLaan, to open the public hearing at 7:35 p.m.
25 Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, I -absent (Daninger) vote.
26
27 Chairperson Koehler opened the public hearing by inviting members of the audience to ask
28 the Commission their questions, stating all questions would be answered. He reminded
29 everyone a lot of neighborhoods are done by PUD because it allows for flexibility but
30 PUDs must provide more efficient development than the standard zoning would allow or
31 it cannot be approved. He said no one is trying to skirt the rules and a PUD is definitely
32 part of the rules. At the conclusion of the meeting a vote will be taken; the vote is a
33 recommendation, and the City Council makes the decision.
34
35 Jeremy Whittenburg, 15598 Norway Street NW, of Miller's Woods, oriented his one -acre
36 property on the map which borders the subject property. He asked whether there would be
37 any tree cover/tree lines that will remain between his property and the new development
38 up to Norway Street. He has a longer driveway because of wetlands and his house is set
39 towards the back of the property, close to the northern property line. He is concerned about
40 looking out the front of his house and seeing the back of another house on Lot 9. Regarding
41 Outlot A, he is concerned whether any trees will remain along the property line closer to
42 the street and wondered how to learn whether any of them are on the property line or his
43 side of the property line. He also asked what the remaining tree cover and gathering area
44 would look like on Outlot A.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 8
1 Rychel Gaustad, 512 Constance Boulevard, east of the proposed development, indicated
2 the Comp Plan states that in all developments it is the spirit of the Comp Plan to be
3 conducive to neighboring properties. She is representing neighbors living at 556 Constance
4 Blvd, 470 Constance Blvd, and 545 Constance Blvd in addition to her own property. Their
5 number one request is that a roadway easement would be installed in the development to
6 serve the properties to the east of this development for future development. Chairperson
7 Koehler stated he remembered Ms. Gaustad bringing that point up when the plat was
8 presented in February.
9
10 Chairperson Koehler asked if she had any other concerns. Ms. Gaustad said she did not,
11 but because the Andover Comp Plan states all developments would be conducive to
12 neighboring properties, an easement would be appropriate. She has no problems with the
13 new development, which looks like a well -thought-out development, but they are being
14 proactive and would like the easement since they are residents.
15
16 Vicky Kroll, 15967 Olive Street, Miller's Woods, referenced the tree line and Outlot A and
17 asked approximately how many feet/depth the trees would be on Outlot A, stating she backs
18 up to that, and that her and neighbors do not want to sit in their backyards and see the back
19 of a house instead of the beautiful woods they see now. Chairperson Koehler clarified her
20 question, that basically she wants to know how deep the tree line will be. Ms. Kroll
21 confirmed that as her question, and also asked for the size of the recreation area that would
22 be built and whether that would be a play area or simply benches and a gazebo. Chairperson
23 Koehler stated he understands the development would be geared toward empty -nesters so
24 he does not think a play area will be built. Also, according to the developer's narrative, he
25 is not building anything there; rather, that will be left to the HOA.
26
27 Ms. Kroll stated it was discussed that this development will be for empty -nesters but they
28 may have grandchildren visiting and have a play area for them. She wanted to be clear on
29 both what the area would be and how big it would be. She is concerned that tree area would
30 be taken away to build a gazebo/benches. Ms. Kroll also inquired about the price range of
31 the villas.
32
33 Jack Titus, 15937 Norway Street, is concerned about Norway Street's safety running north -
34 south. He said the developer previously addressed this by only opening up one of the cul -
35 de -sacs going north -south, allowing a second exit to the north. His concern is there would
36 be a raceway heading north -south along Norway, going from a higher density on the south
37 side to a lower density on the north side, and the roads widen going north and people may
38 go faster. He is not worried about the empty -nesters speeding necessarily, but on the other
39 end there are families with kids racing to and from practices, et cetera. He stated this was
40 brought up in previous meetings with a good resolution but was slammed by the City
41 Council at that time. He is bringing the issue up again because there is a legally blind child
42 living in the area who is on the road sometimes. If it is not an option to keep the cul-de-sac
43 closed, he proposed getting three-way stop signs on the south corner, where there is
44 currently one stop sign for east -west traffic, so the north -south traffic would have to stop.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —July 23, 2019
Page 9
1 Nathan Fair, Landmark Development, 13346 Hanson Blvd., Andover, said staff did a great
2 job with the report so he does not have anything to add but can answer any questions the
3 Commission may have.
4
5 Commissioner VanderLaan expressed concern regarding whether the nearby church and
6 its cemetery have been given due consideration. The plan for the church is in transition as
7 far as potential sale, development, and rebuild. She referenced minutes from a workshop
8 meeting and stated the discussion centered around the number of sanitary sewer stubs that
9 would be allowed in the villa subdivision. She asked whether anything had developed in
10 communications with the church but speculated the question was moot. Mr. Fair agreed
11 the question was moot and he has a clear direction on how the church will proceed.
12 Community Development Director Janish stated the City Council looked at 48 proposed
13 units, and that is the number the applicant is moving forward with.
14
15 Chairperson Koehler stated, as he remembers the report, there is sewer capacity available
16 beyond 48. Community Development Director Janish stated the Council has determined
17 48 units is appropriate for this 20 -acre site. For other parcels such as the church property,
18 there are additional units that have been allocated for future development.
19
20 Chairperson Koehler asked whether the church is aware of that situation, which
21 Community Development Director Janish confirmed as correct.
22
23 Commissioner Hudson stated the original sketch plan was all villas, now there are single -
24 family homes also, and wanted to know the thought process behind the change. Mr. Fair
25 stated Jonathan Homes just finished the White Pine Wilderness project which was very
26 successful and Jonathan Homes would like to continue to build in Andover. It was felt the
27 homes would be a good transition coming out of the Miller's Woods development up
28 Norway Street. It ties into the Miller's Woods project, and those would be some of the
29 nicer lots.
30
31 Commissioner Hudson stated in the original sketch plan there were a lot more trees being
32 saved along the north and east sides and just generally there were more trees along the
33 fringes. He asked if that was purely a sketch plan or if something changed about how the
34 development was being constructed. Mr. Fair said it was purely a sketch plan and they have
35 done a lot of work with staff on the engineering side because it is a challenging site with
36 the stormwater. He stated when you finish the stormwater ponding, get the ditches in, get
37 the two percent swales in and the required grading, a fair amount of the trees are going to
38 come down. They will be saving trees on the south side by creating a Conservation
39 Easement on Outlot A.
40
41 Commissioner Hudson asked the depth of the easement. Mr. Fair stated it would be roughly
42 20 feet deep but would get the exact dimensions for the City Council.
43
44 Commissioner Hudson said, providing the PUD gets approved, he assumed trees would be
45 flagged that need to go down and Mr. Fair will work with neighboring landowners so
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 10
1 everyone knows whose trees are whose. Mr. Fair stated before any grading work is done,
2 Engineers will mark the property lines and every roughly 35 feet there will be a stake in
3 the ground. The silt fence line will also be identified, which will be the clearing line, and
4 the grading subcontractor will know not to go on the other side of the silt fence line. Once
5 the trees are cleared, there may be a couple trees within the Conservation Easement that
6 are leaning due to, for example, wind damage and he will work with neighbors to take
7 down additional trees if it is necessary.
8
9 Commissioner Hudson asked if there would be an HOA for the villas. Mr. Fair stated there
10 would be an HOA.
11
12 Commissioner Hudson asked whether there would be a covenant package lined up with the
13 12 homes. Mr. Fair said the goal would be to work with the Miller's Woods HOA and bring
14 the single-family homes into that association. If the preliminary plat is received, the plan
15 will be to have the HOA attorney see if Miller's Woods wants the 12 single-family homes
16 to come into their association.
17
18 Commissioner Hudson asked if there had been any conversation with Miller's Woods. Mr.
19 Fair responded there had not been, but in talking with the HOA attorney, it would be a
20 benefit to the Miller's Woods HOA, because the 12 homes would help lower their
21 association dues. He stated the villas would be an association -maintained product, meaning
22 the snow and the mow will be taken care of by a management company, so the driveways
23 will be plowed and the lawn cut.
24
25 Commissioner Hudson stated there is a lot of discussion regarding architectural standards
26 and the Commission also has pictures in that regard. He wanted to know if the standards
27 have been clearly defined and have they been memorialized in words versus pictures. City
28 Planner Hanson said with a PUD they will typically be adopted as an exhibit in the
29 Resolution, saying the design will be the same or similar to it.
30
31 Commissioner Hudson clarified that would be both for the villas and the homes, which
32 City Planner Hanson confirmed as correct.
33
34 Commissioner Hudson said he can understand how a gathering space would be a benefit
35 for people buying the villas but also understood Mr. Fair's intention is to turn that over to
36 the HOA and let them decide. He asked if Mr. Fair would be determining dues for the HOA
37 and, if so, would he set the rates high enough to create a budget for the HOA people to do
38 something with the space, citing the example if mowing and blowing cost $200 a month
39 and the dues are $200 a month, there would not be money left to do anything else. Mr. Fair
40 said a professional management company will put a budget together and do the managing.
41 The HOA dues would be set up for the snow and mow only, so when the neighborhood is
42 built out, if the 36 new residents want to add a bench or garden area, it will be up to them
43 and the new board to decide if they want to raise dues or not. The villas will be marketed
44 to buyers who have money but are frugal, and so if the monthly dues are $220 as compared
45 to $200, it could make or break a sale. That is why the developer is not going through the
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 11
1 process of laying out an open -space plan. Instead, it will be up to the HOA as to whether
2 there is a bench or a fire pit built. He speculated the 36 new residents would not want the
3 amenity because they will be living in Minnesota six months out of the year and
4 Arizona/Florida in the winter. He wanted to make sure the record reflects that the trees on
5 the south property line will be saved and if the HOA in the future wants to take down the
6 trees, they cannot legally do so. There will be a Conservation Easement deeded to the City.
7 He also told the Miller's Woods people that information.
8
9 Commissioner Hudson asked Mr. Fair at what point he would see control going to the HOA
to for the 36 villas, whether it would be at 75 percent or some other number. Mr. Fair stated
11 each association is set up differently; but when he sets one up, he controls it until the last
12 unit. The HOA documents have not been drafted. Mr. Fair stated the turnover would be at
13 about 95 percent.
14
15 Commissioner Hudson asked Mr. Fair if he would stage/phase the project or what the
16 process would be. Mr. Fair said he would like half the project built this fall so models can
17 be opened up for the spring parade. The plan, pending approvals, would be to site -grade in
18 the middle of August, start utility work the week after Labor Day and bring on the east side
19 of the project this year, and then next spring the utilities and the second addition would be
20 finished. He estimated 12 single-family lots and nine or ten villas would be built this fall.
21
22 Commissioner Hudson questioned when Olive Street would be built, surmising it would
23 be built next year, assuming approval. Mr. Fair agreed with him.
24
25 Chairperson Koehler asked for confirmation of his understanding that Mr. Fair had a
26 conversation with the City Council about extending a road east and the City Council said
27 no. Mr. Fair stated he was correct.
28
29 Chairperson Koehler told Ms. Gaustad, 512 Constance Boulevard, he would follow up on
30 that with staff.
31
32 Chairperson Koehler asked if the HOA wants to build something on Outlot A, where do
33 they go to get permission to build, whether that is through City permitting or will there be
34 a covenant as to what can/cannot be built. For instance, there will be a Conservation
35 Easement so trees cannot be taken down. He wanted to know what other control the
36 applicant has, if any. Mr. Fair was not sure if he had any control because the HOA would
37 be turned over at that point, so no improvements would be made to Outlot A until the HOA
38 is managed by the HOA. He thought the HOA would have to go through the normal
39 building process at City Hall for any type of structure. Chairperson Koehler stated he would
40 check with staff after the public hearing.
41
42 Chairperson Koehler referenced the cul-de-sacs discussion, whether one or two should be
43 opened, and said the City Council felt two should be opened. He stated, in his opinion, if
44 half the cars could be directed down another road, that was a better option. The speeding
45 issue would still need to be addressed, and he felt Mr. Titus made a good point about the
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 12
1 road getting wider. Chief Streich wanted the roads wider for the fire trucks. He asked for
2 any suggestions/ideas as to how to control the speed such as angling the road so there's a
3 bend to it. Mr. Fair stated he had no additional comments.
4
5 Chairperson Koehler inquired as to the price range for the villas. Mr. Fair said the slab -on
6 grades would start in the mid -350s and some villas could top out at 450-475. He noted the
7 lot lines have been redone compared to the original concept plans; and of the 36 units, 33
8 will fit a third stall garage. He stated there has not been a third stall product in Andover as
9 far as he is aware for some time. He stated empty -nesters often say they want to downsize
to but they need a third stall.
11
12 Chairperson Koehler said there are things he both likes and does not like in the project but
13 thanked Mr. Fair for listening to comments that were made and making some changes. He
14 indicated good changes were made, including the eyebrow curve, realizing that resulted in
15 loss of roadway frontage for the lots.
16
17 Chairperson Koehler stated the phrase "snow and mow" was used in regard to the HOA to
18 the Commission and City Council, but when reading the document that was provided, it
19 says it is in place to take care of exterior maintenance including lawns and snow removal.
20 Mr. Fair stated that is a typo; it should be "snow and mow" only.
21
22 Chairperson Koehler confirmed that each person who owns one of the villas will be
23 responsible for their own exterior maintenance and the document is incorrect. Mr. Fair
24 stated he was correct and covenants will be put in place to make sure "Mr. Anderson" next
25 door can't make a pink house if he were to get hail damage.
26
27 Chairperson Koehler asked if any consideration had been given to picking smaller trees to
28 plant given the size of the lots. Mr. Fair stated he uses a professional consulting firm to
29 develop the landscape plan which was both attached and submitted to the City. He did not
3o know before tonight that City Planner Hanson would like additional landscape foundation
31 plans, which he will provide. He will talk to his consulting firm for their input on other
32 trees that will work on the boulevard, but the firm used the Andover approved tree list
33 when deciding which trees to plant. He stated he will defer to his expert as far as whether
34 the trees should be changed. Chairperson Koehler stated the City has a natural resource
35 expert, Mr. Kytonen, who provided a Memorandum, and his concerns were basically due
36 to the width of the trees. He encouraged Mr. Fair to do some research.
37
38 Chairperson Koehler stated he had a tree planting plan in the packet and asked if that was
39 what Mr. Fair meant by a landscape plan. Mr. Fair confirmed that as correct and used the
40 overhead screen to show the site landscape plan and said his understanding is staff is
41 looking for an individual overview of how the foundation will be planted around, which he
42 will have available for the Council.
43
44 Chairperson Koehler stated there were landscaping ideas of what the monument will look
45 like and suggested that staff is looking for that kind of information: what the front of the
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 13
1 house looks like, where different plantings are going, et cetera. Mr. Fair stated he would
2 make sure that would be available to the Council.
3
4 Chairperson Koehler encouraged Mr. Fair to submit that to staff so Mr. Kytonen can look
5 at it so he can give his opinions before it gets to the Council.
6
7 Chairperson Koehler said staff has a concern regarding the house fitting on Lot 8 and asked
8 whether the layout Mr. Fair said will fit has been provided to staff. Mr. Fair said it was
9 provided to staff and is also in the packet and there are two floor plans Jonathan Homes
10 builds that will work on Lot 8. Chairperson Koehler suggested Mr. Fair identify and
11 communicate to staff which two floor plans fit Lot 8 before this gets to the City Council.
12 Mr. Fair agreed to do so and said the two floor plans are Aspen and Ellingwood.
13
14 Chairperson Koehler stated, in the City of Andover, driveway setback is no less than 20
15 feet and did not think his vehicle, which is not an SUV, would fit on the 16.5 -foot length
16 of driveway, although garage stalls would be able to fit the vehicles. He asked, given a
17 16.5 -foot driveway setback, how snow removal would be handled. Mr. Fair, using a photo
18 of a full-size SUV in a driveway, stated it does fit, with four feet in front of it and 71/2 feet
19 behind it of driveway space. He said there is give and take in this project and they ended
20 up with a 33 -foot wide street. The roads coming out of Miller's Woods are 28 feet, so if
21 they went to a 28 -foot wide street and add the extra five feet, the driveway would be 21'/z
22 feet long. His understanding is a wider street is important. Also, empty -nesters generally
23 don't drive big SUVs and association dues are very important to them. In the future, the
24 driveways will need to be rebuilt and they have done it in other communities, but it is a 30-
25 foot driveway and there is plenty of room, as demonstrated on the exhibit.
26
27 Chairperson Koehler clarified that he was talking about the 16.5 -foot driveway in the villas.
28 Mr. Fair stated the photo is of a villa driveway and the 16.5 feet is measured from the
29 boulevard. Community Development Director Janish stated Chairperson Koehler was
30 asking the question based on the staff write-up, and City staff asked the question because
31 this has not been done in Andover previously. Staff told the applicant he may want to use
32 a larger setback because that has been done in the past, but ultimately the decision is made
33 by the Council with a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
34
35 Chairperson Koehler thanked Mr. Fair for clarifying that the boulevard was included in the
36 number. Mr. Fair stated it is a little confusing, but most residential driveways are between
37 30 and 35 feet and they would never build a 161/2 foot driveway.
38
39 Commissioner VanderLaan asked Mr. Fair if he has discussed with the City or Anoka
40 County or given consideration to the potential undesirable loud noise level because of
41 County Road 60 and Crosstown being busy, realizing there will be noise mitigation because
42 of the trees and plantings that will be added. Mr. Fair stated he does not anticipate any
43 noise issues. He said the Rum River Shores development in Anoka had a similar set of
44 circumstances which is also across from a high school, it is a very busy road so they put
45 additional trees in, and they have not had any issues with customers.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 14
2 Commissioner VanderLaan asked whether the additional trees were planted at Rum River
3 Shores in anticipation of potential noise issues or if they were planted in response to
4 complaints. Mr. Fair stated the trees were planted as part of proper planning.
5
6 Commissioner VanderLaan questioned how accurately Mr. Fair felt he was anticipating
7 the noise levels. Mr. Fair said this road is less traveled than Rum River Shores roads and
8 he feels it is fairly accurate, especially given no high school traffic, and he is not concerned.
9 Community Development Director Janish added Anoka County's comment with regard to
10 projects on county roadways related to future noise with expansion of roadways is typical
11 and is providing the City with notice that if there is a noise wall needed at some future
12 time, the City will be dealing with it.
13
14 Chairperson Koehler asked who maintains the trees in the Conservation Easement, the City
15 or the HOA. Mr. Fair said the HOA is responsible even though it is in a Conservation
16 Easement. The HOA cannot control the stormwater and maintenance of the pond because
17 public water is going into the pond. Chairperson Koehler noted, from discussion the City
18 Council/City Engineer Berkowitz had, a lot of the trees have to come out in order to
19 maintain the runoff and control the water and where it is going and he knows Mr. Fair
20 saved the trees that he could.
21
22 Chairperson Koehler stated City Engineer Berkowitz sent a letter addressed to City Planner
23 Hanson describing concerns regarding the project and wanted to know if Mr. Fair had seen
24 the letter. Mr. Fair stated he received the letter and has been working with staff the last two
25 weeks.
26
27 Chairperson Koehler asked Mr. Fair if there were any unreasonable requests or anything
28 he was unable to resolve. Regarding the County's position on a turn lane and a bypass lane,
29 Mr. Fair said they could put in a turn lane, but they do not own the land to the north so they
30 may not be able to put a bypass lane in. He stated his team would be addressing that.
31
32 Chairperson Koehler reiterated his understanding: the turn lane could be put in but the
33 bypass lane depended on land ownership to the north. Mr. Fair stated that he was correct,
34 because there is not an easement available, the County does not own the land, nor does he
35 own the land. He said no traffic study has been done on the county road. He feels the
36 County is asking for the bypass lane to take money from him because he is a developer,
37 but legally he cannot put a bypass lane on land he does not own. As far as other comments
38 in the letter, they have mostly been addressed with no major sticking points that he is aware
39 of.
40
41 Commissioner VanderLaan commented that in the January 22 hearing, citizens were very
42 forthcoming regarding the buffering, asking that the trees remain, and she had asked how
43 important that was. She thanked Mr. Fair for his testimony, stating it became extremely
44 important and it may have been a factor in keeping the buffer that is between the outlot and
45 Miller's Woods.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 15
2 Commissioner VanderLaan said she feels there is some struggle between the residents of
3 Miller's Woods/their HOA regarding the gathering space, understanding this
4 development's HOA monthly fees would cover snow and grass. She asked if Mr. Fair could
5 work with the residents to the south and maintain the open space and provide something
6 better than just a piece of ground, some trees, and a pond and build something, since the
7 Miller's Woods people are nearby and will feel a compression to their tot lot. She asked if
8 he could do this before it goes to the HOA, when the cost would be passed on to the
9 residents for whatever was done. Mr. Fair stated at this time he would like to leave the
10 decision up to the future HOA, if they want to improve Outlot A. He said they have sold
I 1 several projects in the Twin Cities with no amenity fire pits, trails, or benches. He thinks
12 he knows what these buyers want based on past experience. The residents will have a three -
13 car garage and an opportunity to improve the outlot in the future should they choose to do
14 so, although he thinks it will remain a natural open space.
15
16 Commissioner Hudson asked, assuming the project was approved and Norway is punched
17 through, would the cul-de-sac, yard restoration, driveway extension work happen in the
18 fall for the residents in Miller's Woods who will be impacted, or would that occur in the
19 second phase. Mr. Fair said it would be up to the City: either when the road is punched
20 through, or when the second lift of asphalt goes down. As soon as there is damage to the
21 lawn or the cul-de-sac removed, it would be fixed within a certain amount of days. He
22 would work with Engineering on that and it would also be in the developer's contract.
23
24 Chairperson Koehler referenced the homeowner who lives immediately south and on the
25 west side of the cul-de-sac of Norway and wanted to know whether that house is behind
26 the tree line and not facing the new house that will be built. Mr. Fair stated the plan is to
27 clear all 140 feet of Lot 9. Without knowing the exact location of the house, he did not
28 think the homeowner would be looking at the back of Lot 9 from his front yard; his side
29 yard and backyard view should be looking at the Conservation Easement/trees. There is no
30 way to save the trees between his lot and Lot 9 because of grading and stormwater so the
31 site drains properly.
32
33 Chairperson Koehler asked Mr. Fair to state why the PUD to build single-family detached
34 townhomes is a better development as it has been designed than R-4 zoning to build single -
35 family homes. Mr. Fair said the City of Andover needs a villa product and it is not feasible
36 to build another traditional Miller's Woods two-story neighborhood, given the high water
37 table and the amount of grading that would be necessary. If they were to do a straight R-4
38 zoning, there would be 41 units, no open space, and everything would be clearcut. He is
39 not sure there would be a market for split-level homes because there are many of those
40 homes available in Andover. He thinks there are many existing residents in Andover who
41 want to stay in Andover and have a three -car garage villa unit.
42
43 Chairperson Koehler asked if the developer was required to have three -car garages on the
44 units. Mr. Fair stated that was not a requirement.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 16
1 Chairperson Koehler wanted to know if that was an upsell for the homes, to which Mr.
2 Fair answered yes.
3
4 Chairperson Koehler asked where Mr. Fair has hit sweets spots in terms of, "This isn't
5 required, but we're going to go a little further than we have to," while still making the units
6 affordable and listed, as examples, the three -car garage and the architectural standards at
7 least matching the Miller's Woods development. Mr. Fair said this is the first project where
8 he's been able to make the lots wider to support the third stall. Using the overhead screen,
9 a house in Brooklyn Park was shown. He stated the Mayor of that City was pleasantly
to surprised with the amount of stone and the amount of options available regarding the
11 exterior. He said the easiest solution would be if the City had a zoning district for villas,
12 because he would then be following a straight zoning instead of answering questions about
13 what the City is getting.
14
15 Chairperson Koehler said he does not want to say, "What is the City getting?" but, rather,
16 understand why the villa is a better solution than a straight R-4. Mr. Fair said the villas are
17 higher in price than the 41 split-level homes. The people buying the homes will live in
18 them six months out of the year but pay taxes 12 months out of the year, they do not use
19 the schools, and it is the right fit.
20
21 Chairperson Koehler commented he is sold on the money aspect of it but is asking about
22 the other intangibles. Mr. Fair stated the Conservation Easement is very important.
23
24 Chairperson Koehler suggested Mr. Fair create a document with items he is including in
25 the villa -type units that are not required for an R-4 zoning, because he feels Mr. Fair is
26 going above and beyond with the development. He thinks it is a good plan for the most part
27 but there are issues that still need to be addressed.
28
29 Commissioner Hudson stated, as a resident of Miller's Woods, to have single-family split -
30 level homes abutted to an HOA with all the amenities and requirements that are in place at
31 Miller's Woods and then have a villa -type product creates a separation between the two
32 neighborhoods and it fits in nicely, as opposed to 41 single-family homes in the area
33 without a park, and so forth, because where would the kids be going. Mr. Fair stated if they
34 built 41 single-family homes, the owners would not want to pay association dues even if
35 Miller's Woods would allow them to use the pool, etc. He feels the 12 high-end homes that
36 will be built could fit very well into the Miller's Woods community.
37
38 Chairperson Koehler suggested Mr. Fair acquire Miller's Woods HOA rules and see what
39 he can do to match them, if it makes sense, so it is not a drastic transition between the two
40 neighborhoods.
41
42 Chairperson Koehler asked if there were other people who wanted to speak, stating he had
43 several questions that he would be asking staff such as speeding on the road, any potential
44 building in the outlot, the roadway easement heading cast, and being able to identify which
45 trees belong to whom.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 17
2 Jeremy Whittenburg, 15998 Norway Street NW, said he knows it would be difficult to keep
3 trees between his property and Lot 9 because of drainage, and so forth. He demonstrated
4 on a GIS map that his house is on the back of the property and expressed concern about
5 looking out and seeing the back of another house, depending where the other house sits.
6 He bought his property a year ago, understanding this area would be developed at some
7 point, he spent over a half million dollars, and wanted to know if anything could be done
8 or should he plant his own trees in the future. He said he has been happy with Mr. Fair and
9 he is not saying don't go through with the project. Chairperson Koehler said he was looking
10 at the same map and wants to talk to Staff to hear their suggestions about what can be done.
11 He said something needs to be figured out to make good neighbors.
12
13 Stan Carlson, 680 Constance Blvd, stated he and his wife own the west side of the land.
14 He is happy to see the chunk of woods will be left on the south side and the northwest
15 corner because their deer like to lay down in those areas. Chairperson Koehler commented
16 that the City will continue to expand, but one of the reasons people move to Andover is
17 because of the wildlife. He said Mr. Fair has been working with the City and hopefully,
18 with the pond and the trees on the south side, there will be more wildlife.
19
20 Rychel Gaustad, 512 Constance Boulevard, asked if staff was going to be answering
21 questions following the close of the public hearing. Chairperson Koehler confirmed they
22 would be doing so.
23
24 Motion by Hudson, seconded by Loehlein, to close the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. Motion
25 carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
26
27 Chairperson Koehler asked staff what the plan is for roads going to the east, stating the
28 initial plan did not have an east -west road because of Constance running east -west, but
29 wondered how the area would connect and whether there was anything to show or describe.
30 Community Development Director Janish said they do not have anything and the property
31 to the east is outside of the MUSA so the expectation is that it would develop at the 21/2-
32 acre development and not be at an urban density. The City Council felt an extension to the
33 east was not needed for the development, so a local network would be established as
34 properties developed to the east. He said the properties the individual is representing would
35 need to work together to determine how to get access to those properties if they were to
36 subdivide at the 2'/2 -acre standard.
37
38 Chairperson Koehler, assuming the property does get subdivided and built out, asked if
39 there would be connections to roads like Constance, Goldenrod, 159th, knowing that any
4o answer given is only a possibility. Community Development Director Janish stated access
41 would have to come off Constance, meeting County access spacing guidelines. Using a
42 map, he pointed out potential areas of connection and possible cul-de-sacs. He said a road
43 could possibly be looped into 159th but that would have to be evaluated by looking at
44 wetlands, floodplains, and other information he does not have access to at this time.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —July 23, 2019
Page 18
1 Chairperson Koehler stated there is not a developer and no one knows how things will go,
2 who will sell/who will keep land, but speculated something would come from Constance
3 and connect to Ilex, it might hook into a cul-de-sac in the middle, depending on how the
4 land is zoned and developed, whether it is 2'/z acres or smaller. Community Development
5 Director Janish stated he was correct but at this point it is not within the MUSA so he does
6 not expect it to be under 2'/z acres.
7
8 Chairperson Koehler inquired as to how often the Met Council reviews the MUSA for
9 expansion. Community Development Director Janish stated they are running out of
10 capacity within the system itself in getting to the Met Council pipeline. As a result,
11 expansion to the northeast would be difficult to do without running an entirely new line or
12 trying to build capacity. When miles of pipe are replaced by oversizing, there is no one to
13 pay for that. Hypothetically, if you run three miles of new pipe where it's already developed
14 at urban densities, it is being fronted by the taxpayer because the City has to front that to
15 come through; there are no benefiting properties for it. The end of the pipe is basically at
16 this location.
17
18 Chairperson Koehler stated his understanding of Community Development Director
19 Janish's comments: Basically, there will not be a lot of development in that area unless
20 someone has a lot of money. Community Development Director Janish agreed, adding
21 there is not urban development expected outside the MUSA.
22
23 Chairperson Koehler asked if, when there is development at whatever level, the access
24 would be from Constance. Community Development Director Janish confirmed access
25 would come from Constance.
26
27 Chairperson Koehler commented that guesses are being taken as far as roads, but there is
28 no sewer and utilities in that area to develop at this time. Unless the State or someone
29 comes up with a lot of money, that area will not be developed at a smaller density with a
30 lot of new roads put in or connecting anything. He stated that is the best answer to be given
31 at this time.
32
33 Chairperson Koehler asked if anyone had an idea as to when that area is planned to grow.
34 Community Development Director Janish referenced the Sewer Chapter of the
35 Comprehensive Plan and stated there is no plan to extend the pipe to the east or to the
36 northeast of the area and it is at the end of the MUSA. He said unless a pipe comes from a
37 different direction such as an abutting community, he does not foresee nor does the
38 Comprehensive Plan expect City utilities to be extended.
39
40 Chairperson Koehler inquired as to how far in the future the Comprehensive Plan extends.
41 City Planner Hanson stated to the year 2040.
42
43 Chairperson Koehler stated that between now and 2040 there are no plans to put sewer in
44 or develop this area. Community Development Director Janish confirmed he was correct
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —July 23, 2019
Page 19
1 and added there is no foreseeable capacity within the existing system, which is where the
2 issue is.
3
4 Chairperson Koehler clarified by saying even if sewer was built, there is no downstream
5 capacity to handle the extra properties, which Community Development Director Janish
6 stated was correct.
7
8 Chairperson Koehler asked how the City handles speed and traffic control in the area,
9 specifically considering there is a blind child in the area. He asked if there was an automatic
to reduction in speed, if signs were posted, or how that is handled. Community Development
11 Director Janish stated the sign -posting question should be answered by Engineering and he
12 could relay that question to them and get back to the Commission with the answer and also
13 the City Council. He said there is a design speed for the roadway system, which is more
14 than likely designed to about 35 miles an hour with the extension of Norway. There also
15 may have been discussions related to potential speeding on Norway before because the
16 road kind of has some bends. As the road continues, there will be more bends in it. He
17 stated there are some things you can do in planning that can help reduce speed such as
18 bringing structures closer to the roadway, which happened in Miller's Woods and will also
19 be the case in this development. Also, when drivers are on roads that seem enclosed, they
20 tend to slow down, although the pavement will be wider as well. Parking will be allowed
21 on both sides of the street so there may be some cars there, which may also cause vehicles
22 to slow down. Because of the way the houses are set up and the curves, speeding may not
23 occur. However, if speeding occurs, the sheriff s department is available for enforcement
24 activities.
25
26 Chairperson Koehler inquired as to what traffic control will look like at the three-way
27 intersections in the development. Community Development Director Janish stated the
28 Engineering Department uses MnDOT's design manual when establishing where stop
29 signs should be located and there are certain criteria such as number of vehicles driving
30 through an area. He speculated three-way stop signs would not be required at the
31 intersections, but that Engineering would be answering that question for the City Council.
32
33 Chairperson Koehler stated he has called the sheriff about people speeding on his road, and
34 the City was surprised about how bad it was. He encouraged residents to call if there are
35 speeding issues but to please realize that if a speed trap is set up, most of the speeding will
36 be done by people living in the neighborhood because they are the ones driving through it.
37
38 Chairperson Koehler suggested to Mr. Titus that he give Community Development
39 Director Janish or City Planner Hanson an email address or contact information so they
40 can respond to him about what will happen as far as traffic controls in the area. He guessed
41 there might be one stop sign but not three, because a stop sign going south could cause a
42 traffic backup onto Constance. He said he is not an Engineer and the answer would come
43 from City Engineer Berkowitz.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 20
1 Community Development Director Janish, in regard to potential HOA structures, stated
2 any type of structure requiring a building permit would have to go through that process, so
3 it would be reviewed and evaluated. In addition, the HOA may have limitations on what
4 type of structures may be built. From conversations with Council and the narrative, he
5 envisioned some type of picnic shelter/community gathering type of place.
6
7 Community Development Director Janish, identifying Mr. Whittenburg's home on a map,
8 stated the stormwater is dictating the removal of trees and the grading that would occur.
9 Using the map, he outlined what appeared to be a drainage and utility easement and also
to indicated an area where the property owner could plant trees, assuming the information
11 was accurate. He suggested the best solution is the property owner plants their own trees
12 so he could maintain and be responsible for them if he has concerns about looking into
13 somebody's backyard. If the property owner to the north would plant trees, a future owner
14 could cut them down some day and he would be in the same situation. The property owner
15 could work with the on staff Natural Resource Technician to find trees that would screen
16 the property to the north. Chairperson Koehler encouraged the property owner to contact
17 Natural Resource Technician Kamerou Kytonen, stating he could give him ideas and
18 suggestions.
19
20 Chairperson Koehler stated the County wanted a bypass lane but there is land ownership
21 issues and asked staff for insight, comments, or thoughts on that subject. Community
22 Development Director Janish stated Anoka County Highway Department would have to be
23 contacted to get their feedback, he cannot speak on their behalf. There may need to be some
24 tweaks to the roadway to allow for that.
25
26 Chairperson Koehler asked if City Engineering gets involved in the discussion or whether
27 that is between the developer and the County. Community Development Director Janish
28 said it is typically led by the Anoka County Highway Department because it is their
29 roadway. It is generally worked through the applicant's engineering firm that is doing the
30 work on it and the Anoka County Highway.
31
32 Commissioner Loehlein said he is generally supportive of the plan; the villas are a nice
33 addition to Andover, and it creates a good transition to the use of the land.
34
35 Commissioner VanderLaan stated she agrees with Commissioner Loehlein and added this
36 subdivision brings to the forefront issues the Commission has not dealt with before. When
37 the City was first established, which she was a part of, they looked at how the City would
38 grow. This plan has brought issues to the forefront including tree preservation with regard
39 to the discussions of climate change, with regard to the value of a tree; and both the City
40 and the developer are working harder to preserve and provide trees. She stated when she
41 first looked at the site in January, she considered how many trees were going to be taken
42 down. However, the process has been progressive, practical, and a prudent use of this land.
43 The City no longer has ideal grid patterns; all of that land is gone. This development will
44 address some contemporary housing needs. The family demographic of a husband, a wife,
45 and three kids is not across the City, there is an incredible amount of diversity in the City,
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —July 23, 2019
Page 21
I and that is what makes Andover grow. She reiterated that although it is not perfect, she is
2 supportive of the plan, knowing that staff is hovering and will continue to hover, and the
3 development presented is very good.
4
5 Chairperson Koehler, looking at the Resolution, expressed concern about points the
6 developer must meet such as the Engineering comments. Engineering will determine when
7 they are met. The City of Andover's staff comments must also be addressed. He wants to
8 make sure the concerns are met. He stated to Mr. Fair that he is forced to do a PUD because
9 zoning is not in place but that it does not exclude Mr. Fair from not having to explain why
10 this is a better solution than R-4. He again encouraged Mr. Fair to promote the extra things
11 he put in the development plan and not sell himself short.
12
13 Commissioner Godfrey asked the Commission to look at Number 8 of the Resolution
14 which indicates, "Exhibit D Landscape Plan shall regulate required plantings for the
15 development," and suggested that be amended to add, "subject to approval by Andover
16 staff' because of the concern about plantings. Chairperson Koehler stated he thought it was
17 covered in Number 2 but that it was probably worth calling out specifically and agreed the
18 language should be inserted in Number 8.
19
20 Commissioner Hudson called attention to Number 4 of the Resolution -- the Anoka County
21 Highway Division comments dated July 17 must be satisfactorily addressed and plans
22 approved -- and said right now the letter states they need the westbound turn lane. He asked
23 if the Resolution would provide enough leeway if the County said it was fine, they do not
24 need it. Community Development Director Janish suggested using the phrase "or as
25 amended by Anoka County Highway Department" which gives flexibility if they change
26 their mind or add something.
27
28 Commissioner Sims asked if City staff wanted to bring the zoning issue to the attention of
29 the City Council, since a PUD would not be needed if there was zoning. Chairperson
30 Koehler stated the City Council is aware of it and have already been engaged in
31 conversation.
32
33 Commissioner Sims commented that if you are not at Planning and Zoning, you think a
34 PUD is different than zoning until you understand what it is all about, and it would be
35 cleaner for the citizens and developer if there was zoning in place.
36
37 Motion by Loehlein, seconded by Godfrey, to recommend to the City Council approval
38 with the noted changes to Item Number 4: "... or as amended by Anoka County Highway
39 Department" and Item Number 8: "..., subject to approval by Andover staff." Motion
40 carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
41
42 City Planner Hanson stated this item would be before the City Council at the August 5,
43 2019 City Council meeting.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — July 23, 2019
Page 22
1 OTHER B USINESS
2
3 Community Development Director Janish stated the Interim Use Permit related to land
4 reclamation was approved by the City Council based on the Planning and Zoning
5 Commission's recommendation.
6
7 It is expected that there will be two items at the August 13 meeting.
8
9 Commissioner VanderLaan stated she believed everyone was emailed a notice by Todd
10 Haas about a meeting at the Anoka City Hall regarding the Rum River Watershed. She
11 believes they are putting together a Comprehensive Plan and are asking for City members
12 along the Rum River to be involved in the process. She asked whether Commission
13 members were allowed or encouraged to attend the meeting. City Planner Hanson stated
14 Commissioner VanderLaan would need to speak to Mr. Haas.
15
16 Commissioner VanderLaan, on behalf of the Planning and Zoning Commission, thanked
17 all the volunteers and City staff who worked at Funfest and stated it was spectacular. All
18 of the Commissioners agreed.
19
20 ADJOURNMENT
21
22 Motion by Hudson, seconded by Godfrey to adjourn the meeting at 9:04 p.m. Motion
23 carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
24
25 Respectfully Submitted,
26
27
28 Ruth Holdvogt, Recording Secretary
29 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
30
NDOVE
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO:
FROM
SUBJECT:
Planning and Zoning Commissioners
Joe Janish, Community Development Director
PUBLIC HEARING: Interim Use Permit — Land Reclamation — 4239 1650i
Avenue NW — Bobby Petersen
DATE: August 13, 2019
INTRODUCTION
On July 22, 2019 City staff became aware that the applicant had begun to stockpile fill on the
property in excess of 400 cubic yards. City Code 12-2-2 defines Land Reclamation as "the
reclaiming of any land by depositing of materials so as to elevate the grade. Any lot or parcel
upon which four hundred (400) cubic yards or more of fill is to be deposited shall be considered
land reclamation". The applicant was notified of the requirement and met with staff to discuss
corrective action needed on July 23, 2019. The amount of fill deposited to be estimated at 3,000
cubic yards, with the potential to add another 3,000 to 4,000 yards based on the applicant's
drawings. Since then, the applicant has installed silt fencing and hydro seeded the existing
portion of the berm as staff requested to prevent erosion issue. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting an interim use permit retroactively to bring the property into compliance with the City
Code and to continue with the hauling and creation of a berm.
DISCUSSION
The applicant is requesting an IUP for land reclamation in order to mitigate the future
development of Preserve at Petersen Farms. The area where fill is to be deposited is an open
area. The location of the fill is five (5) feet from the northern property line and 50 feet wide with
a 3:1 slope.
The fill material is topsoil that has come from a project in the City of Anoka. Once the applicant
was notified that a permit is required the applicant stopped the project, installed erosion control
for the area already impacted and is waiting for the permit to be considered by the City of
Andover.
Location of Land Reclamation
Location of the land reclamation shall not interfere with floodplain or wetland locations.
Including the potential wetland located to the south of the project, shown in the attachments.
Slope of Land Reclamation
The applicant shall have a side slope of not more than 3 to 1 on areas of the berm that will not be
maintained through activities such as mowing of grass. On areas that will be maintained the side
slope shall be no more than 4 to 1. The applicant shall not fill or impact the floodplain or
wetlands without proper permits. The applicant is proposing a berm with a 3:1 slope.
Silt Fencing and Vegetation
Silt fencing will be required on the south side of the land reclamation area (berm) until
vegetation has occurred to control any erosion. The applicant will be required to seed and hydro
mulch the land reclamation area and ensure proper vegetation.
Haul Route
A haul route is required as all fill is proposed to come from a site in the City of Anoka.
The applicant has indicated that the fill will enter the City of Andover from 7t' Avenue NW to
165`x' Avenue and access the property utilizing the owners private driveway.
The applicant will need to contact Anoka County Highway Department to determine if additional
traffic signing will be necessary on the roadways along with any permits since the road is being
used for hauling.
Coordination with other Agencies
The applicant is responsible to obtain all appropriate and necessary permits (such as but not
limited to the Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization, etc.). Initial contact shall
be made with the City Engineering Department regarding this item.
Interim Use Permit Standards
The Planning and Zoning Commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the Council
shall issue such interim use permit only if it finds that such use at the proposed location:
Will not create an excess burden on parks, streets, and other public facilities;
The placement of "frll " will not create an excess burden on parks or other public facilities. The
hauling will be conducted on roadways that are designed to accommodate vehicle and truck
traffic. Anoka County Highway department will determine if signage will be required during
hauling periods or any other time during the course of the project.
Will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise harm the public health,
safety, and general welfare;
The applicant shall establish vegetation and ensure proper erosion control to satisfaction of City
Engineer.
Will not have a negative effect on the values of property and scenic views;
The land reclamation is taking place in an area the property owner desires to create a berm.
The owner desires the berm to provide privacy from future development to the north.
Will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public;
The applicant will be required to observe the wetlands, and proposed wetlands on the property.
Any material that falls outside of the property line, right-of-way or any wetland will be the
responsibility of the applicant to remove.
Will be subjected to, by agreement with the owner, any conditions that the City Council has
deemed appropriate for the permission of the use, including a condition that the owner may be
required to provide appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing the interim use and
any interim structures upon the expiration of the interim use period.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing and provide a
recommendation to the City Council regarding the IUP request.
Res tf illy s itted,
Joe Janish
Community Development Director
Attachments
Resolution
Engineer's Memo dated August 8, 2019
Site Location
Applicant's Letter
Applicant's Drawings
Cc: Bobby Petersen, 4239 165`h Ave NW Andover, MN 55304
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
1'.M=191111
A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR LAND RECLAMATION
FOR PIN 07-32-24-43-0002, THE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
THE E 701.69 FT OF SWI/4 OF SE1/4 SEC 7 TWP 32 RGE 24, EX RD SUBJ TO EASE OF
REC
WHEREAS, the applicant, retroactively requested an interim use permit for the berming of up to
7,000 cubic yards of soil; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 13, 2019;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would not have a
detrimental effect upon the health, safety, and general welfare of the City of Andover; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of
the interim use permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
approves the interim use permit to create a berm of up to 7,000 cubic yards of soil as shown on
exhibit A on said property with the following conditions:
1. Soil shall not be placed in wetland areas or floodplain areas without the proper
approvals and mitigation approvals.
2. Silt fencing shall be installed and maintained around the exterior of the stockpile and
vegetation must be established.
3. All material shall be utilized in compliance with the City requirements.
4. Slopes shall not exceed 3 to 1 on unmaintained areas, and not exceed 4 to 1 on
maintained areas.
5. The applicant will be required to seed and hydro mulch berm.
6. The applicant shall be responsible for the cleaning of material (soil, sand, etc) from
the public roadways as needed (may require multiple times a day) a minimum of
daily.
7. All appropriate permits shall be obtained.
8. Any future expansion of berm with fill in excess of 400 cubic yards shall require a
new IUP.
9. The applicant shall contact Anoka County Highway Department to determine if
additional traffic signing will be necessary during hauling periods and verify any
additional county requirements.
10. Permit shall expire on August 1, 2024.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this _ day of 12019.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
Michelle Hartner, Deputy City Clerk
Julie Trude, Mayor
EXHIBIT A
ANPh(_)\1 t )
vn
•or" 1. .•f M. S th.wl agir d t"
Mt'S*fYD SIS1h� tIR1'1'y SwVwftl Q. t. nl tM `wctpt 1.
two app td Nt[ - Ia"%p $T. ft.yr 74
ipi Wo11%RIL'irtNTl 1189"i?'7Yf
701.74
a
t
➢i N ,cd
d I
o tm o M >m
8 S Y SOkE
�.
fir" l l . '. Irl ♦�..
�! 41
x 165+N Av[ MW S_ _ :Me
701.73
51t9'46.43'0
SMA ■n of Ike 5"tkoewl O.sW M
the Su.Nmeat OWWtw of Salter 7, —
lao%vho 17. 4ww 24
J C'�11rtt
J: i sl.pa'
ffcw4ED
,,w ?,I Irl
CM of
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
I 6=16,214310
A RESOLUTION DENYING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR LAND RECLAMATION
FOR PIN 07-32-24-43-0002, THE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
THE E 701.69 FT OF SWI/4 OF SEI/4 SEC 7 TWP 32 RGE 24, EX RD SUBJ TO EASE OF
REC
WHEREAS, the applicant, retroactively requested an interim use permit for the berming of up to
7,000 cubic yards of soil; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 13, 2019;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would have a detrimental
effect upon the health, safety, and general welfare of the City of Andover; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council denial of the
interim use permit for the following reasons:
1.
2.
3.
4.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Andover agrees with the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation of denial on said property based on the finding of facts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Andover herby denies
the Interim Use Permit.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this _ day of , 2019.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST: Julie Trude, Mayor
Michelle Hartner, Deputy City Clerk
(A C I T Y O F
NDOVE
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD IN W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN,US
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
CC: David Berkowitz, City Engineer/Director of Public Works
FROM: Todd J. Haas, Asst. Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Review of the Interim Use Permit (IUP)/4239-165th Avenue NW/Bobby
Petersen Property/Construction of a Berm
DATE: August 8, 2019
This memo is regarding to the proposed IUP for the property at 4239 -165th Avenue
NW. The Engineering Department comments are as follows:
• Silt Fence is required on the south side of the berm near the existing wetland
until such time that the vegetation has been established. Once vegetation has
been established the silt fence is to be removed and disposed of properly.
• The berm must be seeded and mulched (disc anchored) within 7 days after the
berm has been graded.
• The berm must be graded at a 3:1 slope or flatter.
• The applicant is responsible to obtain all necessary permits from the various
agencies where necessary including the MNDNR, US Army Corps of Engineers,
Lower Rum River WMO (if site grading exceeds 1 acre or more),and the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for a NPDES permit. Note: It appears that
no wetlands are being impacted but it is still the property owner responsibility to
make sure that the wetlands are not.
• The berm as we understand has or will be impacting the existing farm road. If
there is a concern from others about the road impact, that impact will need to be
discussed between the property owner and the person bringing up the concern.
The City will not be involved as part of that discussion.
• The property owner will need to contact the Anoka County Highway Department
to determine if additional traffic signing will be necessary on 165th Avenue NW
along with any permits since this road is being used as for hauling.
It is our understanding that this is a after the fact IUP request as the work has already
began. It should be noted to the property owner that are they are required to contact
the City of Andover if there are plans to perform any additional site grading and/or have
potential impacts to the wetlands that exist on the property to determine what permits
may be necessary from various agencies.
Site Location:
It
N
July 23, 2019
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Blvd NW
Andover, MN 55304
Re: Interim Use Permit
To Whom It My Concern:
Since building our home in 2010 we have enjoyed the seclusion of our 21 -acre lot. With the new
housing development coming to our north we have thought about creating a buffer to try and retain our
privacy. Last week a friend of ours, who is a local contractor, approached us with an opportunity to
build a dirt berm. The contractor needed to export 6,000 to 7,000 yards of topsoil off a construction site
in Anoka. He was willing to truck and grade the soil for free.
Not knowing we needed a permit, on July 22, 2019, they hauled in approximately 3,000 yards of dirt and
began the berm. The City of Andover informed us on this day that we needed to have a permit to do
this work and the work was then shut down. The dirt that is already here will be hydroseeded and silt
fence will be installed until this matter is resolved. We are now applying for a permit and are working
with the City to proceed in the proper manner that you are requiring.
Hopefully once we get approval from the City the topsoil will still be available, and we would be able to
finish this project within a week. If, however, the dirt we have access to now is gone, the City has
expressed to us that this permit can be extended for up to five years.
Our plan is to haul the soil on 1651h Ave NW to our private driveway. We would have a water truck on
for dust control and would only work 7 AM to SPM Monday through Saturday.
The finished berm will run the length of our north lot line with a 3:1 slope (per City spec) with varying
height and will be covered with wild grass and trees.
Please consider our request and call with any questions.
Thank You,
14 - --7
Bobby Petersen
612-221-2584
bM lYr of the S° thuGe QW lr Of 1°0
Soublowl Q,,l of the So.tion 7•
Tow lD 32. mal 24
N89'52'2YE
701.74
r
I
100 0 100 2m
{j7
SCALE M �llT
I.
f�
8 _'ry
i.
• 165IH AVE -4*
_ .--_--. �L—
t 0; 823
701.73
589'46'430w
South fns of Mo Sall 0urlr M
No 3o.Mel Ouslr M Soclbn 7•
Toroth* 32. fi°nge 24
II _wlwe-
SC'L ao
RECEIVED
YAlI I,'.
pT v C,f Apa) A
I wr
LA
r
-881
a
u
dPt•
f��
AC I T Y 0 F
ND6-061VYE __ __ __ I
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) — Interim Performance Standards
(Curbing) — 3017 16151 Avenue NW — Upper Midwest Athletic Construction/Erik Hicks
DATE: August 13, 2019
INTRODUCTION
The applicant is seeking approval under the interim performance standards of City Code 12-13-22 related
to curbing which requires approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant is expanding the parking
area to the west of the building and is requesting the use of ribbon curb vs. high back curb. The applicant
has provided the attached plan set to show the proposed ribbon curb with parking stops vs. high back
curb.
DISCUSSION
Upper Midwest Athletic Construction, specializing in the installation and furnishing of track surfacing,
track and field equipment, site amenities, scoreboards, tennis courts and retaining walls, is proposing to
enlarge their parking area. The proposed parking area will be used for work vehicles and trailers. The
applicant has had some issues with theft and this area allows for the use of security measures.
City Code 12-13-22; A. Interim Performance Standards are intended to establish an alternative level
of site improvements for properties located in the rural industrial area generally referred to as the
Hugh/Westview industrial park area. The City acknowledges that the lack of municipal utilities
limits the development potential of these properties. These performance standards are intended to
allow continued use, expansion and redevelopment with a level of site improvements that is
commensurate with the development potential of the properties.
The applicant is proposing to "sheet drain" the parking lot to the west and to prevent vehicles from leaving
the impervious surface the applicant is going to install curb stops along the western boundary of the parking
surface. The applicant is also transplanting trees between 161St Avenue NW and the southern edge of the
parking area, to assist with screening the parking area.
City Engineer/Public Works Director Berkowitz provided a memo (attached) expressing concern with
utilizing parking stops vs. high back curb. The memo focuses on the breakdown of the parking stops over
time vs. high back curbing.
Days and Hours of Operation
No request is being made related to hours of operation.
Traffic
The request of utilizing ribbon curb and parking stops vs. high back curb does not have traffic implications.
Review Criteria
12-14-6 B: Criteria for Granting Conditional Use Permits:
1. In granting a Conditional Use Permit, the City Council shall consider the advice and
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and:
a. The effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of
occupants of surrounding lands.
The applicant is proposing the utilization of ribbon curb vs. high back curb. The ribbon
curbing will allow for sheet draining of the site and it is expected that due to the soils in
the area and ponding adjacent to the parking lot that no negative impacts to the health,
safety, moral and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands will occur. The
applicant is proposing to utilize 8' rubber car stops to prevent vehicles from leaving the
impervious surface.
b. Existing and anticipated traffic conditions, including parking facilities on adjacent streets
and land.
The applicant is looking to expand parking for his business and proposes to utilize sheet
draining to his ponding vs. high back curb and channelization to the ponding area. The
business is currently operating and no additional traffic changes are expected. With the
use of 8' rubber car stops vehicles will be prevented from leaving the impervious surface
area.
c. The effect on values of property and scenic view in the surrounding area, and the effect
of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan.
The applicant is proposing to utilize ribbon curb and 8' rubber car stops to prevent
vehicles from leaving the impervious surface. The applicant is also proposing
transplanting some trees between 161" Avenue NW and his proposed parking expansion
to screen the property more. The 8' rubber car stops will look different than a high back
curb, however it allows for the applicant to sheet drain the property vs. channelizing the
water to a specific location and then discharging to his ponding area.
Engineering has identified that maintenance issues can exist for parking stops, they can
break down over time.
The Comprehensive Plan includes a chapter related to storm water and the proposal still
accomplishes the same goals as high back curbing, however it is accomplished in a
different manner.
Review Criteria Interim Performance Standards:
a. Existing appearance of the building and site;
The applicant is seeking to improve the parking area and desires to use parking stops vs high
back curb. The new parking area would be either asphalt or concrete
b. Compatibility of the proposed site development plan with the other industrial properties in the
area;
The applicant would not have high back curbing. Some of the properties in Hughes Industrial
Park do have high back curbing.
c. Effect of the proposed use and the proposed site development plan on the adjacent residential
neighborhood, including traffic, noise, glare, buffers, and environmental impacts;
The type of curbing or parking stops would not be expected to have on the adjacent residential
neighborhood, including traffic, noise, glare, buffers and environmental impacts. The applicant
is also proposing to transplant some trees to provide additional screening to the area.
ARC REVIEW
Members of the Andover Review Committee commented that while the proposal would accommodate for
the storm water requirements the deviation from high back curb would change the appearance of the area.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing and provide a recommendation to the City
Council regarding the conditional use permit request.
Attachments
• Resolutions
• City Code 12-13-22
• Location Map
• Property Pictures
• Engineering Memo
• Proposed Plan
Rpec ully s b ed,
J Janish
Community Development Director
CC: Erik Hicks, 3017 16151 Ave. NW Andover, MN 55304
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR
INTERIM PERFORMANCE STANDARDS LOCATED AT 3017 161sT Avenue NW, PIN 16-
32-34-23-0002, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
UNPLATTED CITY OF ANDOVER THAT PART OF THE E 461 FT OF THE WI/2 OF
NWIA OF SEC 16-32-24 LYING S OF THE N 2,106.01 FT; EX RD; SUBJ TO EASE OF REC
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a conditional use permit for interim performance
standards (related to curbing) at the subject property, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing pursuant to the
requirements of City Code 12-14-6, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request meets the criteria of City Code, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would not have a
detrimental effect on the health, safety, and general welfare of the City of Andover, and;
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of
the Conditional Use Permit request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approves the
conditional use permit, subject to the following conditions:
1. Commercial Site Plan review must be approved, all city staff comments addressed.
2. All necessary permits shall be obtained by the property owner prior to the start of
construction.
3. The use of parking stops shall endure until City Sewer and water are extended into the
area. At that time, any future expansion or redevelopment of the affected property shall be
required to fully conform to the regular performance standards.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 20th day of August, 2019
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
Michelle Hartner, Deputy City Clerk
Julie Trude, Mayor
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES NO.
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR INTERIM
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS LOCATED AT 3017 161sT Avenue NW, PIN 16-32-34-23-
0002, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
UNPLATTED CITY OF ANDOVER THAT PART OF THE E 461 FT OF THE W1/2 OF
NW 1/4 OF SEC 16-32-24 LYING S OF THE N 2,106.01 FT; EX RD; SUBJ TO EASE OF REC
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a conditional use permit for interim performance
standards (related to curbing) at the subject property, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing pursuant to the
requirements of City Code 12-14-6, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request does not meet the criteria of City Code, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would have a detrimental
effect on the health, safety, and general welfare of the City of Andover, and;
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council denial of
the Conditional Use Permit request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denies the
conditional use permit request; for the following reasons:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 20th day of August, 2019
CITY OF ANDOVER
Julie Trude, Mayor
Michelle Hartner, Deputy City Clerk
12-13-22 Interim Performance Standards
A. Purpose: Interim performance standards are intended to establish an
alternative level of site improvements for properties located in the rural
industrial area generally referred to as the HughsNVestview industrial park
area. The City acknowledges that the lack of municipal utilities limits the
development potential of these properties. These performance standards
are intended to allow continued use, expansion and redevelopment with a
level of site improvements that is commensurate with the development
potential of the properties.
B. Applicability and Scope: This section shall apply to any expansion of use
requiring a conditional use permit or commercial site plan on all properties
generally described as the Hughs/Westview industrial park area and
legally described as the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of
Section 16, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota and the
west half of the west half of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter
of section 16, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota.
C. Procedure: Applications shall be processed under the Conditional Use
Permit procedures described in City Code 12-14-6 except as follows:
1. Application: The property owner or designee shall submit a complete
application to the Community Development Department. A complete
application consists of the following:
a. A completed Conditional Use Permit form and fee as described
in City Code 1-7-3.
b. A site plan that describes all of the existing and proposed site
improvements, including the dimensions of the property, buildings,
parking, landscaping and storage areas and distances from
property lines.
c. A letter describing the existing use of the property, the proposed
use of the property and all of the proposed site improvements.
d. Other information deemed necessary by staff to review the
request.
2. Council Determination: The City Council shall approve or deny the
application based on the factors established in this section. The City
Council may attach such conditions as they determine necessary to
provide the appropriate level of site and building improvements to
accomplish the purpose of this section. The level of required
improvements shall be determined on a case-by-case basis. Applications
shall be reviewed based on the following factors:
a. Existing appearance of the building and site;
b. Compatibility of the proposed site development plan with the
other industrial properties in the area;
c. Effect of the proposed use and the proposed site development
plan on the adjacent residential neighborhood, including traffic,
noise, glare, buffers, and environmental impacts;
D. Deviations to the performance standards will be considered in the
following areas:
1. Parking and Impervious Surface Areas:
a. Screening, landscaping, visual appeal, and lighting of parking lot
areas.
b. Paving of parking areas for customers.
c. Dust control measures for unpaved parking and storage areas.
2. The amount, type, location, and screening of exterior storage requested
as a part of any Conditional Use Permit.
3. Screening of mechanical equipment and trash bins/dumpsters.
4. Other factors related to the new development proposal, as the City
Council may deem relevant.
E. Term of Apprpval: Interim performance standards approved under this
section shall end re until City sewer and water are extended into the area
affected by this sction. At that time, any future expansion or
redevelopment of the affected properties shall be required to fully conform
to the regular performance standards of City Code 12-13.
F. Other Requirements: Proposed improvements or changes in use will be
reviewed by the Building Official and Fire Chief. They will make a
determination of whether or not the building(s) on the site need to be
brought into compliance with applicable building and fire codes. Site
improvements must also be made to meet the requirements of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). No portion of
this section shall be used to vary from these requirements. (Amended
9/18/07; Ord. 353)
um
WAVE .
1 1 u; I i t I ll
621
L.
-- --
_ �,�
-- -
-_---
�� ;�j'.'z^xs a. ', e{n`.�J.... ri P :d... 1 � F;Jo vn_..rutw. �'3:a•i"�^S `
a.
8�,-.'
_e_.,�... �....�..,a�• a
tip`
ANF,Ze�I Aerial of Upper Mid?,8At�Oul lq�iR
7
I
a.,
1
Date Created: August 07, 2019
Disclaimer: The provider makes no representation or warranties with respect to the reuse of this data.
C I 'I' Y O F
ND OVE
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
MEMOATANDDM
TO: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM: David D. Berkowitz, Director of Public Works/City Engineer�fl3
DATE: August 7, 2019
REFERENCE: Commercial Site Plan/Concrete Ribbon Curb Request/Upper Midwest
Athletic Construction
The intent of the B6 concrete curb and gutter requirement for commercial properties is to
control and direct storm water runoff and to control the traffic flow and parking within the
property. B6 curb prevents sprawling of vehicles outside the paved parking area and on to
grass and other surfaces not intended for parking. I do not recall in my 23 years with the City
that this requirement has been waived in leu of ribbon curb. Although the ribbon curb could
handle the storm water runoff in this case it would not control parking. The applicant has
requested to place tire stops in leu of B6 curb. Tire stops are problematic from a snow
removal standpoint and break up over time due to the stops being run into and runover by
vehicle tires and break down from plowing.
I recommend that the City Council hold to the required standard of B6 concrete curb based on
what I stated above and that by changing the standard for this commercial property could
lead to setting a precedence for other commercial projects in the future.
Attached is a 2017 aerial of the site that shows vehicles parked on the grass. This is
consistent to what I see when I drive by the site.
H:\Engineering\Commercial Site Plans\Open Commercial Site Plans\Upper Midwest Athletic Construction\Upper Midwest
Athletic Concrete Ribbon Curb.doc
PROJECT:
C.U.P. &SITE IMPROVEMENTS
ATHLETIC
CONSTRUCTION
UPPER MIDWEST
ATHLETIC CONSTRUCTION
3017 161 st AVENUE NW
ANDOVER, MN 55304
VICINITY MAP INDEX OF DRAWINGS
Upper Midwest AtMetic Con.
3017 161 st Avenue N W
Andover, MN 55304
P TrojeclsTrojects -2018n21660112-Upper Malvest An Com - Site lmprovementstC. DesigOLmd ing FlleA121 Belli T.dad,
T
Title Sheet
-
Topographic Survey
I
Demolition Plan
C200
Civil Site Plan
C300
Grading and Erosion Control Plan
C400
Details
P
...._..
3 i
M
.
� s
.... L.nc`
t
f
m.....
x
t f
t
I
t }
F
... �
4
Upper Midwest AtMetic Con.
3017 161 st Avenue N W
Andover, MN 55304
P TrojeclsTrojects -2018n21660112-Upper Malvest An Com - Site lmprovementstC. DesigOLmd ing FlleA121 Belli T.dad,
T
Title Sheet
-
Topographic Survey
C100
Demolition Plan
C200
Civil Site Plan
C300
Grading and Erosion Control Plan
C400
Details
PROJECT CONTACTS
Civil Engineer:
Eric G. Meyer, P. E.
Larson Engineering, Inc.
3524 Labore Road
White Bear Lake, MN 55110
Tel: 651.481.9120
Fax: 651.481.9201
Surveyor:
Randy L. Kurth, R.L.S.
Kurth Surveying, Inc.
4002 Jefferson Street NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
Tel: 763.788.9769
Fax: 763.788.7602
Owner:
Eric Hicks
Upper Midwest Athletic Construction, Inc.
3017 161 st Ave. NW
Andover, MN 55304
Tel: 763.753.1127
Fax: 763.753.3619
®BEFORE YOU
Gopher State One Call
rvAare,
OUIREE: 10.53-1166
N
do
C a g m$ l
OL O mCp tl
0
L cad°:°e
m. tom m P
��-
�W �
0
Z
� C)
� C)
�W�>2
J IZaf
H U)� o
waz Z
Oma
j U
F-zZ�
vOwz"
0swa'
>��
u)>
o �o
�. r- o
U �¢
m
a
a
I hereby caddy Nat this plan,
specifications or report was prepared
by me or under my died supervision
and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under Me laws
of Me state of Minnesofe.
Eric G. Meyer, P.E.
Dee : 09.14.18 Reg, No.: 44592
Rev. Dab Description
11.15.18 at, Ccronnnb
05.14.19 City Ccrnmenb
Pmjeot Y: 12186092
Drawn By: KBK
Checked By: EGM
Issue Date: 09.14.18
Bbeat Td.:
TITLE SHEET
Sheat
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SYMBOL LEGEND
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TREE, STUMP, AND ROOTS
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
SECTION.
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT
SECTION.
® PROTECT EXISTING DURING CONSTRUCTION.
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING FENCE.
DEMOLITION NOTES
REMOVE AND DISPOSE FXIS
EXISTING
BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTPAVEMENTSECTION
t .,.: •
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING
CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION
KEY NOTES
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TREE, STUMP, AND ROOTS
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
SECTION.
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT
SECTION.
® PROTECT EXISTING DURING CONSTRUCTION.
O REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING FENCE.
DEMOLITION NOTES
LL
OL
CAS-- CAS —..... CAS .PS�..-
----------- 161ST AVENUE —N.W�(C.S.A.H.NO. 20)
P:\PrDla<b\Projecb-201e\12166092 -Upper MdvestAN Coria -Bite ImDrovemenb\G. OeaignVhaMnp Flies\12185082 C100.dxg
0
NORTH
0 15 30 60
o t
v �
aaa
c a m $01 0
a
m
d m o
F•J% d m `� C
L C n°yam'.
wm�m F
JLE
s
Z
W - �Z U Z
EU M
)cry
W >�
J F
2 ���//'��'n>
VJ ❑
wQZI_Z
0
U
m
V
V)
Z
LLILU
vJ Z r)
06 LU Q �
FEd
Ed
O m O
:J ^o
U o
a`
I hereby caddy that this plan,
speoificalions or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under the laws
Otheastate of Mlnnesot
,�.
Enc G. Mayer, P.E. I
Date. 09.14.18 Rag. No: 44592
Rw. Case Deamnion
11.15.18 city Lvnmenb
06.14.19 Lily Lommeem
P.ass0 12166091
Drawn By: KBK
Checked By: EGM
Issue Cate: 09.14.18
Sheet This
DEMOLITION PLAN
6C ■ 0 0
1. Verify all existing utility locations.
2. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to perform or coordinate all
I
necessary utility demolitions and n location from existing utility locations
to all onsite amenities and buildings. These connections include, but are
not firrited to, water, sanitary sewer, able N, telephone, gas, electric, site
lighting, etc.
e. Prior to beginning work, contact Gopher State Onecall(651-054-0002)to
I
locate ubhes throughout the area under construction. The Contractor
x... _... a... I
FV
shall retain the services of a private utility beater to locate the private
ftles.
'. u.
4. Sawcul along edges of pavements, sidewalks, and curbs to remain.
j I
5. An construction shall be performed in accordance with state and local
standard specifications for construction.
I
6. Utility Quality is Level C in accordance wdh CI/ACBE 30-02.
LL
OL
CAS-- CAS —..... CAS .PS�..-
----------- 161ST AVENUE —N.W�(C.S.A.H.NO. 20)
P:\PrDla<b\Projecb-201e\12166092 -Upper MdvestAN Coria -Bite ImDrovemenb\G. OeaignVhaMnp Flies\12185082 C100.dxg
0
NORTH
0 15 30 60
o t
v �
aaa
c a m $01 0
a
m
d m o
F•J% d m `� C
L C n°yam'.
wm�m F
JLE
s
Z
W - �Z U Z
EU M
)cry
W >�
J F
2 ���//'��'n>
VJ ❑
wQZI_Z
0
U
m
V
V)
Z
LLILU
vJ Z r)
06 LU Q �
FEd
Ed
O m O
:J ^o
U o
a`
I hereby caddy that this plan,
speoificalions or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under the laws
Otheastate of Mlnnesot
,�.
Enc G. Mayer, P.E. I
Date. 09.14.18 Rag. No: 44592
Rw. Case Deamnion
11.15.18 city Lvnmenb
06.14.19 Lily Lommeem
P.ass0 12166091
Drawn By: KBK
Checked By: EGM
Issue Cate: 09.14.18
Sheet This
DEMOLITION PLAN
6C ■ 0 0
i
SYMBOL LEGEND
NEW LIGHT-DUTY
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
_ — — — — — —
7 DRY WELL
RIM: 898.48
SEE DETAIL 1/C400IC40D
— -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — --
BLDG
NEW PAVEMENT
I
I
(CONONCRETTUMINOUS)
I
OPEN BOTTOM: 888.39
NEWGRAVELSECTION
I I
S- TRANSPLANTED TREE
M
PVC 1.0%
NEENAH R -0999 -CX
Y
4 � 1 J
TYPE C GRATE
NEW LIGHT POLE
\
RIM: 897.16 —
STMH-1
INV: 896.88
RIM 898.93
EXTEND CMU
WALLS 6.99' BEND INV: 893.49
�0 INV 892.99
i
NOTES
a
$ TYP
1. All new stOping shell be 4 Inches wide with white paint
f
I
Std � ,ss3`an
1;
BUILDING
iT
od K
I
od
TX—
#3017
H
Xf
_
7s
I
G400
TERMINATE FENCE
AT TREE LINE
I,
FUTURE LEA
WITH PRIVACY SLATS
WITH PRIVACY SLATS
I _ f 1 STORY BLDG
C4D0 \\ wwy
Ji
trP
I
TRANSPLANTED TREES
'lam UE
—nL— OL
I
CE — OC —..— UL—�.-lFl `! ry .. r r_ — ..
_. _. __
- or i;a r GAS . BOAS Cn5 — G4• ___ �4S — �-q... 6A .'�._ ...
_.—....._ _._.....—.___�.—. _ \ _... ... l�
I I I
I
- — - - 161ST AVENUE-N.W�(C.S.A.H. NO. 20) - — - - — -
P:1PrniabooPmjents -2018\12196092- upper Micheal P1h Core - Sile Imprwemerriz\C. Dcsi9n0howin9 Flee\121WM C200.dv9
TENSION BANDS
MAXIMUM OF V
TENS
1 FENCE DETAIL
20 NOT TO SCALE
'ENCE FABRIC
PRIVACY SLATS
ED)
POST
4
n
NORTH
LJ 05
0 1s 30 so
c �O e
N on a
e
r C a d
/O//�'er-
L c g e
d m e = F
Jw`'
m_
R
Z
Wv�Zo
L
W >�
J F�
U) ° OD
a Q Z o Q
a O�
U� U
U)
LLJV
UL M
UL o
aJJ LUZN
LE Z
06 LUQ
^ F-
J) LU
LU
�1 m O
J LL Z
`
�m
a
I hereby certify that this plan,
speolficahons or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duty licensed
Profess onel Eng neer under the laws
of the state of Mmnesote.
Eric G. Meyer, P.E.
Date: 09.14.18 Re, No.: 44592
Rev. Cara 0.miplim
111518 Ltly Co..
M.14.19 Cay Commerka
PrplaR#. 12180092
Drawn By: KRK
Checked By: EGM
Issue Dela: 09.14.18
Sheet Tie:
CIVIL SITE
PLAN
Sheet:
0200
STEEL
7 DRY WELL
RIM: 898.48
BLDG
0 Ga09
INV: 892.39
LFe,p
S
OPEN BOTTOM: 888.39
C
@].p%
_ SO LFB _—__l
{
14 LF TRENCH DRAIN
PVC 1.0%
NEENAH R -0999 -CX
TYPE C GRATE
RIM: 897.16 —
STMH-1
INV: 896.88
RIM 898.93
EXTEND CMU
WALLS 6.99' BEND INV: 893.49
�0 INV 892.99
i
$ TYP
f
zs _
STEEL �
BUILDING
TX—
#3017
H
WITH PRIVACY SLATS
WITH PRIVACY SLATS
I _ f 1 STORY BLDG
C4D0 \\ wwy
Ji
trP
I
TRANSPLANTED TREES
'lam UE
—nL— OL
I
CE — OC —..— UL—�.-lFl `! ry .. r r_ — ..
_. _. __
- or i;a r GAS . BOAS Cn5 — G4• ___ �4S — �-q... 6A .'�._ ...
_.—....._ _._.....—.___�.—. _ \ _... ... l�
I I I
I
- — - - 161ST AVENUE-N.W�(C.S.A.H. NO. 20) - — - - — -
P:1PrniabooPmjents -2018\12196092- upper Micheal P1h Core - Sile Imprwemerriz\C. Dcsi9n0howin9 Flee\121WM C200.dv9
TENSION BANDS
MAXIMUM OF V
TENS
1 FENCE DETAIL
20 NOT TO SCALE
'ENCE FABRIC
PRIVACY SLATS
ED)
POST
4
n
NORTH
LJ 05
0 1s 30 so
c �O e
N on a
e
r C a d
/O//�'er-
L c g e
d m e = F
Jw`'
m_
R
Z
Wv�Zo
L
W >�
J F�
U) ° OD
a Q Z o Q
a O�
U� U
U)
LLJV
UL M
UL o
aJJ LUZN
LE Z
06 LUQ
^ F-
J) LU
LU
�1 m O
J LL Z
`
�m
a
I hereby certify that this plan,
speolficahons or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duty licensed
Profess onel Eng neer under the laws
of the state of Mmnesote.
Eric G. Meyer, P.E.
Date: 09.14.18 Re, No.: 44592
Rev. Cara 0.miplim
111518 Ltly Co..
M.14.19 Cay Commerka
PrplaR#. 12180092
Drawn By: KRK
Checked By: EGM
Issue Dela: 09.14.18
Sheet Tie:
CIVIL SITE
PLAN
Sheet:
0200
4 EROSION CONTROL NOTES
�i? I i 1. Owner and Contractor shall obtain MPCA-NPDES permit. COnmctor shall be responsible for all fees pertaining to this permit.
The SWPPP shall ber kept onsite at all times.
2. Install temporary erosion control measures (inlet protection, sig fence, and Feet, commuction entrances) prior w beginning any
/ �
x"2 -N !�
encan, ton or tla=lbon wor at as 9.
3. Erosion control measures shown on the erosion control plan are the absolute minimum. The contractor shall Install temporary
k
\
F-
GL -GUTTER UNE
necessary to further Control erosion. Al changes shall be recorded In the SWPPP.
8 -BITUMINOUS
NOTE:
�
�
a
u �
a Print 50' into the construction zone.
' 1
w"
U,
..Ito
R 825 FFE
00 C
a
(-) - EXISTING TO BE VERIFIED
S. The toe of the sift fence shall be trenched in re minimum of 0'. The trench backfill shall be Completed with a vibratory plate
_
i
I
compactor.
k.t
coot
Nng
',I / I. M31C
/ I�'- STEEL
0 till
g 866C
C400 ( m
....-, ,, I / BLDG
R9a 81C \ y 89740
a__ 897.4 C
-T.-_
I` EXTEN AU gg7.i�
j
BUILDING
1 48 C
901.8' FFE
17
1 STORY BLDG
OE: ._. _....
I 1 a
I 0400
---_---------_--- 161ST AVENUE -N.W�(C.S.A.H.NO. 20) --
P.Pre,clalProlecM-2018\121813092 - Uppers Mldveat AM Cons -She Imprwemem lC. DesigniVere ing Fi wkl21BB042 C300.dwg
LEGEND
._____-_9E,U__.____._
_950-
--949
50
- - 949
-__-E20%--_-
�D-
EXISTING CONTOURS
PROPOSED CONTOURS - MAJOR INTERVAL
PROPOSED CONTOURS -MINOR INTERVAL
GRACE BREAK LINE
GRADE SLOPE
SILT FENCE
RIP -RAP / ROCK CONST. ENTRANCE
EROSION BLANKET AND NATIVE SEED
SEE DETAIL 1/C300
i i CONCRETE WASHOUT STATION
L Me Me Me LOCATE DURING CONSTRUCTION
SPOT ABBREVIATIONS.
encan, ton or tla=lbon wor at as 9.
3. Erosion control measures shown on the erosion control plan are the absolute minimum. The contractor shall Install temporary
I
earth dikes, sediment treys or basins, additional situation fencing, and/or disk the Boll parallel to the contours as deemed
GL -GUTTER UNE
necessary to further Control erosion. Al changes shall be recorded In the SWPPP.
8 -BITUMINOUS
NOTE:
4. All construction she entrances shall ber surfaced with crushed rack across the satire width of the entrance antl from the entrance
4
OF -OVERFLOW
a Print 50' into the construction zone.
'RN -TOP OF WALL
MSTAPLES/ANCHORS', THE TYPE OFANCHORS USED TOSECURE THE BLANHETTOTHE GROUND SHALL BE STEELVdRE 11
..Ito
WUGE,I'WIDEx6O G.
FFE-FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION
a
(-) - EXISTING TO BE VERIFIED
S. The toe of the sift fence shall be trenched in re minimum of 0'. The trench backfill shall be Completed with a vibratory plate
_
i
I
compactor.
k.t
I
heconductedPotential g erosion. lunhol practices must
6. All grading opeonall
(•
rbinor
ownsha
peritlinamefore any up gradient land begin.
DQ estaWshetl on all down grndient perimeters before any up gradient land disturbing activities begin.
�`
'\
T All exposed soil areas must nd stabilized as soon as possible to limit soil erosion but in no Case later than 14 days after the
construction activity in that portion of the site has temporainly or permanently ceased. Temporary stockpiles without significant
sift, clay or organic components (e.g., clean aggregate stockpiles, demofitlon concrete stockpiles, sand stockpiles) and the
constructed base Components of roads, parking lots and similar surfaces are exempt from this requirement.
I
L y
8. The normal weftW perimeter of any temporary or permanent drainage ditch or male that Maine water from any portion of the
k�
y
construction elle, or diverts water around the site, must be stabilized within 200 lineal feet from the property edge, or from the
polut of discharge into any surface water. Stabifizahon of the Iasi 20D trust het must firs completed within 24 hours after
connecting to a surface water. Slabll zahon of the remaining portions of any temporary or permanent ditches or males must be
complete within 14 days after connecting W a surface water and construction in that portion of the ditch has temporarily or
permanently ceased.
9. All be installed with a filler malarial or soil separation fabric and Comply with the Minnesota Department of
nsshall
Transporportation Standard Specifications
10. All storm sewer catch basins not needed for site drainage dunng Construction shall be covered to prevent runoff from entering
the storm sewer system. Catch bas ns necessary ler site drainage during construction shall be provided with inlet protection.
- - I
11. In areas where concentratetl flows moor (such as males and areas in front of storm Catch basins and intakes) the eresion
\ ,�• s
I,
control /aciities shall be backed by sta ilizabon structure to protect those facilities from the concentrated flows.
1
'i,
t4
12. Inspect the Construction site once every, seven days duringrecon ed construction and wl[hin 24 hours after a rainfall event greater
x
�
I
than 0.5 inches In 24 hours. All Impactors shell ba recorded In the bWPPP.
In
13. All sift hnms must be repaired, replaced, or supplemented when they become nonfunctional or the sediment reaches 1r3 of the
�I 1,
be ght of the fenceThese repadrs must be made wittdn 24 hours of tliscovery, or as soon as field conditions allow access. All
O✓SINATE
._TEfFENCE-' T
repairs shaft be recorded In the SWPPP.
AT TREE LINE
14. If sediment escapes the construction site, ofpeRe accumulations of sediment must be removed in a manner and at a frequency
1.4-FFE-
sufficient to Infinite offsite impact.
FUTURE LEAN-TO
15. All soils Backed onto pavement shag be removed daily.
III
16. All infilmil areas must be inspected W ensure that no sediment from ongoing construction activity is reaching Ne infikaM m
area and these areas are protected from compaction due to construction equipment driving across the infiftrabon area.
I
17. Temporary sail stockpiles must have sift fence or other effective sediment controls, and cannot be placed in sudam waters,
Including storm seder Conveyances such as curb and gutter systems, or conduits antl ditch" unless there Is a bypass In place
for the stormwater.
18. Colhchd sed meet asphalt and cone els millings floating debts, paper, plastic fabricConstmction and demolition debris and
other wastes must Im disposed of property and must comply with MPCA disposal requirements.
E
19. Oil, gasoline, paint and any hazardous substances must be properly stored, including secondary Containment, to prevent spills,
X__ X__
leaks or other discharge. Restricted access to storage areas must be pr edded to prevent vandalism. Steel and disposal of
�\ I
j
hazardous waste must be in compliance with MPCA regulations.
20. Priernel washing of trucks and other Construction vehicles must be baited se a defined area of the site Runoff rust nd
III
contained and waste property disposed of. No engine degrees ng is allowed onsite.
�I
21. All liquid and solid wastes generated by concrete washout operations must be contained in a leakyroof Containment facility or
Lar
impermeable finer. A Complectetl clay liner that does not allow washout liquids to enter ground water is Considered an
impermeable iner. The liquid and solid wastes must not contact the grountl, and there must not be runoff from Vie concrete
washout operations or areas. Liquid and sold wastes must be disposed of property and In compiance, with MPCA regulations.
A sign must be installed adjacent to each washout facility to Inform Concrete equipment operators to Fell the proper fecitities.
22. Upon completion of the project and stabilization of all graded areas, all temporary erasion control facilities (sill fences, hay bales,
all shall be removed from the site.
III
23. All permanent sedimentation basins must be restored to their design Condition immediately following stabilizefion of the site.
II
P� rl I
24. Contactor shall submit Notice of Teminamn for MPCAF4PDES permftwlthln 30 days after Final SteNlizabon.
25. Project she is located within the boundaries of the LRRWMO.
LEGEND
._____-_9E,U__.____._
_950-
--949
50
- - 949
-__-E20%--_-
�D-
EXISTING CONTOURS
PROPOSED CONTOURS - MAJOR INTERVAL
PROPOSED CONTOURS -MINOR INTERVAL
GRACE BREAK LINE
GRADE SLOPE
SILT FENCE
RIP -RAP / ROCK CONST. ENTRANCE
EROSION BLANKET AND NATIVE SEED
SEE DETAIL 1/C300
i i CONCRETE WASHOUT STATION
L Me Me Me LOCATE DURING CONSTRUCTION
GRADING NOTES
1. Tree protection Consisting of snow teem or safety fence installed at the
tlnp line shall be in place prior to beginning any grading or demolition
work at the site.
2. All elevations with an asterisk (') shall be field verified. if elevations
vary Significantly, nobly the Engineer for further instruction.
3. Grades shown in paved areas represent finish elevation.
4. Restore all disturbed areas wain IT of good quality topsoil and seed.
5. All construction shall he performed in accordance with state and local
standard specifications for construction.
1. PREPARE SCIL BEFORE INSTAWNG ROLLED EROSION CONTROL PRODUCTS (RECPM, INCLUDING ANY NECIESSCRTAPPLICATION
OF LIME, FERTm2!ER, ANDSEEO.
NOTE', WHEN UWNGCEL EEDWNOT SEED PREPAAEOAREA. CELLQEEO MUST M INSTALLEOwRX PAPERSIGE WIYN.
2. BEGIN AT THE TOP OF THE SLOPE BY ANCHORINGTRE RECPF INA IF (15 GAS DEEP X IF (15CM) WIDE TRENCH
WITHAPPRO41WMLYtY(9 )OF RECPeEMNOEDBEYONDTHEUPSWPEPORTION OF THETRENGN. ANCHOR THE
REWeY A RO's OF STAPLESISTAKES APPR lX TELY IT (MGM) APART IN FILE 90TTOM OF THE TRENCH.
BACKFlLL AND COMPACT THE TRENCH AFTER STAPLING. APPLY SEED TOCOMPACTED SCILAND FOLD REMAINING IT (M CM)
PORTION OF RECPe BACK WERSEEDANDCCMPACTEDSCIL SECURERECFMERWMPACTEDMLWRHARONOF
STAPLES ITA DIS BPACEOAPPRO%IIMTELT IT DUCM) APARTACRWS THE WIDTI OF THE RECPe.
3.ROLLTHERECPFWD OR(BJHORI ALLYACRMsTHESLOPE. RECPx WILLUNROLLYBTHAPPROPRIATE SIM
AGAINSTTHE SBL SURFACE. ALL RECPe MUST BE SECURELY FASTENEDTO SCILSURFACE BY PLACINGSTAPLEMITAXE5
INAPPRGPRKTE LOGATIONSAS SHONN IN 111E STARE PATTERN GUIDE. WRENUSINGTHEWTSYSTEM STAPLESSFULES
SHOULD BE PLACEDTHRWGH EACH OF THE CCLORED DOTS CORRESPONDINGTOYHE APPROPRIATE STAPLE PATTERN.
4 THE EWES OF PARALLEL RECPR MUST BE STAPLED WTM APPROMMATELY Y-4 E CM -125 CM) MERIAP DEPENDING
ON RECPe
SPOT ABBREVIATIONS.
950.00 TC
TC -TOP OF CURB
949.50 GL
GL -GUTTER UNE
TK.
RECPF WIDTH.
8 -BITUMINOUS
NOTE:
G - CONCRETE
IN DODGE SOIL USE OF STAPLE OR STAGE IENGTNS GREATER THAN IT (15 CM)MAY SF NECESSARY l0
OF -OVERFLOW
ECURELE E ECTHE
PROPERLY SECURE INE RECPF.
'RN -TOP OF WALL
MSTAPLES/ANCHORS', THE TYPE OFANCHORS USED TOSECURE THE BLANHETTOTHE GROUND SHALL BE STEELVdRE 11
BW - BOTTOM OF WALL (FIG)
WUGE,I'WIDEx6O G.
FFE-FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION
a
(-) - EXISTING TO BE VERIFIED
GRADING NOTES
1. Tree protection Consisting of snow teem or safety fence installed at the
tlnp line shall be in place prior to beginning any grading or demolition
work at the site.
2. All elevations with an asterisk (') shall be field verified. if elevations
vary Significantly, nobly the Engineer for further instruction.
3. Grades shown in paved areas represent finish elevation.
4. Restore all disturbed areas wain IT of good quality topsoil and seed.
5. All construction shall he performed in accordance with state and local
standard specifications for construction.
1. PREPARE SCIL BEFORE INSTAWNG ROLLED EROSION CONTROL PRODUCTS (RECPM, INCLUDING ANY NECIESSCRTAPPLICATION
OF LIME, FERTm2!ER, ANDSEEO.
NOTE', WHEN UWNGCEL EEDWNOT SEED PREPAAEOAREA. CELLQEEO MUST M INSTALLEOwRX PAPERSIGE WIYN.
2. BEGIN AT THE TOP OF THE SLOPE BY ANCHORINGTRE RECPF INA IF (15 GAS DEEP X IF (15CM) WIDE TRENCH
WITHAPPRO41WMLYtY(9 )OF RECPeEMNOEDBEYONDTHEUPSWPEPORTION OF THETRENGN. ANCHOR THE
REWeY A RO's OF STAPLESISTAKES APPR lX TELY IT (MGM) APART IN FILE 90TTOM OF THE TRENCH.
BACKFlLL AND COMPACT THE TRENCH AFTER STAPLING. APPLY SEED TOCOMPACTED SCILAND FOLD REMAINING IT (M CM)
PORTION OF RECPe BACK WERSEEDANDCCMPACTEDSCIL SECURERECFMERWMPACTEDMLWRHARONOF
STAPLES ITA DIS BPACEOAPPRO%IIMTELT IT DUCM) APARTACRWS THE WIDTI OF THE RECPe.
3.ROLLTHERECPFWD OR(BJHORI ALLYACRMsTHESLOPE. RECPx WILLUNROLLYBTHAPPROPRIATE SIM
AGAINSTTHE SBL SURFACE. ALL RECPe MUST BE SECURELY FASTENEDTO SCILSURFACE BY PLACINGSTAPLEMITAXE5
INAPPRGPRKTE LOGATIONSAS SHONN IN 111E STARE PATTERN GUIDE. WRENUSINGTHEWTSYSTEM STAPLESSFULES
SHOULD BE PLACEDTHRWGH EACH OF THE CCLORED DOTS CORRESPONDINGTOYHE APPROPRIATE STAPLE PATTERN.
4 THE EWES OF PARALLEL RECPR MUST BE STAPLED WTM APPROMMATELY Y-4 E CM -125 CM) MERIAP DEPENDING
ON RECPe
5. CONSECUTIVE RECPe SPLICED DOWN THE SLOPE MUST BE PLACED END OVER END (SHINGLE STYLE) vel AN APPRMMATE
X175GM)GVEFUAP. STAPLE THROUGH MERLAPPEDAREA. APPROxL ELT IT MGM) APARTAGRWS ENTIRE
0
TK.
RECPF WIDTH.
NOTE:
IN DODGE SOIL USE OF STAPLE OR STAGE IENGTNS GREATER THAN IT (15 CM)MAY SF NECESSARY l0
ECURELE E ECTHE
PROPERLY SECURE INE RECPF.
MSTAPLES/ANCHORS', THE TYPE OFANCHORS USED TOSECURE THE BLANHETTOTHE GROUND SHALL BE STEELVdRE 11
NORTH
WUGE,I'WIDEx6O G.
a
15 1. Rn
1 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
C30g NOT TO SCALE
s
O N
E a
Cv mL�
IpLnDal
QymPre oc
C
L C n N on O m
_I LEI
RAJYR
,^ Z
vJ O
wU�w
Z
LLJ D > 2
-J 10 <<n
P U) ° °o
�
^ Q Z oa
LL O co
U
U
vJ
fAWz"LU Z'
LLI'a
n'a0-'O
LL. E` Z
U CL <
F � �
G
n
I hereby rarely that this plan,
specifications r report was prepared
by he or under Try direct supervision
and that I em a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under Ne laws
ofthestat`of Minnesota.
Eric G. Meyer, P.E.
Data 09.14.18 Reg, No.: 44592
Rw.Der's Duce,im,
11.15.18 city cereass
US 14 Go, Commers
Project it, 12188892
Drawn By: KBK
Checked By: EGM
Issue Out. 09.14.18
Sheet Tine:
GRADING AND
EROSION CONTROL
PLAN
BhC300
4" PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE
LIGHT DUTY CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
400 NOT TO SCALE
Y4" SAWED JOINTS FILLED
WITH ELASTOMERIC
JOINT SEALANT
14,
6" BASE
REGATE
NI —NEW B"PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE
11,41 REBAR @ 16"
O.C. EACH WAY
� EXISTING SUBGRADE SOIL
HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
C40 NOT TO SCALE
SIGN
NOTE: ALL SIGNS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MMUTCO.
ACCESSIBLE PARKING
CT-) SIGN DETAIL
400 NOT TO SCALE
AGGREGATE
PLAN
PRECAST INVERT SHOULD BE ill
DIAMETER OF PIPE AND BENCHES
SLOPED 2" TOWARD INVERT.
MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE PLACED
SO THAT OFFSET HOLE M. TOP SLAB
IS
IS FACING DOWNSTREAM.
N) BLOCK STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED
GRADE 1" BELOW 10' TRANSITION.
MANHOLE FRAME & COVER:
/NEENAH R-2015, TYPE C GRATE (CB, OPEN GRATE, CIRCLE)
NEENAH R-1642, TYPE B LID (STMH, SOCIO CLOSED, CIRCLE)
MINIMUM OF 2, MAXIMUM OF 5
CONCRETE ADJUSTMENT RINGS WITH FULL
BED OF MORTAR BETWEEN EACH AND
A 4' COLLAR ON THE OUTSIDE, NO SHIMS
OF ANY MATERIAL ALLOWED.
6" PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB
SEAL WITH 2 BEADS OF RAM-NEK.
ALL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE
O' RING RUBBER GASKETS.
MANHOLE STEPS, COPOLYMER POLYPROPYLENE
PLASTIC, WITH 10 GRADE 60 STEEL
REINFORCEMENT OR EQUAL. 16" O.C,
PRECAST CONCRETE SECTION
8"PRECAST SEGMENTAL CONCRETE BLOCK
TO TOP OF THE PIPE SHALL BE USED
WITH SIZE AND DEPTH PROHIBIT THE
FABRICATION OF PRECAST UNITS.
4ANHOLE FRAME & COVER:
VEENAH R-2015, TYPE C GRATE
ANIMUM OF 2, MAXIMUM OF 5
;ONCRETE ADJUSTMENT RINGS WITH FULL
3ED OF MORTAR BETWEEN EACH AND
N 4" COLLAR ON THE OUTSIDE. NO SHIMS
OF ANY MATERIAL ALLOWED.
11 ACE EXTERNAL CHIMNEY SEAL.
i' PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB.
SEAL WITH 2 BEADS OF RAMl4EK.
kLL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE
O' RING RUBBER GASKETS.
'RECAST CONCRETE SECTION
NPE SHALL BE CUT OUT FLUSH
MTH INSIDE FACE OF WALL. GROUT
AROUND PIPE AT INTERIOR AND
EXTERIOR OF WALL
P00
VpROSJGfpOPO
J8�"K
e
MIN. B" OF 1"TO
2" DIA ROCK.
MNDOT STANDARD
SPECIFICATION 3733 TYPE V
PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC BENEATH ROCK
16" MIN. HIGH CULOFF BERM TO
MINIMIZE SILT RUNOFF FROM SITE.
VARIES:
FULL WIDTH OF EXISI
DRIVEWAY OPENING'
20' MIN. WIDTH.
CROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
C40 NOT TO SCALE
WIRE MESH REINFORCEMENT
(OPTIONAL)
� ENGINEERING FABRIC
METAL, WOOD POST, OR STAKE.
F MAX. SPACING, 2' INTO GROUND.
DIRECTION
FABRIC ANCHORAGE
TRENCH. BACKFILL WITH
TAMPED NATURAL SOIL
.i �..- ...... r.,_....�..,.. �.._,...�.... NATURAL SOIL
V MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS, SECTION 3" MINUS WASHED STONE BEDDING 1 III I -II -"I
ET
5' MINIMUM DIAMETER PRECAST'
CONCRETE SLAB, REINFORCED NOTE: DEPENDING UPON CONFIGURATION, ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE MESH
NTH "REBARQ 8"EW. DRY WELL DETAIL WITH HOG RINGS, STEEL POSTS WITH WIRES, OR WOOD POSTS WITH STAPLES.
T
aoo NOT TO SCALE SILT FENCE
MNDOT NATIVE SEED f 10 INSTALLATION DETAIL
MIXTUREi#33251 6- OF MIXED SOIL BLEND a0U NOT TO SCALE
(50% SAND AND 50% PEAT/COMPOST)
-TOP OF BERM: 898.70'
I I
4:1 MAX PIES III : — - LL J NEW RIP RAP
GROUT BOTTOM
SECTION `WATEF
(BOOT,
CATCH BASIN MANHOLE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
BACKFILL WITH NEW
GOOD QUALITY
TOPSOIL AND SEED
6'PORTLAND
CEMENT CONCRETE
NEW BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT
EXISTING
AGGREGATE
III -_ ` � _' '•
2" NEW
III III III �T 1 11 1 Irl D GRANULAR
BACKFILL
e' EXISTING SUBGRADE SOIL
s FLUSH CURB DETAIL
40 NOT TO SCALE
FILTER WOOD OR METAL
STAKE
FABRIC O
4•-za"
MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN
POSTS IS 2'. BOTTOM OF FENCE
IS BURIED IN TRENCH, SIMILAR TO
NORMAL SILT FENCE INSTALLATION.
NOTE: IN PAVEMENT AREAS, SANDBAGS, AGGREGATE WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC
OR OTHER APPROVED PRODUCTS SHALL BE USED FOR INLET PROTECTION.
INLET PROTECTION SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL PAVEMENT IS INSTALLED AND NRF
AREAS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED.
SILT FENCE INLET
B SEDIMENT FILTER
40 NOT TO SCALE
P:Nro�'ecblProfecR-2018112186092 -Upper MidwealNh Core- Silo ImprovementelC. DeagnWrasing Flea\121NIJW C400.dwg
OUT
897.40' (12- MIN.) III BASIN 1 OUTLET e'
III III. —I - TOP OF BERM: 896.75
I III � III I I : ::III
RADE
SOLS III Il f I I I I 5'
OUTLET: 895.43' NEW RIP RAP
- - (17' MIN.) '
PER PLAN BASIN 2 OUTLET
ONCE COMPLETED, SCARIFY BASIN BOTTOM AND THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THE BASIN SHALL BE LIMITED TO PREVENT
SEDIMENT DEPOSITION AND COMPACTION. THE BASIN'S PERIMETER SHALL BE LINED WITH SILT FENCE AND MARKED OFF.
INFILTRATION
BASIN SECTION
400 NOT TO SCALE
CATEGORY 3
ROSION CONTROL BLANKET-\
SPEC. 3885)
4" x 4" TRENCH BACKFILLED OVER
EROSION CONTROL BLANKETT
(SPEC. 3885) / 1
7 I�.rl'
_ �. �!'�y
s` a 3$+ IN
8"11
GA. STAPLES
STRAW OR WOOD FIBER 6" OR SPACED V -O" ON CENTER
12• DIAMETER ROLL ENCLOSED
IN PLASTIC OR POLYESTER NETTING 2 x 2 x 18 LONG WOODEN STAKES
AT 2'-0" SPACING. DRIVE THROUGH
POINT "A" MUST BE HIGHER THAN POINT "B" TO ENSURE NETTNC AND FIBER ROLL.
THAT WATER FLOWS OVER DIKE AND NOT AROUND
TME ENDS.
TCH CHECK
D
2
4D NOT TO SCALE
BACKFILL WITH NEW GOOD p�UMINUM COVER
QUALITY TOPSOIL AND SEED PLAN
b NEW 4" PORTLAND 6"
CEMENT CONCRETE
NEW PAVEMENT
14-, NEW B"BASE
.- .. . _ AGGREGATE
SECTION ` EXISTING SUBGRADE SOIL
Ni OWNER WILL PROVIDE COVER FOR THE WASHOUT PAD.
11 WASHOUT PAD DETAIL
40 NOT TO SCALE
C o� !
au v w
r� Z`E
0•L °yam =
0 c
F
m n . F
L'
m m �
J w in ;
LLIP
`^ Z y
VJ _O >
� U
LU
N
z
WZ
—LUD>5
�JDfF10�
N =U) >
LLBID°Q
W Q 7 n Z
0�
j U
CA
H
0
3
LE M
(AwzLO
M
LU Z
06w>�
LU
LU
a O
Z
s
eeel
1 hereby cerelp Mat this Plan,
specifications or report eras prepared
by me or under my dues, supervision
and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under Ne laws
o-ththeeersstste�of Mnnesola,
Em,G.Meyer,P.E.
Date'. 09.14.18 Reg. N, 44592
R, Dna Description
11.15.15 CA, Comnerle
651419 LLLy Comments
Project* 12185092
Drown By: KBK
Checked By: EGM
Issue Deb. 09.14.18
Sheet This
DETAILS
Sheet