HomeMy Public PortalAbout09-08-2015 POSTED IN CITY HALL September 4, 2015
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2015
7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24)
1. Call to Order
2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda
3. Update from City Council proceedings
4. Planning Department Report
5. Approval of August 11, 2015 Draft Planning Commission minutes.
6. Public Hearing – 3 Rivers Church – 52 Hamel Road – Conditional Use
Permit
7. Wealshire of Medina – PID 03-118-23-24-0003 – Rezoning, Site Plan
Review, Interim Use Permit
8. Update on Comprehensive Plan Update Process/Schedule
9. Council Meeting Schedule
10. Adjourn
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 September 1, 2015
City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: August 27, 2015
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates September 1, 2015 City Council Meeting
Land Use Application Review
A) Stonegate Conservation Design Subdivision – west of Deerhill, East of Homestead. The applicant
has requested PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat approval for a conservation design
subdivision of 42 lots on 170 gross acres. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
matter at the July 14 meeting and found that the proposed conservation design subdivision does not
fully meet the objectives of the CD-district. As a result, the Commission recommended denial. The
Park Commission reviewed on July 15. The City Council reviewed on August 5 and asked for a
number of changes and reviewed an updated site plan on August 18. Following review, the Council
directed staff to prepare documents of approval, providing the applicant updates the plat and plans as
directed by September 1. If the applicant provides these updates, the documents will be presented at
the September 15 meeting.
B) Buehler Plat – Robert Buehler has requested approval of a plat to separate 2782 Willow Drive from
an adjacent property. The parcels were a single lot and a previous owner sold portions of the lot to
two separate buyers. The applicant seeks to subdivide the property to create a buildable lot, and the
other portion of the property would be platted as an outlot. Planning Commission held a hearing at
the August 11 meeting and split 3-3 on the recommendation. Staff intends to present to the Council
at the September 1 meeting.
C) Etzel Setback Variance – 2942 Lakeshore Ave. – Brian Etzel has requested a variance to reduce the
setback from Balsam Street from 30 feet to 12 feet for expansion of an existing deck. The proposed
expansion is proposed to be setback the same distance as the existing deck, continuing the same
building line. The Planning Commission reviewed at the August 11 meeting and recommended
approval. Staff intends to present to the Council at the September 1 meeting.
D) 3 Rivers Church CUP – 3 Rivers Church has requested a conditional use permit to operate within
the existing office building at 52 Hamel Road. A public hearing is scheduled for the September 8
Planning Commission meeting.
E) Wealshire LLC Comp Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Site Plan Review – Wealshire, LLC has
requested a site plan review for construction of a 173,000 sf memory care facility. The request also
includes a rezoning from RR-UR to Business Park and an Interim Use Permit to permit continued
agricultural use of the portion of the property not proposed to be developed. The Met Council has
also approved of the previous Comp Plan amendment. The Planning Commission meeting reviewed
the rezoning, site plan review and interim use permit at the February 10 meeting and unanimously
recommended approval. The City Council reviewed at the May 19 meeting and directed staff to
prepare approval documents. The applicant has subsequently changed their proposed site plan. Staff
is conducting a preliminary review to determine if it is appropriate to present the changes to the
Planning Commission.
F) St. Peter and Paul Cemetery and Hamel Place –The City Council has adopted resolutions
approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order
to complete the projects.
G) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll– these preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting a
final plat application
Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 September 1, 2015
City Council Meeting
H) Hamel Haven subdivisions, Wakefield Valley Farm – These subdivisions have all received final
approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before construction
begins.
I) Goddard School Site Plan Review – PJ Norman LLC has requested Site Plan Review approval to
construct a new building to house a Goddard School at 345 Clydesdale Trail (next to Caribou
Coffee). The City Council approved the project on July 21 and staff is working with the applicant
on the conditions of approval before construction.
J) Wright-Hennepin Solar Panels – WH has requested a conditional use permit for the installation of a
solar garden approximately an acre in area at their substation on Willow Drive, south of Highway
55. The Council adopted a resolution of approval at the June 16 meeting. Staff will work with the
applicant to meet the conditions of approval before construction.
Other Projects
A) Deck Upland Buffer Setbacks – a resident of the Enclave development has requested that the City
reconsider the requirement that decks be set back 15 feet from Upland Buffers. The setback limits
the size of decks on a number of the lots in the Enclave development. Staff presented the ordinance
at the July Planning Commission meeting. The Commission was concerned of the unintended
consequences of reducing the required setback and recommended denial. Following the Planning
Commission review, the interested parties requested that the Commission consider a 10 foot setback.
The Planning Commission recommended denial 5-1 on August 11. Staff presented to the Council on
August 18 and the Council requested additional information. Staff intends to present the information
at the September 1 meeting.
B) Commercial connection fees – Planning staff provided information to Finance related to historical
commercial connection fees and projections in the future. The Council discussed at the August 18
worksession and directed staff to prepare an amendment for review which would provide some
credit for small businesses moving into existing buildings. Staff intends to present this information
at the September 1 meeting.
C) Watershed Dues Analysis – Planning staff prepared figures for the City Council’s review at the
August 18 special session related to establishing different stormwater utility fees for each watershed
district so that residents of Elm Creek and Pioneer-Sarah Creek can pay the cost. The City Council
requested additional information, which staff intends to prepare for the September 15 worksession.
D) Cable Buildout Discussion – Planning staff has continued to assist with negotiations related to
Mediacom’s expansion in the City.
E) Park at Fields of Medina Grand Opening – some Planning staff assisted with and attended the
Grand Opening which was very well attended.
1
CITY OF MEDINA 1
PLANNING COMMISSION 2
DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3
Tuesday August 11, 2015 4
5
1. Call to Order: Acting Chairperson Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 6
7
Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Randy Foote, Kim Murrin, Victoria Reid, 8
Janet White, and Kent Williams. 9
10
Absent: Planning Commissioner Charles Nolan. 11
12
Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke 13
14
2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda 15
16
No comments made. 17
18
3. Update from City Council Proceedings 19
20
City Councilmember Anderson provided an update on the recent activity of the Council. He 21
stated that at the Council meeting the previous week the Council had a lengthy discussion 22
regarding the Stonegate request and voted unanimously to direct staff to prepare both a 23
resolution of denial and a resolution of approval that would be contingent upon the applicant 24
providing a revised plan that incorporates the comments made by the Planning Commission 25
and City Council. He hoped that the applicant would bring back a revised plan. 26
Williams asked if the resolutions worked in tandem or whether they would be mutually 27
exclusive. 28
29
Anderson explained that the Council would only adopt one resolution and that would depend 30
upon the action of the applicant. He stated that if the applicant does not revise their plan, the 31
Council would adopt the resolution denying the request. He stated that the resolutions would 32
come before the Council for consideration at their next meeting. 33
34
Williams asked if the applicant were to provide a revised plan, would the Planning 35
Commission also review that plan before the Council. 36
37
Finke stated that there is not enough time within the review period and therefore the Council 38
alone would review any new submissions from the applicant. 39
40
Williams asked if the resolution of approval would address the issue of density. 41
42
Finke stated that a reduction of density was one of the items the applicant was to consider. 43
He stated that staff did receive a revised plan from the applicant today, which appears to have 44
increased the conservation area to 36 percent of the buildable area, which is approximately 45
another seven to eight acres; reduced the number of lots by two, removing one home lot and 46
the pool lot; and increasing the amount of trails. He stated that the question will now be did 47
the applicant go far enough. 48
49
Anderson reported that the Council also considered a preliminary approval of a draft 50
ordinance regarding solar panels in the rural residential zoning districts, noting that staff is 51
2
now preparing a final draft of the ordinance; and the Council also approved the Town Line 52
Road improvement project. 53
54
Murrin referenced the solar ordinance and questioned if the Council suggested any changes 55
from what had been recommended by the Planning Commission. 56
57
Anderson stated that he did not believe any significant changes were suggested from what 58
had been recommended by the Planning Commission. 59
60
4. Planning Department Report 61
62
Finke provided an update. 63
64
5. Approval of the July 14, 2015 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 65
66
Motion by Williams, seconded by White, to approve the July 14, 2015, Planning 67
Commission minutes with the noted corrections. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: 68
Nolan) 69
70
6. Robert Buehler – Preliminary Plat and Variance to Divide a Single Lot into 71
a Lot and an Outlot 72
73
Finke stated that this request requires two action items, a Preliminary Plat to subdivide the 74
parcel and a variance request related to the minimum lot size. He stated that the subdivision 75
would create one buildable lot and one outlot. He stated that the variance is to reduce the 76
minimum lot size requirements for the proposed lot. He noted that the subject property is 77
actually a single parcel that encompasses the triangle and rectangular portions. He explained 78
that originally there were two tax identifications issued for the parcel, one for the triangle and 79
one for the rectangle, because the parcel lies within two taxing districts. He stated that it is 80
not uncommon that a single parcel be issued two tax identification numbers for this reason. 81
He stated that a previous owner then conveyed portions of the property to two different 82
parties, which should not have been allowed as the single property is now under ownership of 83
two parties. He stated that there was a home on the western portion of the property, which 84
was demolished by the current owner and the applicant, with the intent of building a new 85
home on the property. He stated that the property is zoned rural residential and displayed an 86
aerial photograph of the property. He stated that the proposed split would be along the taxing 87
line with the triangle portion to be used to construct a home, if the variance is approved, and 88
the rectangular portion would become an outlot. He explained that the property owner to the 89
south also owns the rectangle portion of this property. 90
91
Murrin questioned how the sale of one parcel was processed to two buyers through the 92
County. 93
94
Finke stated that deeds were provided on each portion of the lot. He explained that the 95
proposed triangle lot would be over four acres in size, which would contain 3.5 acres of 96
contiguous suitable soils, noting that the rural residential district requires five acres of 97
contiguous suitable soils, which is why the variance is requested. He stated that 98
approximately one acre of the suitable soils lie within a driveway easement. He stated that if 99
the request moves forward, staff recommends a condition that would require the applicant to 100
address that issue and move the easement to the shared driveway rather than its current 101
location. 102
103
Reid questioned who the existing unused easement is actually for. 104
3
Finke stated that the easement is for numerous properties to the east. 105
106
Williams asked if the purpose of that easement is to provide access to Willow Drive. 107
108
Finke confirmed that the purpose of the easement is to provide access to Willow Drive to the 109
properties to the east. 110
111
Williams questioned how those properties receive access currently. 112
113
Finke stated that those properties use the existing driveway. He stated that staff has had 114
numerous conversations with the applicant as they bought the property with the home on it 115
and believed that after the home was demolished they would be able to construct a home in 116
its place. He stated that this information came to light after the home was demolished. 117
118
Williams asked when the applicant purchased the property. 119
120
Robert Buehler stated that they closed on the property in February of 2011 from a bank, as 121
the property was in foreclosure. 122
123
Finke stated that the property was owned by multiple parties after the “subdivision” was 124
done. He explained that the variance would have to be considered first because if the 125
variance is not received the Preliminary Plat could not be approved. He stated that if the 126
Commission finds the criteria for the variance to be met, a recommendation of approval 127
would be in order and staff has included potential conditions for approval in the staff report. 128
129
White questioned if there are any other lots in a similar situation, as this could set precedent. 130
131
Finke clarified similar properties to mean properties in which portions have been conveyed 132
rather than subdivided and the home demolished with the intent to build a new home. He 133
stated that he was not aware of any other properties of that nature and noted that each 134
variance request would stand on its own merit. 135
136
White asked if there were any other lot size variances in the rural residential zoning district. 137
138
Finke stated that there were some variances issued when the five-acre minimum was enacted, 139
but noted that there have not been any recent variances issued for that purpose. 140
141
Foote questioned when the minimum lot size was changed. 142
143
Finke stated that in 1999 the change was enacted which required all rural residential lots to 144
have five acres of contiguous suitable soils, and noted that previous to that there were 145
different soil groupings allowed. 146
147
Murrin received confirmation that the house that previously existing on the site predated the 148
1984 conveyance and therefore met the requirements of the district. She asked if the 149
applicant was aware that there would be an issue rebuilding a home. 150
151
Finke stated that there were conversations when the applicant received a demolition permit 152
and noted that City staff was not aware that there would be any issue rebuilding at that time 153
and therefore the applicant was not made aware that there would be any issue rebuilding a 154
home on the lot. 155
156
4
Robert Buehler, the applicant, stated that they purchased the property in early 2011 and 157
during 2011 worked with staff for demolition permits and building permits. He stated that 158
they were under the impression, as was City staff, that there would be no issues with that. He 159
stated that for reasons not related to this application they did not move forward at that time. 160
He stated that in late 2012 they discovered that the property was not properly subdivided and 161
in 2013 and 2014 worked with the neighboring parcel owner to gain their signature on the 162
application. He stated that the application was then submitted this spring to get to this point. 163
He stated that their desire is to get the property properly subdivided, as they believed it to 164
have been when they purchased it. 165
166
Murrin asked when the home was demolished. 167
168
Buehler stated that the home was demolished in 2011. 169
170
Murrin asked how the property owner was made aware of the improper division of the 171
property. 172
173
Buehler stated that they were made aware of the issue by a real estate representative of the 174
other property owner in late 2012. 175
176
Finke agreed that the issue became known through a property appraisal that was done by the 177
owner of the outlot. 178
179
Reid stated that the staff report provides the possibility of attempting to purchase additional 180
land that would then make the variance not needed and asked if the applicant had considered 181
that option. 182
183
Buehler stated that there was a property to the south of the triangle that offered to sell 184
additional land, but noted that option was not economically viable and therefore they would 185
proceed with this approach rather than purchasing additional land that they do not need. 186
187
Williams stated that it appears that there are two septic systems shown near the wetlands. 188
189
Buehler stated that he believed there to only be two delineated wetlands and noted that the 190
septic is next to where the original house had been placed and the soil testing had been done 191
to validate that could be a viable septic site. 192
193
Finke stated that is not a wetland near the septic sites, noting that the wetland is on the 194
southeast corner of the property. 195
196
Reid opened the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. 197
198
Kristen Chapman, 1910 Iroquois Drive, stated that she was doing research recently and noted 199
that in 1998, there was a property similar to this that requested to subdivide the property and 200
one of those lots would be nonconforming. She stated that the City did approve that under a 201
hardship clause. 202
203
Reid stated that the law around variances has changed since that time. 204
205
Steve Scherer, 2622 Willow Drive, stated that his brother and sister are also in attendance 206
representing his parent’s property at 2672 Willow Drive. He stated that they came before the 207
City in 2008 to discuss splitting the Scherer farm into two lots as the property had been 208
assessed for two lots through the road project. He stated this is a planned estate from his 209
5
parents and his family has owned the property since the turn of the 19th century. He stated 210
that in 1983 or 1984 he split off 5.2 acres from his dad’s property and in the 1990’s, prior to 211
1999 he purchased additional property from his parents, but still leaving enough for the 212
remaining property of his parents to be split into two lots. He stated that his concern is that 213
they came to the City and because of the rule change, they were short of the contiguous soils 214
requirement by ¾ of an acre, which did not take into account the road right-of-way. He 215
stated that this case has considerably less area and believed there to be a hardship in both 216
cases. He stated that the estate planning in his case had been done with the intent of creating 217
two lots and the property was assessed for the road project as two lots. He stated that his 218
mother is in a nursing home and they would like to be able to sell his parents property as two 219
lots to maximize the sale. He believed that there were similar hardships in both cases. He 220
noted that the original home on the applicant’s lot was 800 square feet and was more of a 221
cabin than a home. He stated that they did offer to sell a parcel of property to the applicant 222
which would make the applicant’s lot conforming and would also leave his family with a 223
parcel of suitable size to be sold. He stated that the applicant responded that he was not 224
interested although this would solve the problem for both cases. He stated that they are 225
attempting to play by the rules and believed that this would set a precedent. 226
227
Dale Considine, 2265 Chestnut Road, identified her property on the aerial photograph. She 228
asked for additional information on the outlot and whether it is owned by the applicant or 229
another party. 230
231
Reid stated that the outlot is currently owned by another party, but the two parcels are one lot. 232
The proposal would be to split the lots, but the variance would be needed. 233
234
Considine asked if the outlot is a buildable lot as she believed it to be only wetland. 235
236
Reid confirmed that the outlot would not be buildable. 237
238
Murrin confirmed the location of the Scherer property and that the Scherers offered to sell a 239
portion of their property to the applicant. She questioned if the applicant’s lot would then be 240
conforming if they were to purchase that parcel. 241
242
Finke stated that the land would need to be surveyed just to verify, but it appears that the 243
property could then be contiguous and therefore conforming. 244
245
Murrin questioned what the current owner is using the wetland as. 246
247
Finke stated that it is just open land and wetland. He stated that the upland portion of the 248
outlot is mostly occupied by driveway easements. 249
250
Murrin questioned how the parcel was originally conveyed, whether the land was given to 251
family members or sold. 252
253
Finke stated that the land was sold. 254
255
Buehler stated that while one viable solution would be to add some additional property the 256
offered price to them was equal to what they had paid for the entire original parcel they have 257
which did not seem to make sense financially. He stated that when they purchased the 258
property they believed it to be subdivided and buildable, as the City did. 259
Foote questioned where the original house had been and questioned if the intent would be to 260
build a similar size home or larger home. 261
262
6
Buehler stated that he believed the home would be about twice the size of the original home 263
that had been on the lot. He stated that he was unsure of the size of the original home, 264
although it had been mentioned that the home was 800 square feet. He stated that they would 265
be mindful of the appearance of the home to ensure that it would be appropriate with the 266
neighboring homes. 267
268
Reid closed the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. 269
270
Reid stated that if it had been known before the home was demolished that this issue existed, 271
could the property owner then have lived in the home and/or remodeled the home or added 272
onto the home. 273
274
Finke stated that the options had not been reviewed at that time. He stated that perhaps a 275
permit to expand the existing home could have been issued, but noted that he could not 276
provide an exact answer. 277
278
Williams asked if the property had been properly subdivided in the past, could the applicant 279
then have demolished the home and constructed a larger home on the site. 280
281
Finke replied that if the lot was a conforming lot of record, the existing house could be 282
demolished and a new home could be constructed. 283
284
White stated that she believed that the request meets the criteria for a variance as the situation 285
was not created by the landowner and would be a reasonable use of the property and would 286
not affect the character of the neighborhood. She stated that while she would not necessarily 287
be in favor of approving a lot that would not meet the minimum lot size for the rural 288
residential zoning district; the request appears to meet the variance criteria. 289
290
Albers agreed, as the situation was not created by the applicant and therefore would be in 291
favor of granting the variance. 292
293
Williams stated that he has a different take on the variance criteria as he was not sure that this 294
request would be in harmony with the intent of the zoning district requirements, as this parcel 295
would be half of the acreage that is required; he did not find this to be consistent with the 296
Comprehensive Plan, as the Plan has this zoned as rural residential; and while there is a 297
practical difficulty in this situation, economic considerations alone do not constitute a 298
practical difficulty, and there is additional land to the south that could be purchased, but the 299
applicant did not do so because they did not find it economical. He stated that in reference to 300
the reasonable use of the land, the applicant wants to build a house on the property and 301
reasonable use would depend on the size of the home. He noted that perhaps this variance 302
would be granted and the applicant will come back with additional variance requests because 303
of the size of the home they wish to construct and the setbacks that would be required. He 304
stated that while the property is unique and would not appear to be caused by the landowner, 305
it seems that additional work such as a title search would have been done at the time of 306
purchase and this improper subdivision would have been discovered at that time. He stated 307
that it is unfortunate that the landowner is in this situation, but a title search and title 308
insurance would have provided that clarity. He stated that if a large home is going to be built 309
in place of a small log cabin that would be very different than what existed and therefore he is 310
not persuaded that the criteria for a variance would be met, although he is sympathetic to the 311
landowner. 312
Foote referenced the reasonable use of the property and stated that if a similar home was 313
going to be constructed to what had been there before he would probably not have a problem 314
7
with that, but noted that if a large home is going to be built he did not know if that would be a 315
reasonable use. 316
317
Finke stated that the cleanest fix would be for one of the property owners to purchase the 318
other half of the lot, as the sole property owner could then build a home of their choice on the 319
lot, as the two halves together would be a buildable lot. He stated that if the Plat were 320
approved, the outlot would then be specified as unbuildable. He stated that if the property 321
remains in its current form staff could not approve a building permit for either property 322
owner. 323
324
Murrin stated that there are alternate options, as the applicant could purchase additional land 325
from the Scherer property or the two landowners of this parcel could work together under 326
common ownership. She stated that she would prefer those options be investigated before a 327
variance is considered. 328
329
Williams stated that Scherer had been shut down in the past for his request to subdivide and if 330
this variance is approved then that could set precedent. 331
332
Reid stated that the applicant bought property with a house on it with the belief that a new 333
home could be built on that lot. She stated that although a title search and additional 334
measures could have been taken, not everyone goes through those steps. She stated that if the 335
property were one lot, the property would be conforming. She noted that the outlot will never 336
be built on and therefore the net impact is the same even though there are two owners. She 337
stated that if there had not been a house on the property in the past she would not be willing 338
to grant a variance, but because the property did have a house and the property was priced in 339
a manner which conveyed that a home could be built on it, she would be in favor of granting 340
a variance. She stated that while it would be great if an alternate option could be worked out, 341
she did not believe it is the business of the Planning Commission to get into that business. 342
343
Williams received confirmation that if the landowner was able to purchase the outlot, the lot 344
could then be built upon. 345
346
Finke explained that the property was joined together prior to 1984 and therefore the lot is 347
one lot which is conforming, but is currently under the ownership of two parties. 348
349
Murrin stated that the applicant should be able to go back through to the title company with 350
their title insurance to receive possible reimbursement. 351
352
Williams stated that a homeowner should review the issue further if their plan is to purchase 353
the property with the intent of demolishing the home and building a new home and did not 354
believe that this would justify a variance. 355
356
Motion by Williams, seconded by Murrin, to recommend denial of the variance request for 357
the reasons stated. Motion failed 3-3 (Reid, White and Albers opposed). (Absent: Nolan) 358
359
Motion by White, seconded by Albers, to recommend approval of the variance request 360
subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Motion fails 3-3 (Murrin, Williams and 361
Foote opposed). (Absent: Nolan) 362
363
Williams asked if the Commission should still provide input on the Preliminary Plat, absent 364
the variance. 365
Finke stated that staff thought about that as well, but ultimately it was determined that the 366
Preliminary Plat could not move forward without the variance. 367
8
Foote stated that his biggest complaint is the size, as it is unknown what would be built by the 368
applicant. He stated that if the applicant were going to keep the same footprint as the former 369
home he would not have a problem with that. 370
371
Williams stated that the Preliminary Plat was within the packet that shows the subdivision of 372
the lot. He reviewed the criteria for a Preliminary Plat and stated that some of those criteria 373
are still not met even if a variance were issued. 374
375
Murrin stated that the size is the sticking point. She stated that if the item were approved by 376
the Council she would think that a size limit would need to be placed on the footprint of the 377
home as the lot size would be smaller than a typical rural residential lot. 378
379
Foote stated that if there is an existing house that burns down you are always allowed to 380
rebuild within the same footprint. 381
382
Williams asked if this is a premature Preliminary Plat as the size of the home is not known. 383
384
Finke stated that is not necessarily true and noted that a maximum size of the home could be 385
specified. 386
387
Murrin stated that it is difficult to determine if this would change the character as it is 388
unknown what the size of the home would be compared to the home that previously existed. 389
390
Reid noted that any house would change the character of the area simply because you built. 391
392
Williams questioned if Foote would be willing to change his vote on the variance if a size 393
limit was placed on the new home equal to what the original home had been. 394
395
Reid noted that would be very small. 396
397
Foote stated that this lot is half the size of a conforming lot. 398
399
Albers stated that as long as the home meets the setback requirements he did not think the 400
size of the home would make a difference. He received confirmation that there were multiple 401
structures on the lot at one time and perhaps those sizes could be combined for a total 402
footprint. 403
404
White agreed that if the setback requirements and no further variance requests were needed 405
she would not necessarily care about the size of the home. 406
407
Foote stated that he would support the variance if the footprint of the new house is no bigger 408
than the previous footprint. 409
410
Reid stated that she would not necessarily be in favor of that because of the small size 411
limitation. 412
413
Motion by Reid, seconded by Albers, to recommend approval of the variance request 414
subject to the conditions noted in the staff report and with the added condition limiting the 415
footprint of the house to the size of the structures previously on the property. Motion fails 3-416
3 (Murrin, Williams and Foote opposed). (Absent: Nolan) 417
7. Brian Etzel – 2942 Lakeshore Avenue – Variance from Required 30 foot Setback to 418
Expand Deck 419
White recused herself from this discussion as the property owner is her neighbor. 420
9
Finke presented a request from the applicant for a variance from the required 30-foot setback 421
to expand an existing deck. He displayed an aerial photograph of the property and described 422
the applicant’s plan to extend the deck to meet with the existing portion of the deck. He 423
explained that this would be a variance from the side setback to Balsam from 30 feet to 12 424
feet. He stated that none of the current features meet the 30-foot setback. He stated that the 425
lot is also nonconforming and explained that the existing street, Balsam, is off center to the 426
north and therefore the front appears to be setback more than other properties. He noted that 427
setback is not met either because the setback is calculated from the right-of-way. He stated 428
that if the road were to be expanded in the future it would be logical to expand to the south 429
because the road is off center. He noted that 60 foot of right-of-way while relatively standard 430
in most neighborhoods, it is unique in the Independence Beach area as some of those streets 431
have 40-foot right-of-ways. He stated that the deck expansion would not increase the 432
nonconformance of the property, it would simply add to the linear calculation. He stated that 433
if the Commission finds that the variance criteria are met, staff suggested a number of 434
conditions of approval. He stated that the hardcover for the lot is not in conformance and 435
noted that the deck would be built over some existing plastic material. He noted that the 436
plastic material could be removed in order to reduce the hardcover of the site. 437
438
Williams asked for additional information on the dimensions of the deck. 439
440
Finke provided the additional calculations for the deck. He clarified that neither the house, 441
nor the deck meets the setback requirement along Balsam and advised that the setback along 442
Lakeshore Avenue is met. 443
444
Murrin received confirmation that the deck would simply be made longer. 445
446
Brian Etzel, the applicant, stated that he was present to address any questions. He stated that 447
he purchased the home in 1986 and there was a three-season porch, which he remodeled into 448
a four-season porch. He stated that he would be amenable to working with City staff to 449
reduce the hardcover if needed. 450
451
Murrin questioned if the homeowner would get rid of the existing deck or keep the existing 452
deck. 453
454
Etzel stated that he would keep the existing deck, although replacing the lumber, and would 455
simply be extending the deck to wrap around. 456
457
Motion by Foote, seconded by Williams, to recommend approval of the 30-foot setback 458
variance request for Brian Etzel for the property located at 2942 Lakeshore Avenue based 459
upon the findings noted in the staff report and subject to the conditions recommended by 460
staff. Motion approved unanimously. (Absent: Nolan) 461
462
White rejoined the Commission. 463
464
8. Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the City Code Related to 465
Setbacks from Upland Wetland Buffers 466
467
Finke stated that this proposed amendment was considered before the Commission the 468
previous month, which would reduce the setback to a wetland for a deck from 15 feet to five 469
feet and the Commission recommended denial. He stated that the residents were interested in 470
alternate options and one of those options would be to reduce the setback from 15 feet to ten 471
feet rather than five feet. He asked if the Commission would be in support of this proposal. 472
473
10
Reid stated that when the 15-foot setback was set she believed that staff reviewed the 474
requirements of other cities. 475
476
Finke stated that staff did review the requirements of another city that used a wetland 477
specialist that determined that more of a setback assisted the wetland. 478
479
Reid opened the public hearing 8:38 p.m. 480
481
Charles Morris stated that he lives in the Enclave development and submitted the original 482
proposal. He stated that many of the homes in that development are laid out in a manner, 483
which would make it very difficult to construct a deck because of the location of the 484
wetlands. He stated that many of the residents would like a little more leniency, noting that 485
he would simply need two additional feet for the deck he would like to build. He stated that 486
the homeowners are not attempting to construct grandiose decks but simply a deck that 487
attaches to their home and their families could enjoy. He stated that for his property the 488
relation to the wetland is angled and if he had an additional two feet he could make the deck 489
more of a square and could simply fit his grill, patio set and some space for eight to ten 490
people. 491
492
White asked how the issue of decks was related to the homeowner when they purchased their 493
home. 494
495
Morris stated that Lennar did not go into the building requirements and deferred to the City 496
for any specifics regarding to building code conformance. He stated that the only 497
requirement from Lennar was that the deck would be submitted to them for aesthetic review. 498
499
Reid asked if the builder normally builds the deck as well. 500
501
Morris replied that it not the case. 502
503
Reid asked if all the homeowners then build their own decks. 504
505
Morris stated that he could not speak for everyone but noted that he did not receive an offer 506
or option for them to build his deck. 507
508
Reid stated that she did look at the development and some of them had decks. 509
510
Morris stated that he purchased his home two years ago and there was no option to include a 511
deck. He stated that the builder was not even willing to place the strip on the home to start 512
the deck. He noted that he was told that he would have to submit an application to Lennar 513
showing what he proposed to ensure that the deck would fit the design guidance and that the 514
permit process would go through the City. 515
516
Foote questioned how far the setback would be if the homeowner were to build the deck as he 517
desired. 518
519
Morris stated that the setback from his deck would be 13 feet as desired. He stated that ten 520
feet would be sufficient for himself, but noted that will not correct the issue of all the 521
homeowners in the development as the setback to the wetland is different for the different 522
homes. He stated that perhaps the residents and City can work together to find a setback that 523
would work for both the City and those in the development that would like to have a deck to 524
fully enjoy their property. 525
526
11
Kristin Chapman, 1910 Iroquois Drive, stated that one of the benefits of Medina is its natural 527
resources. She stated that she called the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to find out 528
additional information on setbacks, noting that there are minimal and optimal requirements. 529
She stated that the City has done a lot to be minimal rather than optimal and those changes 530
erode the natural resources that they are attempting to protect. She stated that while this may 531
not be in the interest of some homeowners, it is important to protect the natural resources. 532
533
Williams asked what the optimal setbacks would be. 534
535
Chapman stated that she did not receive that information as the staff person was going to get 536
back to her the following day. 537
538
Foote stated that he was not present at the meeting the previous month and questioned what 539
the Commission had decided. 540
541
Reid stated that the Commission recommended denial of the request. She stated that this 542
issue was discussed when the Enclave development was reviewed because of this purpose. 543
544
Murrin stated that when the Commission spoke with Kyle the previous month he had stated 545
that Lennar did tell him about the setback requirement noting that while some homeowners 546
were not informed, others were. 547
548
Chapman stated that it is the responsibility of the buyer to known their rights beforehand if 549
they plan to build a deck onto a property when they are buying the home. 550
551
Reid closed the public hearing at 8:49 p.m. 552
553
White stated that enforceability would also be an issue as an open deck could then transition 554
into a three season or four-season porch. 555
556
Albers stated that if the setback is reduced then the concern would be that builders would 557
build the homes even further towards the setback. 558
559
Reid stated that perhaps these homes were priced the way they were because of the 560
knowledge that it would be difficult to construct decks. 561
562
Finke provided additional information on the vegetative wetland buffer requirements of the 563
City, which range in 20 to 50 feet, and noted that there is an additional five-foot setback for 564
accessory structures and 15 feet for the principle structure. 565
566
Williams asked the rational to allow a patio to go against the buffer but not a deck. 567
568
Finke stated that the thought was that the purpose of the setback, not the buffer, is to reduce 569
the likelihood that there would be a violation in the buffer area. He stated that the wetland 570
buffer easement is fairly restrictive on what can be done. 571
572
Reid asked and received confirmation that you do not have to pull a permit for a patio while 573
you do need a permit to construct a deck. 574
575
Albers asked and received confirmation that a permit would be necessary to change a deck to 576
a three-season porch. 577
578
12
Williams stated that while the setback is an arbitrary line that the City draws, they drew the 579
line at 15 feet, and residents of Lennar should have been made aware of the issue when they 580
purchased their home. He stated that if they were not told, they should take that up with 581
Lennar. 582
583
Murrin stated that she also feels that it is important to preserve the greenspace in Medina as 584
there is more and more pressure for development. She stated that the Commission has only 585
heard from two people, one last week and one the previous month, so perhaps the issue is not 586
as important as it is being made to seem to those other people. She stated that perhaps a 587
variance request should be made by the residents so that a decision could be made on a case 588
by case basis rather than applying a standard across the board. 589
590
Reid stated that perhaps she would be willing to decrease the setback by a few feet, but she 591
definitely would not want covered decks. 592
593
Albers stated that he would be more comfortable with each individual coming forward rather 594
than applying a lesser standard across the board. 595
596
Reid asked how residents would even gain a variance for a deck. 597
598
Finke agreed that it would be difficult to obtain a variance for a deck. 599
600
Motion by Williams, seconded by Murrin, to recommend denial of an Ordinance 601
amendment to Chapter 8 of the City Code related to setbacks from upland wetland buffers. 602
Motion approved 5-1 (Reid opposed). (Absent: Nolan) 603
604
Reid stated that she would be comfortable with a 12 or 13-foot setback and thinks it would be 605
difficult for residents to obtain a variance for a deck, which is why she opposed the vote. 606
607
9. Council Meeting Schedule 608
609
Finke advised that the Council will be meeting on August 18th and Williams volunteered to 610
attend. 611
612
10. Adjourn 613
614
Motion by White, seconded by Murrin, to adjourn the meeting at 9:02 p.m. Motion carried 615
unanimously. 616
3 Rivers Church Page 1 of 4 September 8, 2015
Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner
DATE: September 2, 2015
MEETING: September 8, 2015 Planning Commission
SUBJ: 3 Rivers Church–Conditional Use Permit – 52 Hamel Road – Public Hearing
Summary of Request
3 Rivers Church has requested a conditional use permit to operate in an existing office building
at 52 Hamel Road. The applicant proposes to office within the existing office space and also to
assemble within an existing gathering space in the subject property.
No improvements are proposed to accommodate the use, and the applicant proposes to use the
existing building as-is. As such, this review will not cover common matters such as building
dimensions, setbacks, building materials, landscaping and the like.
The subject property is zoned Uptown Hamel-2, in which religious institutions are an allowed
conditional use. Surrounding uses are predominantly commercial, with offices to the east and
west and Inn Kahoots and the American Legion to the south. Railroad right-of-way is located to
the north at the bottom of a steep slope. An aerial of the site can be found below.
3 Rivers Church Page 2 of 4 September 8, 2015
Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission Meeting
Analysis
The applicant proposes to rent some of the existing office space at the property for their offices
and to assemble in the “multi-purpose room” for services. These services are proposed to occur
outside of the hours of operation of JT Miller, who occupies the remaining office space in the
building.
The maximum occupancy of the room proposed for assembly is 60. Staff believes the scale of
the proposed use (especially considered separate from the primary office use of the site) will not
introduce land use or transportation concerns.
The Building Official has requested a “code analysis” to confirm if a second direct exit is
required to be provided.
Parking
City code would require 1 parking space per 3 occupants. This would result in 20 required off-
street parking spaces for the assembly use. There is area for 17 off-street parking spaces on the
property, which is slightly less than would be required based on the maximum occupancy of the
room, let alone the remaining office space within the building.
The Uptown Hamel zoning districts do permit some flexibility from off-street parking
requirements. According to Section 834.1.07, Subd 2. (a), “Flexibility in the number of required
off-street parking spaces and loading facilities is allowed in the Uptown Hamel-1 district
because: 1) many parcels were developed prior to enactment of parking and loading
requirements; 2) some parcels are small; 3) some parcels have little open space; and 4) there is a
need to retain continuity of buildings fronting on Hamel Road and in the future on Sioux Drive,
and there is a preference for “infill” on Hamel Road to be buildings, not parking lots or
structures. In providing this flexibility, the city will consider the use and need for parking, the
amount of off-street parking that is being provided, the amount of nearby on-street parking, any
nearby public parking lots, peak parking demands for the use, joint use of parking facilities, and
other relevant factors. In granting a parking reduction, concern for the overall benefits to the
Uptown Hamel district will be considered as well as use and enjoyment of adjacent properties
and economic impacts.”
The applicant proposes to only have larger assemblies outside of the operating hours of the office
on the site. As a result, staff believes it is reasonable to not consider the parking needs of the
office and the assembly use simultaneously. While the site does have three fewer off-street
parking spaces than would be required for the assembly use, staff believes this amount is
reasonable based on the flexibility allowed in Uptown Hamel. There are three parking spaces
along Hamel Road on the adjacent site to each side and an addition three spaces across Hamel
Road. The public parking lot on Mill Drive is also within 800 feet.
Specific CUP Standards
The Uptown Hamel zoning districts establish the following specific criteria for religious
institutions:
i) Shared parking options shall be considered when a proposed expansion requires
more off-street parking.
3 Rivers Church Page 3 of 4 September 8, 2015
Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission Meeting
ii) The site plan shall provide for adequate parking and traffic circulation including a
plan for formation and movement of a funeral procession.
As noted above, the applicant is essentially proposing shared parking by only assembling in non-
office hours. Staff believes the applicant has submitted sufficient information related to parking
and traffic circulation based on the reduced scale of the proposed use.
CUP Review Criteria
Section 825.39 of the City Code states that the City shall consider the following matters when
reviewing CUPs, in addition to the “effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals,
and general welfare.” Staff has provided a potential finding behind each criterion.
That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the immediate vicinity.
Staff does not believe the proposed use will have negative impacts on surrounding
property or owners. The proposed use is an allowed conditional use in the district.
That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly
development of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area.
Staff does not believe the proposed use will impede surrounding development.
That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities have been or
are being provided.
Staff does not believe the proposed use changes the utility or transportation impact of
the property.
That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking
and loading space to serve the proposed use.
As noted above, while the site does not include the required amount of off-street
parking, flexibility is permitted in Uptown Hamel area. Staff recommends a condition
that large assemblies occur outside of regular office hours so that the uses in the
building can share parking. With this arrangement and existing on-street parking,
staff believes adequate parking is available.
That adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor,
fumes, dust, noise and vibration, so that none of these will constitute a nuisance, and to
control lighted signs and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring
properties will result.
Staff does not believe that the proposed use will introduce any of these concerns.
The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of
the City and to the existing land use.
Staff does not believe the proposed use will have negative impacts on surrounding
property or owners. The proposed use is an allowed conditional use in the district.
3 Rivers Church Page 4 of 4 September 8, 2015
Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission Meeting
The use is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the purposes of the zoning
district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use.
The proposed use is an allowed conditional use in the district.
The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City.
Staff does not believe the proposed use conflicts with the policies of the City.
The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion.
Staff does not believe the proposed use will cause traffic concerns, especially with the
limitations proposed by the applicant.
Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare or
general unsightliness.
Staff does not believe that the proposed use will introduce any of these concerns.
The developer shall submit a time schedule for completion of the project.
The applicant proposes to commence the use immediately upon approval.
The developer shall provide proof of ownership of the property to the Zoning Officer.
The owner of the property is a co-applicant and proposes to lease the space to 3
Rivers Church.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the following conditions:
1. Assemblies greater than 10 people shall not occur during business hours of the
primary office use operating on the property.
2. Assemblies shall not exceed 60 people, except larger special events shall be
permitted no more than four times per year with prior approval of a Special
Event permit and only if consistent with building code requirements.
3. The Applicant shall implement active measures to encourage parking within off-
street parking locations.
4. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the Building Official.
5. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the
City for the cost of reviewing the conditional use permit.
Attachments
1. List of Document
2. Building Official Comments
3. Applicant Narrative
4. Existing site plan
5. Existing floor plan
Project: LR‐15‐163 – 3 Rivers Church CUP The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 8/13/20158/13/20153 Application Y Fee 8/13/20158/13/20151 Fee Y $2000 Mailing Labels 8/13/20158/12/20155 MailingLabels Y Narrative 8/13/2015N/A 1 Narrative Y Plan Set 8/13/2015Varies 6 Plans Y Survey; Site Plans; Floor Plans Driveway Easement 8/13/20156/25/20026 Driveway Easement Y Includes plat resolution Parking Agreement 8/13/20151/24/20116 Parking Agreement Y Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Engineering Comments 8‐20‐2015 1 EngComments‐08‐20‐2015 Legal Comments 8‐24‐2015 1 LegalComments‐08‐24‐2015 Building Official Comments 9‐1‐2015 1 BuildingComments‐09‐01‐2015 Public Comments
1111 AUG 1 3 2015
J.T. MILLER COMPLY, INC,
52 i-i..A\HA. ROAD, PO Jk)X 218, HAUL 11'1N 55:11.0-962,5
8(8).328.1.5.1. www.itmillcreompany.com
We are currently renting office space to 3 Rivers Church and are requesting
a conditional use permit for the church to use our multi -use room on the et
floor for their Sunday services.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Daniel Miller
Vice President
0.4/.=/
FINANCIAL SERVICES — SINCE 1926
OFFICE
BUILDING
fr,, . , WOODED
APPROXIMATE
SITE BOUNDARY -
EASEM ENT
ACCESS
ASILE
I
r
I
I
I
I
HA EL /ROAD
r
I
I
r
I
TRANSFORMER
I
VACANT
PA RCEL
m
cc
scale: I - asq
tirr . r. F-Lo9r L egis-ri ,M
� %glal!o
p
to,tc.,wMP
01.
tlIRJ .-.
14,1514 _
?'15
0
If
PervivAlo
`•Taal'
2 M4,I1J NA* rLMM.l.. CI:xL --A—
VE
A U G 1 3 2015
O
O
D
a
O
a
J.T. MIRer Ins&:rarme
Hamei, MN
CODE ANALYSIS;
TIPS PROJECT IS TO r,EMOOEL AN EXISTING 53 X 100 FOOT MA..S^M.Y BUILDING WITH STEEL
JOB, SINGLE SPAN, ROOF DECK WITH BOTTOM OF JOISTS AT 20' +/-. THE EXISTING
BULDING HAS BEEN USED AS OFF CE AND MANUTACTURIN G FACILITY. THE FRONT OF THE
EX SiINNG BUILDING HAS A TWO STORY WOOD FRAMED AREA WITHINTI IE MASONRY BUILDING.
THE FRONT OFFICE AREA 15 36 FEET DEEP iX SE) AND THE UPPER LEVEL IS USED TOR
OFFICE OVERFLOW AND STORAGE. THE !BUILDING HAS A SPRINKLER SYSTEM FOIL FIRE
PROTECTION.
REMODELLING OF THE BUILDING WILL ENLARGE E OFFICE FUNCTION AND LEAVE ABOUT
1511 SQUARE FEET REMAINING UNFINISHED MD DESIGNATED OFFICE STORAGE THE OFFICE
PORTION WILL BE EXPANDED WITH 3000 SQUARE FEET ON EACH FLOOR. A 1000 SQ)IARE
FOOT SPACE WILL BE A FINISHED FU LI HFII:HT SPAM TO BE USED AS A MULTI PURPOSE
MEETING SPACE
OCCUPANCY;
THE TOTAL BUILDING IS 5800 SQ FT. (GROSS EX EI'JOR MEASUREMENT)
5'OFFICE - (1 ST -2644, END 2954) 5599 SQ FT
(INCLUDES STAIR, BRKRM, TOILETS AND MECH SPACE)
A -ASSEMBLY - MULTI PURPOSE AND LOBBY 1643 SQ. FT.
S -STORAGE 1.550 SQFT
TOTAL AREA 8791 SQFT
IBC TABLE 503
ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA VB; 2 FLOORS, 9,000 SQ FT + INCREASES
CONST TYPE; V8, IBC TABLE 601; CONST TYPE VP
FRET. WALLS; MASONRY WALLS . STEEL FRAME, JETS. DECK 0• FIRE RATING
INTERIOR WOOD FRAME BEARING WALLS: 0- FIRE RATING
INTERIOR WOOD FRAME NON BEARING WALLS; 0- FIRE RATING
FLOOR [MIST; WOOD FRAMING AND JOISTS; 0- FIRE RATING
FIRE PROTECTION;
THE BUILDING WILL HAVE FULL FIRE PROTECTION SPRINKLER SYSTEM. THE FRONT
OFFICE PORTION WAS CONSTRUCTED WITH 2X4 FLOOR TRUSSES AND A SUSPENDED CEILING.
THIS AREA WILL HAVE ADDED TO IT UPTURNED SPRINKLER HEADS ABOVE THE SUSPENDED
CEILING.
OCCUPANT LOAD; IBC TABLE 1004.1.1
OFFICE 0 1/100 SQ FT 5596 SQ FT (1ST -2644, END 2954) = 56 OCCUPANTS
REDUCTION NOT T/."EN FOR TOILETS OR MECHANICAL SPACE
ASSEMBLY MULTI PURPOSE N" 1 /15 SQ FT; (NET 900 SQ FT) - SO OCCUPANTS
ASSEMBLY LOBBY 0 1/15 SQ!T; (NET 4i.0 SQFT) • 28 OCCUPANTS
STORAGE 1/500 (1550 SQ. FT.)- 4 OCCUPANTS
TOTAL . 148 OCCUPANTS
EXITS REQUIRED; I4BOCCUPANTS
IBC 1015. NUMBER OF EXITS REWIRE TWO EXIT
IBC 1016, TRAVEL DISTANCE: SPRINKIERED B OCCUPANCY 3DO FEET
IBC 1019.2, SECOND LEVEL OCCUPANTS ALLOWS ONE FXIT. EXIT TRAVEL DISTANCE
REQUIRES TWO EXITS. TWO EXITS PROVIDED.
ASSEMBLY ROOM REQUIRES TWO EXITS
BC 1005.1 (.15 X 160) = 24" EXIT WIDTH REQUIRED.
TOILET FACILITIES: TOTAL 295 OCCUPANTS
AREA 0CC
BUSINESS 5598
01/100 56
ASSEMBLY 1320 (NE')
01/15 44+44
WAREHOUSE 1830
41/500 4
WC LUV
2.12 1.2
.55+.68 .44
.04
TOTAL a 3.19 WC
PROVIDED:
ENTRY LEVEL -PROVIDE& SEPARATE MENS AND WOMEiNS ACCESSIBLE TOILET ROOMS
2 WC 2 LAV
SECOND LEVEL -PROVIDED: SEPARATE MENS AND WOMENS ACCESSIBLE TOILET ROOMS
2 WC , " URINAL 2 LAV
FIRE PROTECTION; SIC 903.E.3 BUILDING < 12,000 SQ FT
04
1.68 LAV
AOCSSIBILrTY: BUILDING iS ACCESSIBLE,
BC 1104.4, EXCEPTION 1; SECOND LEVEL OF 2950 SQUARE FEET (c3000 SQ FT)
IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE ACCESSIBLE LULA (ELEVATOR) IS BEING PROVIDED.
V CORM
Cole. -r}
Medne
. 3z kiNMSL Ra.
ly5.A7
ewe
ti.,hne4.
9l�•
Log LOLL
x �y
l.n: cwf .a'44'
:ewl6'.r sre+Iln
uwn.
L.I" L. '
Dee7h7w7
b
P
.
GMva +ede l:u
1;,.w
TrF
F...,Rq .
0101AR7o�,
New Noce
vfrneva
1.744=-
.r 11 I LL JI ILL I
Al MAIN FLOOR PLAN 5c9 % S •Lic.
A2 SECOND FLOOR PLAN
A3 BUILDING SECTIONS
A4 MAIN FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN
A5 SECOND FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN
A6 CROSS SECTIONS, INTERIOR ELEVATIONS
AND DETAILS
I
1
J
—T
53d,414
0
'-4
8
-za-zsw'-
�P
N1
L�3T17L•y,t4'L.�.�1�
- MINIMUM -
24 HOUR NOTICE ON
ALL I,USPEOTIONS
=,1,Zd-t-ANJ t.
eT /14a.q w�.y 66 TF�.T �� 5//9/%.. CG�r.T. c.
Y 4 rrv, a..,
141 ZMPE11E,J dN &re plil 15 -NK51-1 Prom D ING+ 15•(!)') I-I1'fv-c]°:
rcogF I4. 1/1&/1156 •
f
i TT py± r LL.
.�,..OLIT1ON NOTES -------------P ..` ' ,, . \
oS TRACTO ARE REQUIRED TO VISIT THE SITE PRIOR TO BIDDING. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL PLANS 1L11CLIIE'i 7
... LABLE FOR EACH CONTRACTOR. C4
.
OWNER SNAIL BF RESPONSIBLE FOR MOVING AND STORING FURNITURE. •, . -
ALL ITEMS AND MATERIAL BEING REMOVED PUKING DEMOLITION WILL SEINE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR. \ '4 . - \
ANY ITEM THE OWNER WANTS TO KEEP WILL BE DETERMINED PRIOR TO DEMOLITION. ti'A' -.. `
4. ALL DOORS, FRAMES, CABINETS ETC, TO BE SAVED AND FEUDED.
S. GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE ALL DEMOLTION MATERIAL FROM THE SITE AND DISPOSE OF IT PROPERLY AND ��_ \ '
IRIAI IV
101&
1
31
` Ayr ot
I \
Lt-OrA4r
( III
✓ 'I P1 sJ}
W4 I
TS . .
MUL'(I-L155 1$11
1O1
a
10 hjg4461,-
0
Iv -6.146A f4 --f r '-i� -
ri b
�IF'r IF IT .
n\ .\
I I
'a
l
j I- I I I I
Lr
I
ji 1 1 IEl
'-` tor_wes Y 1pls.Ma
R+ Go f
ELKu DUU'A M Io . n -•
+1! Id'
ii -I el i"-15`--1I
7.
,-a
lo�
ktof Rh
Il
JA -g 101 I\ 3
-1140.
JII
V
rIP6.5I _ Z66,11N61$
O I?LNEu.�CAA..86!N '1
L • Ga`+pLIAI.fl
z4.10
•
'f
T
10
IaLtl
loo F5
1
100
N
!Doc.
(M1AIki fVDOI- rus'k' vv41'U
GENERAL NOTES
1. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. DIMENSIONS TARE PRECEDENCE OVER
SCALE ON CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS.
2. ALL WALLS SHALL EXTEND TO DECK AND OR STRUCTURE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
3. ALL WALL TYPES INDICATE BASE MATERIAL ONLY, REFER TO FINISH SCHEDULE FOR FINISHES.
4. ALL EXTERIOR WALL AND ROOF PENETRATIONS SHALL BE SEALED.
5. ML EXPOSED SURFACES SHALL BE FINISHED EXCEPT BEDCK WALLS IN STORAGE ROOM.
6. PROVIDE 22 BLOCKING (OR LARGER IF NECESSARY) FOR ALL WALL MOUNTED HARDWARE AND CABINETS.
COORDINATE THE LOCATION OF MITRE BLOCKING WITH THE INSTALLATION GUIDEUNE FOR THAT
PRODUCT.
7. ALL WOOD PROVIDED ON THE JOB SHALL BE FIRE RETARDANT TREATED.
B. THE STAIRS ARE TO RECEIVE HANDRAILS ON BOTH SIDES.
9, FIELD VERIFY, ALL MILLWORK OPENINGS.
10. REUSE EXISTING SCUD WOOD DOORS AND METAL FRAMES WHERE POSSIBLE
.� 611,Yrto,no r-TR.IRa IR*JcC a botFrTTf LlW6N Tome TSN61 I N1NFnnMTn RANn6Rfit SFT FORT
1
_..1.o13Pi/ P12$A1+1=41240.
I-os
nA
t'
Pklf' j
T21- 1
r -1 - - -
-Q
, \ `, \. \
I 1
11
1I
11
Gw-1r. R T
Ito 11
1
ts,
to
NI0wS
10+e
Au -
S=3
- Io
1
S.
14. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL PAY FOR LABOR, MATERMLS,
EQUIPMENT, CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT, MACHINERY, TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER FAOUTIES AND
SERVICES NECESSARY FOR THE PROJECT IN A'UEN FREE' CONDmON. EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT TO ALL
BUILDING TRADES AND SUPPLIERS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO OWNER.
15. THE CONTRACTOR WARRANTS TO THE OWNER THAT ML MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT FURNISHED UNDER
THIS CONTRACT WILL BE NEW (UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND
CONTRACTOR) AND THAT ALL WORK WILL BE OF GOOD QUALITY, FREE FROM DEFECTS, AND FAULTS. R IS
UNDERSTOOD THAT WORK NOT 5O CONFORMING WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WHETHER DISCOVERED ATTHE
TIME OF INSTALLATION OR AFTER FINAL ACCEPTANCE IF REQUIRED BY THE OWNER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
RJRNISH SATISFACTORY AS TO THE KIND AND QUALITY OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT.
16. THE WARRANTIES AND GUARANTEES PROVIDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS SHALL BE IN ADDITION
TO AND NOT IN UMITATION OF ANY OTHER WARRANTY OF GUARANTY OR REMEDY REQUIRED BY LAW OR
THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.
17 mNrRAirne SHATAPPIY TVPIC.S CONSTRUCTION METHODS UNLESS NOTEDOTHEN/LSE AND SHALL
F
1
Ica"
%S
i.
3'x Lo IAn 1,1P1.4 C'iErlf °i
N1a0D pr-AMe..�
112.
how G } 67
-
GPrtte PACO-
1115
ME:.cI4 RM-
111
11
I &kr, ,a4* In -
-
aa ii..L, fik.02 1trlE-
YFxr-dGT4TE( �} alb o 1-15614. pm L' I..IG� 04 IL, Fir a-
I4.42-1I+'ro. 0N.E .L& tF.ln 1149 / .4.45, /F I'II%IM 1•1544÷, 94't
I -r
4.
rti
rILF.
115
7
l,lArflla6, M'
I Ito
20, VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL INFLOORCONDUIT AND DRAIN LINES PRIOR TO SAW CUTTING OFTHEIDOSFING
FLOOR. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT OF DAMAGED UHLmES, •Ar3.
21. VERIFY LOCATION OF DRAIN AND SUMP PIT FOR WLA ELEVATOR [ADD ALTERNATE 11 AND PROVIDE A
POSIINE SLOPE FOR ALL DRAINS EKCEPTAS NOTED. •
22. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL ELECTRICAL CONDUITS, PLUMBING LINES AND MECHANICAL PIPING SHALL
BY CONCEALED AND FRAMING SHALL BE ADEQUATE DIMENSION TD ACCOMPLISH THIS WITHOUT
UNNECESSARY CHANGES IN WALL PLANE.
73. ALL MANUFACTURED ARTICLES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE APPLIED, INSTALLED, CONNECTED,
ERECTED, CLEANED AND CONDITIONED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS WRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS
OR INSTRUCTIONS UNLESS HEREAFTER SPECIFIED TO THE CONTRARY.
24. COORDINATE SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL P0E-13'I SHAFT OPENINGS IN WALLS ANO FLOORS WITH MECH.,
ELEC. AND STRUCTURAL IF NEEDED. PROVIDE ALL REQUIRED LINTELS HEADERS, ETC. FOR OPENINGS _.
25. AU -SPRINKLER RELOCATION AND OR ADDMONAL HEADS REQURED ARE THE REsrosinRTLTIT or THE
CONTRACTOR AND SPRINKLER SUBCONTRACTOR, VERIFY IFTHEY NEED TO as SUBMITTED TO THE
sidelight to match existing windows, -
5. Replace existing ceiling tile panels in existing front office
Space with ( 2x2 Glacier style by USG J.
6. Relocate upper half of existing sprinkler pipe to be above
existing Mech. Room.
7. Office room 118 - Install wood paneling wainscot and chair rail on all
walls. Replace existing 2x2 ceiling tiles (USG Glacier style -verify with
•
I
•
ADD ALTERNATES
Fat. Install -a LU/LA Elevator as shown -See 1/A6 & 2/A6
. Extend west wall of Multi -Use room to existing north
wall and remove new north wall.
railing
LEGEND
a
1
I
1II
1
1
r4:
1
533 I'LL 3eL
441,-(e. 0+¢ eA.61PE
ni. M - 55 e ll:o.c.
I arr 617 ENT.. jl DE.
4" l kq'f II IAUL:pp.'SLTtAF1I9,
�JI 1,1104-
-.
rF '
M l:..$ru75t-lI>'G4
yi' cor $m. EA.SInI:
6IIt T IIho .
Cpp�e,.ME'f. ljI.IO .li oboe
1' L l e4s11. Mtr..-114*
Uld
0;41,1 4(4 . 1'3aa:+-
I ruF *
NGir, Il QL-
itut
C.
I�'(o u�+GA
• ap }
• -111 fs. MCGv.
I
H
9r"A • V^
2901 e , llp'o.(. (flo},I'ceri
EXISTING WALL
2,c snp
- - - EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED
Finish deck at front of building by adding an alum.
/qt
(42" finished height) on top of existing wall. Alum. door and Se3E
` •, L�r-
11 EXISTING DOOR & FRAME TO BE REMOVED
I AND RELOCATED
NEW WALL
NEW OR RELOCATED DOOR & FRAME
2
M
re
F
J d
log
-`\
Floryrrl
tai
I
N
zziI' 41
P- *UT �I rE P�r•rL
r-isA
-616p446
1
we
e ,*
5-20.1
=Ha-KM-.r7tl'W-3
J
4
.yA1—.
>
h
I J I.) l i l
U
z
z
0
u
cc
w
J_
2
9
i
Wealshire of Medina Page 1 of 3 September 8, 2015
Rezoning, Site Plan Review, Interim Use Permit Planning Commission Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner
DATE: September 2, 2015
MEETING: September 8, 2015 Planning Commission
SUBJ: Wealshire of Medina – Rezoning, Site Plan Review, Interim Use Permit –
PID 03-118-23-24-0003
Background
Earlier in the year, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed rezoning, site plan review
and interim use permit for the Wealshire of Medina at the northwest corner of Mohawk Drive
and Chippewa Road. The Commission recommended approval of the requests.
The request was for construction of a 171,392 s.f. one story, 150-resident memory care facility.
The applicant has subsequently altered the site plan and adjusted the layout of the proposed
structure. The size of the structure did not change significantly, but rather the location of the
structure on the lot. The applicant also proposes more surface parking and less underground
parking.
The updated layout increased the proposed wetland impacts from 23,086 square feet to 59,844
square feet. The applicant proposes to mitigate the wetlands on-site, which will result in a net
increase of wetlands because of the 2:1 replacement requirements.
The updated site plan shifts the building away from the western lot line, pushing it further to the
south. Staff does not believe the amended building layout significantly affect most of the aspects
of the initial review. The most significant change is the increased wetland impacts, which are
now proposed to be mitigated on-site.
However, staff wanted to present the updated site plan to the Planning Commission to see if it
has any effect on the earlier recommendation.
Updated Site Plan
The following table summarizes the requirements of the BP district and the proposed updated
site plan. The proposed construction appears to meet all of the dimensional standards, provided
a 70% opaque landscaping screen is provided along the north and west (residential zoning
districts).
Wealshire of Medina Page 2 of 3 September 8, 2015
Rezoning, Site Plan Review, Interim Use Permit Planning Commission Meeting
Business Park Requirement Proposed
Minimum Lot Area 3 acres 17.59 acres
Minimum Lot Width 200 feet 1413 feet
Minimum Lot Depth 200 feet 2608 feet
Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 feet 90 feet
Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback 30 feet 137 feet (west)
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 30 feet 75 feet (north)
Street Setback 50 feet 90 feet
Setback from Residential 100 feet; or 75 feet (w/ 70%
opaque landscaping)
75 feet
Minimum Parking Setbacks
Front Yard
Rear/Interior Side Yards
Residential
35 feet
20 feet
100 ft;or 60 (w/ 70% opaque)
35 feet
60 feet
60 feet
Maximum Impervious Surface 70% 23.6%
Planning Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at their February meeting. Following
discussion, the Commission recommended approval with the following conditions:
1) The applicant shall construct the improvements as displayed on the plans received by the
City 1/30/2015, except as modified herein.
2) This approval shall be valid for one calendar year for Phase I and three calendar years for
Phase II. The applicant may request a permit to construct Phase II within this time frame
without obtaining Site Plan Review approval.
3) This approval is contingent upon approval of a wetland replacement plan for wetland
impacts. As part of this review, the applicant shall examine means to reduce impacts and
implement those that are practical.
4) The applicant shall grant an additional 3 feet of right-of-way to the City as well as
easements over all public utility improvements.
5) The applicant shall meet the recommendations of the City Engineer dated 2/4/2015.
6) The applicant shall update the landscaping plan to identify landscaping for Phase II
consistent with City requirements but would not be required to be installed until
construction of Phase II takes place.
7) Upland buffers shall be established fully around all wetland areas, including required
vegetation, signage and easements.
8) If the applicant does not use the property south of the wetland for agriculture, the area
shall be vegetated and maintained in order to prevent erosion.
9) No tree planting has been required for the area south of the wetland. This area shall be
landscaped consistent with City requirements upon future development.
10) Plans shall be updated so that stormwater improvements are not located on top of public
sanitary sewer or water improvements.
11) In lieu of constructing improvements to Mohawk Drive and Chippewa Road to support
the proposed development, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City
related to proportionate contributions to future improvement projects.
Wealshire of Medina Page 3 of 3 September 8, 2015
Rezoning, Site Plan Review, Interim Use Permit Planning Commission Meeting
12) The applicant shall obtain necessary approvals and permits from the Elm Creek
Watershed, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of
Health, and other relevant agencies.
13) The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for
the cost of reviewing the site plan and other relevant documents.
14) Agricultural use of the property south of the wetland may be continued as an Interim Use
until the earliest of the following:
a. Subdivision of the subject property
b. Construction of any structure on the portion of the property south of the wetland
Attachments
1) Applicant Narrative
2) Updated site plan received by the City 8/11/2015
3) Plans received by the City 1/30/2015
January 9, 2015 (Initial Letter of October 15, 2014 has been revised)
TO: Medina Planning & Zoning Department
SUBJ: Amend future land use from low density residential to General Business
Property Identification Number: 03-118-23-24-0003
ECIEOVED
JAN - 9 2015
I am the President/CEO and founder of the Wealshire, LLC. Under my supervision, we specialize in the
construction and management of assisted living and dementia/Alzheimer's care facilities for seniors.
We built and opened the Wellstead of Rogers in 1999, which is a beautiful 162 resident dementia and
Alzheimer's care facility that also included 66 deluxe 1 and 2 bedroom apartments for senior general
assisted living and a spectacular 300 person banquet/conference center in Rogers, Minnesota. At 162
dementia beds, the Wellstead of Rogers was recognized as the largest senior dementia care facility in
the country. Of greater importance, In 2004/05 the Wellstead of Rogers earned the prestigious award
for being the best dementia/Alzheimer's care facility in the State of Minnesota, and within a year was
named the best senior dementia care facility in the United States. The Wellstead of Rogers is a
beautiful senior care campus which won numerous annual awards for stone and brick construction in
Minnesota. The exterior of the Wellstead of Rogers looks like a fine manicured country club, with
hundreds of trees, resident walking paths, a large gazebo and two water ponds with fountains. The
Wellstead of Rogers employed more than 300 well paid nursing, dietary and administrative type
employees. Against my wishes, the Wellstead of Rogers was sold in February of 2008 to a large senior
healthcare developer from Newton, MA.
Upon the sale of the Wellstead of Rogers, I immediately initiated research to purchase land to build
another spectacular senior dementia/Alzheimer's care facility in the Twin Cities, and in 2010 we broke
ground on the Wealshire of Bloomington, a beautiful 137 resident dementia/Alzheimer's senior care
facility in Bloomington, MN. The Wealshire of Bloomington was built in two phases, and the first phase
opened in August of 2011, which consisted of 56 senior dementia/Alzheimer's beds. Because of our
excellent reputation, this first phase of construction reached full resident occupancy in less than seven
(7) months. The second phase of construction, 81 resident beds, opened in September of 2013 and we
expect to reach full resident occupancy (137 resident beds) within the next ninety (90) days.
The Wealshire of Bloomington is rapidly becoming the "Gold Standard" for senior dementia/Alzheimer's
care in the State of Minnesota. The Wealshire more than replicates the beauty and attractiveness of the
Wellstead of Rogers. As you may have heard, the City of Bloomington is a very strict and demanding
community to build within, but they are extremely fair and reasonable. The Mayor of Bloomington, and
the other Principals of the City of Bloomington have indicated that our construction exceeded their
greatest expectations. We recommend and encourage you to contact both the City of Bloomington and
the City of Rogers to ascertain and confirm our high standards of construction excellence, in addition to
our desire to make our senior health care facilities look like prestigious golf country clubs. Our
neighbors in Bloomington are extremely pleased and very satisfied with our quality of construction and
the beauty we have brought to the neighborhood by building the Wealshire of Bloomington. The
Wealshire of Bloomington will employ more than 250 well paid employees at full capacity.
As President, CEO and founder of both the Wellstead of Rogers and the Wealshire of Bloomington, I
have more than 46 years of successful employment in the medical field. I initially worked for Baxter
Healthcare for 6 years in sales and sales management. Then I was President and CEO of Northern
Medical/Orthomet for approximately 22 years, and we designed, manufactured and sold orthopedic
implant products (total knees & total hips) throughout the USA, Europe, Asia and South America. Upon
the death of my father from Alzheimer's in November of 1996, I have spent the last 18 years dedicating
my life to improving the "Quality of Life" of individuals suffering some form of dementia.
My father and I were very close and he was possibly my best friend. Unfortunately, when my father was
78, he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's and he suffered from this devastating progressive disease for
approximately seven years. Unfortunately my father was never given the opportunity to live with pride
and dignity during his battles with Alzheimer's, which created extreme guilt on my part when my father
finally passed away. While in the casket, I took my father's hand and promised him I would do
something so others with this devastating disease could live with pride and dignity. I spent the next 2
years researching approximately 35 Alzheimer's care facilities throughout the USA, and then I put
together a business plan to build the Wellstead of Rogers. When we opened the Wellstead of Rogers on
August 15, 1999, my mother was our first resident, and she resided at the Wellstead until her death on
August 22, 2001. I am sure my commitment and dedication to improving the life of individuals with
dementia/Alzheimer's is pleasing to my parents, and the passion I share is evident in the quality of care
we provide our demented residents at the care facilities we build.
It has been said that each community has an obligation to provide quality senior care to the residents
that reside within their community. To this extent, we desire to build the Wealshire of Medina, which
would be a 150 resident dementia/Alzheimer's care facility, constructed in two phases. This facility
would be relatively similar to the facilities we have built in both Rogers and Bloomington. Our objective
is to commence construction in May of 2015, with a projected facility opening date of June 1, 2016. At
the request of the Principals of the City of Medina, we would possibly consider constructing a
reasonable number of general assisted living apartments for seniors, but this construction is not
included in our current developmental plans. We would include 150-200 beautiful trees on this
proposed site, with resident walking paths, water ponds with fountains, and underground parking for
our projected 250-300 employees.
Our initial objective for our proposed dementia and Alzheimer's facility development in Medina
consisted of our desire to purchase 11.0 acres (north section) of the combined 22.0 acreage on Mohawk
Drive. Unfortunately, this acreage was zoned low density residential, but the Planning Commission and
the Council approved the rezoning of this entire 22.0 site to General Business, which we are extremely
thankful and appreciative of. However, concerns were indicated by members of both groups to what
development might occur on the south end of this 22.0 site, which could possibly be unfavorable as a
result of this 11.0 acreage site also being rezoned as General Business.
We had assumed our purchase of the northern 11.0 acreage site would be more land than what we
would require to construct our proposed 150 resident dementia and Alzheimer's care facility. However,
due to the significant set -back developmental requirements, the associated wet land parcels on this
acreage, in addition to the required fire lane around the property, we were informed by the architect
that we could not construct our proposed development on this 11.0 acreage site.
Rather than attempting to request certain "variances" from the City of Medina, we thought it would be
best for us to also consider purchasing the southern 11.0 acreage, even though this would require a
substantial additional financial investment. We also wanted to minimize any concerns by the Planning
Commission and the Council to the future potential "unfavorable" development of this southern 11.0
acreage, which made this additional substantial financial investment to be justified and worthwhile.
At this time, and probably for at least the next 5-7 years, we do not have any sincere interest in
developing this southern 11.0 acreage unless the City of Medina approaches us to develop general
assisted living senior apartments on this site. Therefore, we would appreciate your assistance in
approving an "interim use permit" to enable this south 11.0 acreage to be utilized for agricultural
purposes as a means to assist in paying the annual property taxes on this southern 11.0 acreage.
We truly encourage all interested parties to review our Wealshire of Bloomington website
(wealshireofbloomington.com) and the Wellstead of Rogers website (wellsteadofrogers.com), and we
would also welcome the opportunity to provide anyone a tour of our prestigious Bloomington senior
care facility. We would appreciate your assistance and cooperation to make our proposed senior
development in Medina a reality. Please notify me if you have questions, or if I can be of greater
assistance. I promise and assure you we will construct a beautiful and prestigious senior care campus in
Medina.
Sincerely and God bless,
Thomas A. Wiskow
President/CEO
t -a-4441
10601 Lyndale Ave S. Bloomington, MN 55420
www.wealshireofbloomington.com
Tel - 952,345,1900 Fax - 952.345.1906
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
1-800-270-9495
UPDATED 8-11-2015
1 0 2015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or ca11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
Preliminary Plans
for
Wealshire of Medina
Medina, MN
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndale Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
Contact: Thomas Wiskow
Phone: 952-345-1900
Fax: 952-345-1906
Prepared by:
Westwood
Phone (920( 253-9495 910112th Street North, Suite 206
Fax (320) 2534737 St. Cloud, MN 50303
Tot Free (00012]0-94955495 weenvoodas.cnm
wmlwood Professional 5eMoss, Inc
Project number: 0004724.00
Contact: Robert J. Olson
Sheet List Table
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
1
Cover
2
Existing Conditions & Removal Plan
3
Site Plan — Overall
4
Site Plan — Phase 1
5
Grading Plan — Overall
6
Grading Plan — Phase 1
7
Utility Plan — Public Extension
8
Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Plan
9
Storm Sewer Plan
10
Erosion Control Plan
11
Details
12
Details
13
Details
14
Lighting Plan
15
Landscape Plan
16
Landscape Details J
Vicinity Map
(Not to Scale)
NO.
DATE
REVISION
SHEETS
1
01/29/15
REVISED PER CITY COMMENTS
ALL
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Preliminary Plans
for
Site, Grading, Utilities,
and SWPPP
for
Wealshire of Medina
Medina, MN
Date: 01/09/15 Sheet 1 of 16
00o4724CVF01.4,
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or co11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
EDGE/ OF
F Fl D
I CVV/IAvS 7h/,r) I I
WETLAND BOUNDARY
(TOP)
992_
993
994
.995
996
30' Rs ADWA
EASE ENT
EDGE OF
FARM FIELD (TYP)
BENCHMARK CHIPPEWA:ROAD� S89°23. E 740.1e
INN= 100008.
ROAt WAY
EASEMENT
30' ROADWAY
EASEMENT
RA 4hIvc ��Iv - ,.;
24- CAN
50' 100' 150'
r 91Y=98 s
Removal Legend
EXISTING
EXISTING
sw�
vs
pvc
PROPOSED
— — — PROPERTY LINE
SAW CUT PAVEMENT
REMOVAI S
\\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\\\
\\\%\\\\\\
Legal Description
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PER TITLE COMMITMENT NO. 514215
CURB & GUTTER
SANITARY SEWER
WATER MAIN
HYDRANT
STORM SEWER
GAS
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
TELEPHONE FIBER OPTIC
CABLE TELEVISION
RETAINING WALL
FENCE
CONCRETE
BITUMINOUS
BUILDING
TREE
LIGHT POLE
TRAFFIC SIGN
CONSTRUCTION BARRICADE
SOIL BORING LOCATION
TREE LINE
Parcel 1:
That part of the East 740 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter lying North of the South 684 feet thereof, Section 3, Township 118 North,
Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Parcel 2:
The South 684 feet of the East 740 feet of Southeast Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter of Section 3, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal
Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Surveyor's Notes
1.
0.
5.
6.
WITHINTHE SUBJECT PROPERTY LIES DETERMINED UTSIOE 0.2% ANNUAL
CHANCE rLOODPLAIIN) PER rEMACOMMMUNITY PANEL NUMBER27053001056,
TOTAL SITE GROSS AREA: 22.68 ACRES 1988,133 SO, FT.)
PROPERTY ADDRESS: UNASSIGNED
SUBJEC
Y IS
BEARINTSPSHOWNTARE BAYED UPONLTHEHRESIDENTIAL-URBAN
EN EPIN COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM, NAD 83, 1996
NO BUILDINGS EXIST ON THE SURVEYED PROPERTY.
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc,
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwaodps.corn
D®18ned: coo
Checked: BN
Drawls
Record Drawing by/date
ReWato.s
MONIER under tee Rws of WY of Masa
Robert J. D�
Rr
ome 01/29/15 sna= No. 45023
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndele Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
realshire of
[edina
diva, MN
Existing Conditions &
Removal Plan
13010 01/09/15
Shea! 2 OF 16
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or ca11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
10.00'
N
9 HOLEx PUTTING GREEN
(BY OTHERS)
20' FIRE LANE
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
STORMWATER \
POND
25' WETLAND BUFFER
(TYP.)
10' DRAINAGE &
UTLITIY EAASEMENT
10.00' I
1
//////////
10' DRAINAGE &
UuLITY EASEMENT
//7/ ////
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
PHASE I
\ ` FUTURE ADDITION \/
V FFE=998.50 / N/ \
;\ / N
v V / N
VPHASE 11/
y J l
/
DROP OFF STALLS
N
\ /\\ -',I 113. 0'
\/ .I
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=998.50
PHASE LINE
------------
N
/
EDGE OF
FARM FIELD
DRAINAGE &
UTILITY EASEMENT
WETLAND BOUNDARY
(TYP.)
II
ALI
rrIG
�i1
/1 I
/ I
I1
I 1
\ 1
I>
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
J
30' EXISTING
ROADWAY
EASEMENT
f13DRAINAGE &
UTILITY EASEMENT
0'I EXISTING
O DWAY EASEMENT
BREA
CHAIN
AWAY
30' EXISTING
R0 DWAY
EA EMENT
J"— 13' RAINAGE &
UTILTY EASEMENT
I �
Site Legend
FXISDNG PROPOSED
rcp
•
General Site Notes
PROPERTY LINE
LOT LINE
SETBACK LINE
EASEMENT LINE
CURB AND GUTTER
POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL
RETAINING WALL
FENCE
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
NORMAL DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS
TRANSFORMER
SITE LIGHTING
TRAFFIC SIGN
POWER POLE
BOLLARD / POST
DECIDUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
1. LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES AS
SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY
SITE CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO
EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND, THE
ENGINEER SHOULD BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY.
REFER TO BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR LOT BEARINGS, DIMENSIONS AND AREAS.
3. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB OR EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND
LOCATIONS OF EXITS, RAMPS, AND TRUCK DOCKS.
ALL CURB RADII ARE SHALL BE 3.0 FEET (TO FACE OF CURB) UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
6. ALL CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE 6612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS,
DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGGERS AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF
TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE
APPROVED BY THE CITY AND ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC
CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MNDOT STANDARDS.
8. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AND CONCRETE SECTIONS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
9. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN FULL ACCESS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING
CONSTRUCTION AND TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY
DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
10. SITE LIGHTING SHOWN ON PLAN IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO LIGHTING
PLAN PREPARED BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING DETAILS AND PHOTOMETRICS.
Site Development Summary
• EXISTING ZONING:
• PROPOSED ZONING:
• PROPERTY AREA:
RR—UR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL —URBAN RESERVE
BP — BUSINESS PARK
988,133 SF (22.68 AC)
• EXISTING PERVIOUS AREA: 961,303 SF (97.3%)
• EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 26,830 SF (2.7%)
• PROPOSED PERVIOUS AREA: 754,919 SF (76.4%)
• PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA: 233,214 SF (23.6%)
• BUILDING GROSS SIZE:
PHASE I:
LOWER LEVEL:
1ST FLOOR:
PHASE II:
LOWER LEVEL:
1ST FLOOR:
TOTAL:
29,922 SF
85,091 SF
4,375 SF
56,207 SF
175,595 SF
• BUILDING SETBACK PER CODE: 50'=FRONT
75=SIDE / 50'=SIDE TO ROW
75'=REAR
• PARKING SETBACK:
35=FRONT AND ROW
60'=SIDE AND REAR
• BEDS:
PHASE I: 84 BEDS
PHASE II: 66 BEDS
TOTAL: 150 BEDS
• PARKING RATIO REQUIREMENT — CITY OF MEDINA
RETAIL/OFFIEF: 1 SPACE / 3 RFDS
TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED: 50 SPACES
• PARKING PROVIDED
SURFACE:
ADA
REGULAR
DROP OFF
GARAGE:
ADA
REGULAR
TOTAL
6 STALLS
51 STALLS
4 STALLS
3 STALLS
31 STALLS
95 STALLS
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
370112th Street North, Suite 206
St Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwoodps.cam
Daianed:
Checked:
Drawls
Record Drawing by/date:
MO
010
IA
emawI001 2. w 22 eve nu warped by m undo my
myoufd00 /my MOM= ®dm ate. Inc• 1. roe nOH oeavourr
S Mimeo
Robert J. O�
Dee 01/29/15 — rro 45023
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndele Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
Wealshire of
Medina
Medina, MN
Site Plan - Overall
BENCHMARK CHIPPEWA ROAD
TNH 1000.08
0' 50' 100' 150'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
oats 01/09/15
Si— 3 OP 16
00067246PF0tde9
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or ca11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
Site Legend
FXISDNG
PROPOSED MIRE
Westwood
10'
20' FIRE LANE
DRAINAGE &
UTILITY EASEMENT
RETAINING WALL
GAZEBO
xl 8' HIGH
METAL FENCE
(TYP)
9 —HOLE
PUTTING GREEN �/ \
(BY OTHERS)
//
0'
8' HIGH
ETAL FENCE
(TYP)
I \\
DRAINAGE &
UTILITY EASEMENT
PARKING
SETBACK `yy
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
// /\./
///
SECURED
COURTYARD
BUILDIN
\ SETBACK
I I\
/
/
8' HIGH
METAL FENCE
(TOP)
/
///////
PROPOSED BUILDING
FEE -995.50
////
/
/ / / /
/
/7
/
///
/
/
/
/
/
// j
/ /
///////:
Y /
/
SECURED
COURTYARD
8' HIGH
METAL FENCE
(TSP)
////
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
//////////
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
///
ADMIN
/
/
/
///////// /
/
n
/
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=998.50
/
/ \
> \
/
7 /
//
7/
/
h
/
/
//
/
/
/
/
UNDERGROUND
GARAGE ENTRANCE
//!////�//C/
5
DROP OFF STALLS
/—
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE-998.50
/
/\
2 N
2
V
I 9' I
MONUMENT SIGN
5
/
/
\7 /5/
\/
2�
38'
13
25'
1
50'
DRAINAGE &
UTILITY ,EASEMENT
J
STCIRM WATER
POND
NWL=988.0
/ WETLAND BOUNDARY
(TYP.)
/
General Site Notes
PROPERTY LINE
LOT LINE
SETBACK LINE
EASEMENT LINE
CURB AND GUTTER
POND NORMAL WATER LE I_
RETAINING WALL
FENCE
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
NORMAL DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMEN
NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS
TRANSFORMER
SITE LIGHTING
TRAFFIC SIGN
POWER POLE
BOLLARD / POST
DECIDUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THIS PROJECT PROVIDED BY WESTWOOD
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. ST. CLOUD. MINNESOTA, DATED 11/14/14..
LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES AS
SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY
SITE CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO
EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND, THE
ENGINEER SHOULD BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY.
3. REFER TO BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR LOT BEARINGS, DIMENSIONS AND AREAS.
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB OR EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND
LOCATIONS OF EXITS, RAMPS, AND TRUCK DOCKS.
6. ALL CURB RADII ARE SHALL BE 3.0 FEET (TO FACE OF CURB) UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
ALL CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE B612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS,
DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGGERS AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF
TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE
APPROVED BY THE CITY AND ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC
CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MNDOT STANDARDS.
9. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AND CONCRETE SECTIONS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
10 CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN FULL ACCESS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING
CONSTRUCTION AND TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY
DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
11. SITE LIGHTING SHOWN ON PLAN IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO LIGHTING
PLAN PREPARED BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING DETAILS AND PHOTOMETRICS.
M Site Details (SI-OXX)
1
B612 CURB & GUTTER
2 MOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER
5 INTEGRAL CURB AND WALK
6 CONCRETE CROSS GUTTER
8 PRIVATE CONCRETE SIDEWALK
9 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP
10 PARALLEL PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP
14 SIGN INSTALLATION
15 HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE SIGNAGE AND STRIPING
19 PAVEMENT SECTIONS
25 CURB CUT WITH EROSION CONTROL MAT
32 BEAVERTAIL CURB (B612)
X
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwoodps.cam
610
Checked:
Dews
Record Dewing by/date:
186
hos, m.vry emw, eve nu.2.H wr m mm my
om mss
w+MMIIM m. ma °Roe
..a ro. nor.a Namavouer
Robert J. 0�
OMB 01/29/15 sna= eon 45023
Prepared fon
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndale Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
Wealshire of
Medina
Medina, MN
Site Plan - Phase I
0 30 60' 90'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Data 01/09/15
Si— 4 OP 16
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or coll811.com
Common Ground Alliance
997.00
998.00
994.95
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
997,50
X99800-
DITION
=998.50
/\ X `/
e op50 \
96.00 -995.86
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
995.90
B-99191 T- .
B-989.80
99,247
FUTURE ADDITION
FEE=99x50
WETLAND IMPACT #2
17,109 SF
-989.64
8-990 04
989.25
/ am
/
RAND IMPACT #1
6, 26 SF
991.50
99;
994.10
994.08 m
9'99.55
992.31
992151
992961
991!76
Grading Legend
fOISIING PROMOS@
- - - - - - - - PROPERTY LINE
-980_ - - -980_ - INDEX CONTOUR
X982_ INTERVAL CONTOUR
CURB AND GUTTER
POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL
SILT FENCE
MMU STORM SEWER
® ® FLARED END SECTION (WITH RIPRAP)
^'^r WATER MAIN
SAN N SANITARY SEWER
RETAINING WALL
aaa DRAIN TILE
RIDGE LINE
GRADING LIMITS
REM RIP -RAP
E=21 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT
= x91.00 SPOT ELEVATION
FLOW DIRECTION
ll( E.O.F.
58 00
Grading Notes
TOP AND BOTTOM OF RETAINING WALL
Revisions
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW
INLET PROTECTION
1. LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES AS
SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY
SITE CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION.
THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE
FOUND.
2. CONTRACTORS SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS
AND DIMENSIONS OF VESTIBULE, SLOPED PAVEMENT, EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS,
TRUCK DOCKS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS, EXACT BUILDING UTILITY
ENTRANCE LOCATIONS, AND EXACT LOCATIONS AND NUMBER OF DOWNSPOUTS.
3. ALL EXCAVATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF
"STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRENCH EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL/SURFACE
RESTORATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF
MINNESOTA.
4. ALL DISTURBED UNPAVED AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE FOUR INCHES OF TOPSOIL
AND SOD OR SEED. THESE AREAS SHALL BE WATERED UNTIL A HEALTHY STAND
OF GRASS IS OBTAINED. SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR PLANTING AND TURF
ESTABLISHMENT.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL
SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE
NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE
ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM
TO APPROPRIATE MNDOT STANDARDS.
6. ALL SLOPES SHALL BE GRADED TO 3:1 OR FLATTER, UNLESS OTHERWISE
INDICATED ON THIS SHEET.
7. CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING AND
PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITH UNIFORM SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS
WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING
GRADES.
8. SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN INDICATE FINISHED PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS Be GUTTER
FLOW LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED
SURFACE GRADE.
9. SEE SOILS REPORT FOR PAVEMENT THICKNESSES AND HOLD DOWNS.
10. CONTRACTOR SHALL DISPOSE OF ANY EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL THAT EXISTS
AFTER THE SITE GRADING AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL DISPOSE OF ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL IN A MANNER
ACCEPTABLE TO THE OWNER AND THE REGULATING AGENCIES.
11. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A STRUCTURAL RETAINING WALL DESIGN CERTIFIED
BY A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
12. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL RULES
INCLUDING THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.
13. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF ANY STRUCTURE OR PAVEMENT, A PROOF ROLL, AT
MINIMUM, WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE SUBGRADE. PROOF ROLLING SHALL BE
ACCOMPLISHED BY MAKING MINIMUM OF 2 COMPLETE PASSES WITH
FULLY -LOADED TANDEM -AXLE DUMP TRUCK, OR APPROVED EQUAL, IN EACH OF
2 PERPENDICULAR DIRECTIONS WHILE UNDER SUPERVISION AND DIRECTION OF
THE INDEPENDENT TESTING LABORATORY. AREAS OF FAILURE SHALL BE
EXCAVATED AND RECOMPACTED AS SPECIFIED HEREIN.
14. EMBANKMENT MATERIAL PLACED BENEATH BUILDINGS AND STREET OR PARKING
AREAS SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFIED DENSITY
METHOD AS OUTLINED IN MNDOT 2105.3F1 AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
15. EMBANKMENT MATERIAL NOT PLACED IN THE BUILDING PAD, STREETS OR
PARKING AREA, SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF
THE ORDINARY COMPACTION METHOD AS OUTLINED IN MNDOT 2105.3F2.
16. ALL SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY AN INDEPENDENT
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. EXCAVATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMOVING
UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOILS TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
0' 30' 60' 90'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwoodps.cam
Da0Bned: coo
Checked:
aN
Dearest IA
Record Drawing by/date
m �em u i.m U.. Yeaoemoumi
INN.= tar tee taws N Mae Nam
Robert J. D�
caw 01/29/15 sna= rro 45023
Prepared fon
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndale Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
realshire of
[edina
diva, MN
Grading Plan - Overall
o.te 01/09/15
sh..e 5 OP 16
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or coll811.com
Common Ground Alliance
PROPOSED BUILDING
_ _ — FFE=998.50
e' ` \
/
/\
/
9oF50
SEE LEFT FOR POND INSET
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
989.64
8-990.04
959.25
Grading Legend
FXISIING PROPOSED
— — — — — — — — PROPERTY LINE
—980_ _ �980� — INDEX CONTOUR
�9g2_ INTERVAL CONTOUR
CURB AND GUTTER
POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL
SILT FENCE
MMU STORM SEWER
® ® FLARED END SECTION (WITH RIPRAP)
^'^r WATER MAIN
SAN N SANITARY SEWER
— RETAINING WALL
aaa DRAIN TILE
RIDGE LINE
GRADING LIMITS
REM RIP —RAP
E721 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT
= x9ro0 SPOT ELEVATION
FLOW DIRECTION
Pond Inset
R E.O.F.
58 00
TOP AND BOTTOM OF RETAINING WALL
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW
INLET PROTECTION
POND
TOP=99 . 0
HWL=9 .47
NWL= 88.00
BOT 980.00 /
0' 30' 60' 90'
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
370112th Street North, Suite 206
St Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-M95
westwoodps.cam
D®18ned: No
Checked:
Drawer IA
Renard Drawing by/date
a 2 m " flar�a9*,i
INN.= tar tee taws N Mae Nam
Robert J. D�
Pas 01/29/15 sere= rro 45023
Prepared fon
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndele Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
Wealshire of
Medina
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
diva, MN
Grading Plan - Phase 1
Data 01/09/15
Shaw 6 DR 16
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or co11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
TERMAIN PLUG
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BEE -987.17
FUTURE ADDITION "/ v
FFE=998.50 /
WETLAND BOUNDARY
(TYP.)
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=998.50
8" WATERMAIN PLUG
8� TEE
MH- ox
RE=990.11
IE-980.40 (5)
• I
MH-3
RE=988.26
IE=979.20 (N)
IE=979.20 (W)
IE=979.10 (5)
CORE DRILL AND CONPFECT
BENCHM- ARK CHI- PPEWA ROAD -T �I TING SANITARY MANHOLE
BE 100008-. ®IL 9/6.15
LF-6" rTE cam
5 w" war REMOVE 12 x 12" TEE OSS
REPLACE WITH 12 x 2' COS
yl
231LF-8' ko'CR00
L -4 BEND
X49 LF-8" PVC C900
8" GATE VALVE
12"x 8" REDUCER- -
Utility Legend
EXISTING PROPOSED
- - - - - - - - PROPERTY LINE
EASEMENT LINE
CURB AND GUTTER
►-0 SANITARY SEWER
FM - FM- SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN
STORM SEWER
nor I WATER MAIN
wnr 1-.4 HYDRANT
GAS
ws 700 UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
em rcn OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
100 ruo UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
m. no, OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
roe TELEPHONE FIBER OPTIC
c^' cry CABLE TELEVISION
aaa DRAIN TILE
▪ GATE VALVE
U ► FLARED END SECTION (WITH RIPRAP)
G # LIGHT POLE
VERTICAL UTILITY SEPARATION
General Utility Notes
1. THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR
ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED ON
RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES AND LIMITED MEASUREMENTS
TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE RELIED ON AS BEING
EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE OWNER OR ENGINEER OF
DISCREPANCIES.
2. ALL SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND WATER MAIN MATERIAL AND
INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE PER CITY REQUIREMENTS, MINNESOTA PLUMBING
CODE, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION AND
SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE
CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA.
3. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN THE NECESSARY
FEDERAL STATE AND LOCAL PERMITS FOR THE PROPOSED WORK OR VERIFY
WITH THE OWNER OR ENGINEER THAT PERMITS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED. PERMIT
FEES SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNLESS OTHERWISE
ARRANGED WITH THE OWNER.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATION
AND DIMENSIONS OF DOORWAYS, RAMPS, TRUCK DOCKS, PRECISE BUILDING
DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY CONNECTION LOCATIONS.
5. ALL PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
SPECIFICATIONS OF THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY. THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL COORDINATE THE SERVICE LINE CONSTRUCTION WITH THE UTILITY
COMPANIES.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY CITY PERMITS FOR UTILITY
CONNECTIONS, AND UTILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE
CITY. THE CITY SHALL BE NOTIFIED 48 -HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH
THE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION OR ANY REQUIRED TESTING. CONTRACTOR SHALL
NOT OPERATE, INTERFERE WITH, CONNECT ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO, OR TAP
ANY WATER MAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TO DO
SO BY THE CITY. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF SCHEDULED OR
UNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE TO BE THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.
7. WATER MAIN LENGTHS AS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL LENGTHS.
ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL PIPE WHEN INSTALLING ON SLOPES OR WHEN
DEFLECTIONS ARE REQUIRED. THE JOINT DEFLECTIONS SHALL NOT EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED BY THE PIPE MANUFACTURER OR BY LOCAL
GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS. FITTINGS REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT WATER MAIN
SHALL BE INCLUDED IN WATER MAIN CONSTRUCTION.
8. PROVIDE WATER MAIN THRUST RESTRAINTS PER CITY STANDARD
REQUIREMENTS.
9. A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18 INCHES IS REQUIRED AT ALL WATER
LINE CROSSINGS WITH SANITARY SEWER OR STORM SEWER. THE WATER LINE
SHALL NOT HAVE JOINTS OR CONNECTION WITHIN 10 -FEET OF THE CROSSING.
INSULATE CROSSINGS WITH STORM SEWER.
10. UTILITY SERVICES TYPICALLY TERMINATE 5' OUTSIDE BUILDING WALL UNLESS
OTHERWISE SHOWN OR NOTED.
11. DUCTILE IRON WATER LINES SHALL BE CLASS 52, PER AWWA C115 OR C151.
COPPER WATER LINES SHALL BE TYPE K PER ASTM B88. PVC WATER LINES
SHALL BE PER AWWA C900 AND INSTALLED PER AWWA C605 IF ALLOWED BY
CITY.
12. ALL WATER LINES SHALL HAVE 8' MINIMUM COVER. INSULATE WATER MAIN IF
LESS THAN 8' OF COVER. INSULATION SHALL BE DOW STYROFOAM HI BRAND
35 OR EQUIVALENT, WITH 4 INCHES OF THICKNESS.
13. SANITARY SEWER PIPE OUTSIDE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE SHALL BE POLYVINYL
CHLORIDE (PVC) SDR 26 OR SCHEDULE 40 PER ASTM D2241. SANITARY SEWER
PIPE WITHIN 5 FEET OF BUILDING AND UNDER FOOTINGS SHALL BE PVC
SCHEDULE 40 PER ASTM D2665. ALL PLASTIC SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE
INSTALLED PER D2321. SOLVENT WELD JOINTS MUST INCLUDE USE OF A
PRIMER WHICH IS OF A CONTRASTING COLOR TO THE PIPE AND CEMENT. ALL
SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE TESTED ACCORDING TO MINNESOTA RULES, PART
4715.2820.
ALL NONCONDUCTIVE PIPE SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A LOCATE (TRACER) WIRE
PER MINNESOTA RULES. PART 7560.0150.
14. POST INDICATOR VALVES SHALL BE CLOW F-5750 (OR EQUIVALENT) MEETING
AWWA STANDARD C509 AND CITY STANDARDS. VALVE TO BE MECHANICAL
JOINT RESILIENT WEDGE GATE VALVE. POST TO BE ADJUSTABLE FOR 8 FEET
WATER MAIN DEPTH. THE ELECTRICAL ALARM SWITCH SHALL BE PART NO.
PCVS2 (OR EQUIVALENT).
15. AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE
OWNER WITH AN AS -BUILT RECORD OF UTILITY CONSTRUCTION. THE AS -BUILT
SHALL INCLUDE LOCATION AND LENGTH DEVIATIONS OR CHANGES TO THE
PLAN. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WITH OWNER OR ENGINEER WHETHER A PLAN
WITH POST -CONSTRUCTION ELEVATIONS IS REQUIRED.
16. REPAIRS TO CHIPPEWA ROAD SHALL BE AS DIRECTED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR OR CITY ENGINEER.
50' 100' 150'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwoodps.cam
Reviebae
Da0Bned: Rto
Checked: 210
Drawls IA
Record Dewing by/date
m au ti.Nut m 2- Yeaoemou*iINN.= tar tee taws N Mae Nam
Robert J. 0�
oue 01/29/15 sna= rro 45023
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndale Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
realshire of
[edina
diva, MN
Utility Plan - Public
Extension
ate 01/09/15
Shea! 7 OP 16
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or ca11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
N PLUG
LF Er PVC C900
8x 8" TEE
8"x 6"(TEE
L L I
384 LF-8 PVC C900 I
///// //
HYD. W/AUX. VALVE
GRND ELEV. 996.3
5 - P C 960
V////
//////
///
/
/
/
/
///////
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
8"x 6" TEE
HYD. W/AUX. VALVE
GRND ELEV.=996.4
47 LF- PVC C900
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
//// / /
♦♦♦ / /
/ /
// j // • //
/////////
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=998.50
8"-451'0 BEND ee
/
8" FIRE STUB -3C SERVICE
n 4 DOMESTIC
IE=982.01
5'-8" PVC L® 1.005
CLEANOUi-3B '
B" FUTURE W
SERVICE
FUTURE
SERVICES
49'-8" PVC ® 1.00% MH-3A
RE -993.62
IE=981.47 (NW)
IE-981.37 (E)
N
/\/
\ I /
\ /
l S
/\
2 \
I eav n
324 LF-8I PVC C90
/
/
/-
/
//(////i( //
LF-8" PVC CZS 0
5 LF-8" PVC C900
1• LF-8" VC C900
END
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=996.60
8" WATERMAIN PLUG
MH-4
RE=990.11
IE-980.40 (5)
MH-3
RE -936.26
IE=979.20 (N)
IE-979.20 (W)
E=979.10 (5)
HYD. W/AUX. VALVE
GRND ELEV.=990.0
13 LF- PVC C900
30 LF- PVC 'O90Q\ Ni
1 1 - I - -- _-
67 LF-8" BVC C900 350 LF-e" PVC C900
/ 8% 6" TEE 8"x 6" TEE
N l all,
WETLAND BOUNDARY
P.I)
iY
113,LF-8" PVC C900
89 PVC C9D0
X. VALVI
V.991.1
VC C900
8"x16" TEE
Utility Legend
EXISTING PROPOSED
roc
rorr
cry
PROPERTY LINE
EASEMENT LINE
CURB AND GUTTER
SANITARY SEWER
SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN
STORM SEWER
WATER MAIN
HYDRANT
GAS
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
TELEPHONE FIBER OPTIC
CABLE TELEVISION
DRAIN TILE
GATE VALVE
FLARED END SECTION (WITH RIPRAP)
LIGHT POLE
VERTICAL UTILITY SEPARATION
General Watermain & Sanitary Sewer Notes
1. THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR
ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED ON
RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES AND LIMITED MEASUREMENTS
TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE RELIED ON AS BEING
EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE OWNER OR ENGINEER OF
DISCREPANCIES.
2. ALL SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN MATERIAL AND INSTALLATIONS SHALL
BE PER CITY REQUIREMENTS, MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE, AND IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR
WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION AND SANITARY SEWER AND
STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS
ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA.
3. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN THE NECESSARY
FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL PERMITS FOR THE PROPOSED WORK OR VERIFY
WITH THE OWNER OR ENGINEER THAT PERMITS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED. PERMIT
FEES SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNLESS OTHERWISE
ARRANGED WITH THE OWNER.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATION
AND DIMENSIONS OF DOORWAYS, RAMPS, TRUCK DOCKS, PRECISE BUILDING
DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY CONNECTION LOCATIONS.
5. ALL PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
SPECIFICATIONS OF THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY. THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL COORDINATE THE SERVICE LINE CONSTRUCTION WITH THE UTILITY
COMPANIES.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY CITY PERMITS FOR UTILITY
CONNECTIONS, AND UTILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE
CITY. THE CITY SHALL BE NOTIFIED 48 -HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH
THE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION OR ANY REQUIRED TESTING. CONTRACTOR SHALL
NOT OPERATE, INTERFERE WITH, CONNECT ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO, OR TAP
ANY WATER MAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TO DO
SO BY THE CITY. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF SCHEDULED OR
UNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE TO BE THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.
7. WATER MAIN LENGTHS AS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL LENGTHS.
ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL PIPE WHEN INSTALLING ON SLOPES OR WHEN
DEFLECTIONS ARE REQUIRED. THE JOINT DEFLECTIONS SHALL NOT EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED BY THE PIPE MANUFACTURER OR BY LOCAL
GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS. FITTINGS REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT WATER MAIN
SHALL BE INCLUDED IN WATER MAIN CONSTRUCTION.
8. PROVIDE WATER MAIN THRUST RESTRAINTS PER CITY STANDARD
REQUIREMENTS.
9. A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18 INCHES IS REQUIRED AT ALL WATER
LINE CROSSINGS WITH SANITARY SEWER OR STORM SEWER. THE WATER LINE
SHALL NOT HAVE JOINTS OR CONNECTION WITHIN 10 -FEET OF THE CROSSING.
INSULATE CROSSINGS WITH STORM SEWER.
10. UTILITY SERVICES TYPICALLY TERMINATE 5' OUTSIDE BUILDING WALL UNLESS
OTHERWISE SHOWN OR NOTED.
11. DUCTILE IRON WATER LINES SHALL BE CLASS 52, PER AWWA C115 OR C151.
COPPER WATER LINES SHALL BE TYPE K PER ASTM B88. PVC WATER LINES
SHALL BE PER AWWA C900 AND INSTALLED PER AWWA C605 IF ALLOWED BY
CITY.
12. ALL WATER LINES SHALL HAVE 8' MINIMUM COVER. INSULATE WATER MAIN IF
LESS THAN 8' OF COVER. INSULATION SHALL BE DOW STYROFOAM HI BRAND
35 OR EQUIVALENT, WITH 4 INCHES OF THICKNESS.
13. SANITARY SEWER PIPE OUTSIDE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE SHALL BE POLYVINYL
CHLORIDE (PVC) SDR 26 OR SCHEDULE 40 PER ASTM D2241. SANITARY SEWER
PIPE WITHIN 5 FEET OF BUILDING AND UNDER FOOTINGS SHALL BE PVC
SCHEDULE 40 PER ASTM D2665. ALL PLASTIC SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE
INSTALLED PER D2321. SOLVENT WELD JOINTS MUST INCLUDE USE OF A
PRIMER WHICH IS OF A CONTRASTING COLOR TO THE PIPE AND CEMENT. ALL
SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE TESTED ACCORDING TO MINNESOTA RULES, PART
4715.2820.
14. ALL NONCONDUCTIVE PIPE SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A LOCATE (TRACER)
WIRE PER MINNESOTA RULES, PART 7560.0150.
15. POST INDICATOR VALVES SHALL BE CLOW F-5750 (OR EQUIVALENT) MEETING
AWWA STANDARD C509 AND CITY STANDARDS. VALVE TO BE MECHANICAL
JOINT RESILIENT WEDGE GATE VALVE. POST TO BE ADJUSTABLE FOR 8 FEET
WATER MAIN DEPTH. THE ELECTRICAL ALARM SWITCH SHALL BE PART NO.
PCVS2 (OR EQUIVALENT).
16. AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE
OWNER WITH AN AS -BUILT RECORD OF UTILITY CONSTRUCTION. THE AS -BUILT
SHALL INCLUDE LOCATION AND LENGTH DEVIATIONS OR CHANGES TO THE
PLAN. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WITH OWNER OR ENGINEER WHETHER A PLAN
WITH POST -CONSTRUCTION ELEVATIONS IS REQUIRED.
17. ALL MANHOLE CASTINGS IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.05 FEET. RIM
ELEVATIONS ON PLAN DO NOT REFLECT THE SUMPED ELEVATIONS.
0' 30' 60' 90'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-3737
TollFree 1-300-270-9495
westwoodps.cam
Desi.ed: No
Checked: gto
Drawls IA
Record Drawing by/dtls
Revisions
m� u Om .m awy v�rw YeaoemoumieMMMIIIM ma tee taws tM Mae Nam
Robert J. 0�
ome 01/29/15 sk rro 45023
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndele Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
realshire of
[edina
diva, MN
Sanitary Sewer &
Watermain Plan
Date 01/09/15
Sheet 8 OF 16
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or ca11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
STMH-103
RE=996.39
-992.39 (5)
STORM CLEANO T - r' 6" PERFORATED DRAINTLE
(TYP.)
- _____ eel - aae
/
/
/
/
• STMH-102
/ RE=995.53
�IE=991.69 (N)
/ IE=991.69 (5)
//0000/// /
//////////
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50 / /// ///
182'-12"
• STM SWR 0 0.75%
FES-100
IE=988.0
STORMWATER
POND
STMH-101
RE=995.15
IE=990.75 (N)
16=990.95 (NE)
IE=988.38 (5)
0.74%
STM SAN ® 0.35%
FES-200
IE=988.00
/
0
// 000/ ///
CBMH- 01C
59'-12" 78'-12" RE=996.00 II
STM SWR 0 0.49% STM SWR 0 0.50%. ,,11I 16=993.00 (SW) L
// 0000// / J(, / /
// Nz
/
CBMH-1036
CBM%�1A RE9,9.61
/ RE=996.0 1E=992.61 (NE)
IE-992,32 (E`), IE�992.61 (W)
IE=992.32 (SW) /
IE=988.13
IE=988.13
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=998.50
\/^\/\
/ I
/
\ /
l S 8" PERFORATED DRAINTILE
(N
TYP
8" Shy SWR 0 0.35 yH
WETLAND BOUNDARY
(TOP.)
SEE MECHANICAL
PLAN FOR TRENCH
DRAIN CONNECTION TO
/ PUMP AND STMH-401
I ///
/////.
TRENCH DRAIN -402
RE=987.95
IE=985.95 (5) STMH-401
RE=994.72
IE=992.29 (W)
IE=992.29 (E)
65'-12"
STM SWR ® 2.00%
/ // /////
\ N
N/ N
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=998.50
125.-18eee 444 1 444
STM SWR ® 2.00%
200'-18" STII.SWR TA 0.35% dd
ES -400
IE=991.00
21-2
STM SWR 0 0.75%
FES-S00
IE=990.00
FES-204
IE=990.00
Utility Legend
EXISTING
PROPOSED
- - - - PROPERTY LINE
EASEMENT LINE
CURB AND GUTTER
a. SANITARY SEWER
Ern SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN
eel STORM SEWER
WATER MAIN
I-.* HYDRANT
c.s GAS
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
xw OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
00 UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
rar OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
rm TELEPHONE FIBER OPTIC
cry CABLE TELEVISION
eee DRAIN TILE
GATE VALVE
► FLARED END SECTION (WITH RIPRAP)
1�F LIGHT POLE
VERTICAL UTILITY SEPARATION
FILTRATION MEDIA
General Storm Sewer Notes
1. THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES
AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES AND LIMITED
MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR
COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE
OWNER OR ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES.
ALL STORM SEWER MATERIAL AND INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE PER CITY REQUIREMENTS, MINNESOTA PLUMBING
CODE, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN
AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION AND SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY
THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA.
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN THE NECESSARY FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL
PERMITS FOR THE PROPOSED WORK OR VERIFY WITH THE OWNER OR ENGINEER THAT PERMITS HAVE BEEN
OBTAINED. PERMIT FEES SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNLESS OTHERWISE ARRANGED
WITH THE OWNER.
CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF DOORWAYS,
RAMPS, TRUCK DOCKS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY CONNECTION LOCATIONS.
5. ALL PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE
APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE SERVICE LINE CONSTRUCTION WITH
THE UTILITY COMPANIES.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY CITY PERMITS FOR UTILITY CONNECTIONS, AND UTILITIES SHALL
BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY. THE CITY SHALL BE NOTIFIED 48 -HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING
WITH THE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION OR ANY REQUIRED TESTING. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPERATE, INTERFERE
WITH, CONNECT ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO, OR TAP ANY WATER MAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY
AUTHORIZED TO DO SO BY THE CITY. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED
DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.
A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18 INCHES IS REQUIRED AT ALL WATER LINE CROSSINGS WITH STORM
SEWER. THE WATER LINE SHALL NOT HAVE JOINTS OR CONNECTION WITHIN 10 -FEET OF THE CROSSING.
INSULATE CROSSINGS WITH STORM SEWER.
8. UTILITY SERVICES TYPICALLY TERMINATE 5' OUTSIDE BUILDING WALL UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN OR NOTED.
9. STORM SEWER PIPE:
REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 5 FOR PIPE DIAMETERS 18" AND SMALLER, CLASS 3 FOR
PIPE DIAMETERS 21" AND LARGER UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, PER ASTM C76 WITH R-4 GASKETS.
B. HDPE STORM PIPE 4- TO 10 -INCHES IN DIAMETER SHALL MEET REQUIREMENTS OF PASHTO M252. HDPE
STORM PIPE 12- TO 60 -INCHES IN DIAMETER SHALL MEET REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2306.
C. PVC STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 PIPE PER ASTM F949.
D. HDPE AND PVC STORM PIPE SHALL HAVE FITTINGS PER ASTM D3212 AND BE INSTALLED PER ASTM D232'.
E. CORRUGATED METAL PIPE (CMP) FOR SIZES 18- TO 120 -INCH AND MUST MEET ASTM A760 OR ASTM
A796 AND BE INSTALLED PER ASTM A798. CMP MAY NOT BE INSTALLED WITHIN 10 -FEET OF A
WATERMAIN, WATER SERVICE, OR A BUILDING.
ALL STORM SEWER JOINTS AND STRUCTURE CONNECTIONS SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT AS
REQUIRED BY MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715.0700. STORM SEWER LOCATED WITHIN 10 -FEET OF
BUILDING AND/OR WATER LINE SHALL BE TESTED PER MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715.2820.
10. ALL NONCONDUCTIVE PIPE SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A LOCATE (TRACER) WIRE PER MINNESOTA RULES, PAR',
7560.0150.
11. AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH AN AS -BUILT
RECORD OF UTILITY CONSTRUCTION. THE AS -BUILT SHALL INCLUDE LOCATION AND LENGTH DEVIATIONS OR
CHANGES TO THE PLAN. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WITH OWNER OR ENGINEER WHETHER A PLAN WITH
POST -CONSTRUCTION ELEVATIONS IS REQUIRED.
12. ALL CATCH BASIN CASTINGS IN CURB SHALL BE SUMPED 0.15 FEET AND MANHOLE CASTINGS IN PAVED AREAS
SHALL BE DUMPED 0.05 FEET. RIM ELEVATIONS ON PLAN DO NOT REFLECT THE DUMPED ELEVATIONS.
0' 30' 60' 90'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
370112th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
TollFree 1-800-270-9495
westwoodps.cam
DalBned: sto
Checked: aN
Dearest IA
Record Drawing by/date
en..RwieWee
my
m um 5i .m mur mm Yaoemoe*i
Robert J. O�
Doer 01/29/15 - NM 45023
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndale Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
realshire of
[edina
diva, MN
Storm Sewer Plan
Date 01/09/15
ghee! 9 oP 16
000672.703,,
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or ca11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
PROPOSED BUILDING
AFTER )kOND HAS BEE
ONSTRU TED, INSTALL
T FENCE, TO PREVENT
tIMENT FRQW FILLING
POND.
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
Erosion Control Legend
FXISIING PROPOSED
— — — — — — — — PROPERTY LINE
—980_ �.980 — INDEX CONTOUR
982_ - INTERVAL CONTOUR
CURB AND GUTTER
POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL
SILT FENCE
MMU STORM SEWER
® ® FLARED END SECTION (WITH RIPRAP)
^'^r WATER MAIN
SAN a SANITARY SEWER
— RETAINING WALL
aaa DRAIN TILE
RIDGE LINE
GRADING LIMITS
REM ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
E721 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT
x= x9ro0 SPOT ELEVATION
FLOW DIRECTION
11,4 E.O.F.
58 00
TOP AND BOTTOM OF RETAINING WALL
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW
INLET PROTECTION
General Erosion Control Notes
1. THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR
ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED ON
RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES AND LIMITED MEASUREMENTS
TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE RELIED ON AS BEING
EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE OWNER OR ENGINEER OF
DISCREPANCIES.
2. ALL SILT FENCE AND OTHER EROSION CONTROL FEATURES SHALL BE IN -PLACE
PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL
VIABLE TURF OR GROUND COVER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. EXISTING SILT
FENCE ON -SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND OR REMOVED AND SHALL BE
CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT. IT IS OF EXTREME
IMPORTANCE TO BE AWARE OF CURRENT FIELD CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO
EROSION CONTROL TEMPORARY PONDING, DIKES, HAYBALES, ETC., REQUIRED
BY THE CITY SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT.
3. EROSION AND SILTATION CONTROL (ESC): THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME
COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTROLLING ALL SILTATION AND EROSION OF
THE PROJECT AREA. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHATEVER MEANS
NECESSARY TO CONTROL THE EROSION AND SILTATION INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO: CATCH BASIN INSERTS, CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES, EROSION
CONTROL BLANKET, AND SILT FENCE. ESC SHALL COMMENCE WITH GRADING
AND CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK
BY THE OWNER. THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY INCLUDES ALL
IMPLEMENTATION AS REQUIRED TO PREVENT EROSION AND THE DEPOSITING OF
SILT. THE OWNER MAY DIRECT THE CONTRACTOR'S METHODS AS DEEMED FIT
TO PROTECT PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS. ANY DEPOSITION OF SILT OR MUD
ON NEW OR EXISTING PAVEMENT OR IN EXISTING STORM SEWERS OR SWALES
SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH RAIN EVENT. AFFECTED AREAS SHALL BE
CLEANED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER, ALL AT THE EXPENSE OF THE
CONTRACTOR. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE
CONTRACTOR AFTER THE TURF IS ESTABLISHED.
4. ALL STREETS DISTURBED DURING WORKING HOURS MUST BE CLEANED AT THE
END OF EACH WORKING DAY. A CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TO THE SITE MUST
BE PROVIDED ACCORDING TO DETAILS TO REDUCE TRACKING OF DIRT ONTO
PUBLIC STREETS.
5. PROPOSED PONDS SHALL BE EXCAVATED FIRST AND USED AS TEMPORARY
PONDING DURING CONSTRUCTION.
6. WHEN INSTALLING END -OF -LINE FLARED END SECTIONS, BRING THE SILT FENCE
UP & OVER THE FLARED END SECTIONS & COVER DISTURBED AREAS WITH RIP
RAP. THE UPSTREAM FLARED END SECTIONS SHALL HAVE WOOD FIBER
BLANKET INSTALLED ON THE DISTURBED SOILS.
7. ALL UNPAVED AREAS ALTERED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES MUST BE
RESTORED WITH SEED AND MULCH, SOD, EROSION CONTROL BLANKET OR BE
HARD SURFACE WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION.
8. THE SITE MUST BE STABILIZED WITH A 25-151 SEED MIX AT 70 -POUNDS PER
ACRE AND TYPE I MULCH AT 2 -TONS PER ACRE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT
2575 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
9. TEMPORARY SEEDING SHALL BE MN/DOT SEED MIX 22-111 AT 40 -POUNDS
PER ACRE AND TYPE I MULCH AT 2 -TONS PER ACRE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
MNDOT 2575 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
10. FOR AREAS WITH SLOPE OF 3:1 OR GREATER, RESTORATION WITH SOD OR
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET IS REQUIRED.
11. ALL TEMPORARY STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE INSTALLED AROUND THEM
TO TRAP SEDIMENT.
12. ALL PERMANENT PONDS USED AS TEMPORAY SEDIMENT BASINS DURING
CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE DREDGED AFTER THE SITE HAS BEEN STABILIZED TO
RESTORE THE POND TO THE PROPOSED BOTTOM ELEVATION.
13. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL AND STATE RULES INCLUDING
THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS.
14. THE SITE MUST BE KEPT IN A WELL -DRAINED CONDITION AT ALL TIMES. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORARY DITCHES, PIPING OR
OTHER MEANS REQUIRED TO INSURE PROPER DRAINAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
LOW POINTS IN ROADWAYS OR BUILDING PADS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH A
POSITIVE OUTFLOW.
15. PUBLIC STREETS USED FOR HAULING SHALL BE KEPT FREE OF SOIL AND
DEBRIS. STREET SWEEPING SHALL BE CONCURRENT WITH SITE WORK.
0' 30' 60' 90'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwoodps.cam
Dalened: 950
Checked: aN
Draw. IA
Record Drawing by/date
rhodby au emi m awyv�rFre*w Yeaoemou*iENGINEER ERIN EN INN of WY of NIfureeN.
Robert 0 O�
oue 01/29/15 sk rro 45023
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndale Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
realshire of
[edina
diva, MN
Erosion Control Plan
Data 01/09/15
Shaw 10 OP 16
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or co11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
Lighting Notes
Westwood
I
Description
//
/
/
i
/
/
/
/7
/
/ / /
// /
/
.:-/ /
. ;/ /
/ /
x Y 1///-7-7i, //%/�Mw: as /
///
/
/
/
H. 8.5
/////// / //
/
/ //
PROPOSED BUILDING /
FFE=998.50 /
•
♦ 4 /\
♦ / /
♦ / / \
♦ \ > \
♦ / \
♦♦ t / \
♦ v" //
\ \• `/
/////// /
/////////////
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE=998.50
BFE=987.17
//// ///
////,I
/ M H: 6.
/ /
/ /
/
////
/
1
4
✓ \ FUTURE ADDITION
l>\ FFE=998.50
H: 8.5
//
v/ N/v
\
v
v
C N
\ /
v /
2
\
/\
/
/
8.5
///
/
77
/
/
////
// A
Dl 5 . I o.{
/_L.
/
/
/
CMY
///// / / /
///19M 6
o.i/'o(///////L: H:
4 5
v
22
27.5
8.
/
o
27.
27.5
1.0.7
8 h0
2.2
I'a
o
2.0 t.8 1.1.2
6.
4446..E
27.
2.1
FUTURE ADDITION
FFE=998.50
7_
Q
\
'2,
2M3/5,;11.0
z o ,.4 to.e
ton
Y
0.2
•
•
``
to.o
toe
ton
gm- 9-
o
o
o.
FIXTURES MUST BE THE FOLLOWING:
Qty
Filename: F:\2015\WESTWOOD\Wealshire of Medina \ALDLTG.AGI
2
2
Symbol
Label
A
Date:1/8/2015
LEOTEK AR13-15M-MV-NW-5-DB-700/25' HAPCO POLE
LEOTEK AR13-15M-MV-NW-3-DB-700/25' HAPCO POLE
LEOTEK AR13-20M-MR-NW-5-DB-700/25' HAPCO POLE
EELP WP49-L-2x12
EELP WP53-D-50L-3K
Arrangement
SINGLE
SINGLE
SINGLE
SINGLE
SINGLE
LLF
0.855
0.855
0.855
0.750
0.750
Lum. Watts
129.34
130.48
177.64
29.2
49.6
Lum. Lumens
13823
13628
18145
2563
4184
BUG Rating
64 -U0 -G2
62 -U0 -G2
64 -U0 -G2
62 -U1 -GO
61 -U1 -G1
W1
Calculation Summary
1. THIS LIGHTING PLAN SPECIFIES LUMINAIRES SUPPLIED BY ALD. NO
SUBSTITUTIONS ALLOWED. ANY DEVIATION FROM THIS PLAN OR USE OF
LUMINAIRES OTHER THAN ALD PRODUCTS WILL REQUIRE FULL SUBMITTAL OF
FIXTURE SAMPLE, DRAWINGS, AND LIGHTING PLAN TO CITY, ENGINEER AND
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR PRIOR APPROVAL.
2. THESE CALCULATIONS ARE NOT VALID FOR OWNER OR CITY APPROVAL USING
ANY "NON-ALD REPRESENTED PRODUCT" OR FIXTURES NOT SHOWN ON THIS
PLAN. FIXTURES MUST BE PROVIDED BY ALD.
3. CALCULATIONS HAVE BEEN PERFORMED WITH OUR BEST INTERPRETATION OF
THE DETAILS GIVEN TO US. SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEASURED AND
CALCULATED RESULTS MAY OCCUR DUE TO INTOLERANCES IN CALCULATION
METHODS, TESTING PROCEDURES, COMPONENT PERFORMANCE, MEASUREMENT
TECHNIQUES AND FIELD CONDITIONS SUCH AS VOLTAGE, TEMPERATURE
VARIATIONS, LAMP MANUFACTURER VARIATIONS, AND OTHER VARIABLES.
CALCULATIONS DO NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OBJECTS SUCH AS, BUT
NOT LIMITED TO, TREES, BUILDINGS, PAVEMENT, SIDEWALK, OR CARS.
CALCULATION VALUES REPRESENT HORIZONTAL (I.E. LIGHT METER FACING
STRAIGHT UP) ILLUMINANCE FC LEVELS (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED). IF THE
REAL ENVIRONMENT CONDITIONS DO NOT MATCH THE INPUT DATA,
DIFFERENCES WILL OCCUR BETWEEN MEASURED VALUES AND CALCULATED
VALUES. ALD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ACQUIRING OR INTERPRETING ANY
LOCAL LIGHTING CODES.
4. THESE LIGHTING CALCULATIONS ARE NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR INDEPENDENT
ENGINEERING ANALYSIS BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
TYPES A,B,C
FULL CUTOFF LED
25' TALL HAPCO POLE
3' TALL CONCRETE BASE
TYPES W
FULL CUTOFF LED
WALL MOUNTED
1111
TYPES W1
FULL CUTOFF LED
WALL MOUNTED
ALD,Inc.
ARCHITECTURAL LIGHTING DESIGNS,INC.
2920 ANTHONY LANE
ST. ANTHONY, MN 55418
612-252-4100, 612-252-4141 fax
CONTACT: SCOTT HARMES
sharmes@aldmpls.com
X
Westwood Professional Services, Inc,
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwaodps.cam
DeriSad: coo
Checked:
Draw=
Record Dewing by/date
R,0
1a
5. ,,Revidotux
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndele Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
Wealshire of
Medina
Medina, MN
Lighting Plan
Label
ALL AREA
PARKING STALLS ONLY
CalcType
Illuminance
Illuminance
Units
Fc
Fc
Avg
0.77
1.73
Max
8.5
3.0
Min
0.0
0.3
Avg/Min
Max/Min
5.77
10.00
MAINTAINED LIGHT LEVELS USING
FULL CUTOFF LED FIXTURES SHOWN
ON PLAN.
0 30 60' 90'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ate 01/09/15
SI..e 14 DP 16
Westwood
Westwood Professional Services, Inc
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9995
Fax 320-253-8]3]
Toll Free 1-800-2]0-9995
westwaodps.rom
Drawls
Record Drawing by/date
a eWy umuei
Chad 6 Peigum, PLA
oua 01/29/15 soar rb 46508
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndale Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
Landscape Plan
02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Call 48 Hours before digging:
811 or ca11811.com
Common Ground Alliance
Westwood
w
PRUNE OUT MISDIRECTEDBRANCHES. PROLADE OE
CENTRAL LEADER
GUYING AND STAKING AS REQUIRED,
FOR ONE (1)) YEAR N ON ALL
DECITOP DUOUS AND S TREES:
STAKES 'ABOVEGROUND
(MAX.) OR TO FIRST BRANCH.
BOTTOM OF KESTAKIG ) BELOWGROUND IN STAINEDPOSTS TO BE 2.X.2.
WOOD OR PAINTED STEEL
DELINEATOR TS EOUIDPOSTS. PLACE ARWND3
AND OUTSIDE ROOT BALL.
SECURE TREE POST WTH
IC LONG POLYPRW1lENE OR
POLYETH,ENE, 40 MIL., 1.5
WIDE
';11aIED.LOVER PLANT PITS -
DO NOT
ILE AGAINST TRUNK
FORM 3"PDEEP WATERING BASIN.
BACKFILL PLANT PIT WITH
SPECIFIED BACKFILL SOIL. OF
SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM
REFER TO AMERICAN STANDARD
FOR NURSERY STOCK FOR
MINIMUM BALL SIZE. ROOT
FLARE TO BE PLANTED AT OR
NEAR FINISHED GROUNDLINE.
SET OOT BALL ON ED
CW ACTED SOIL
GRADE RAL
DL OMP
INE TH FINISHED SITE
w
P ME ONEICENIRAL LEADERCHES.
GUYING AND STAKING, AS REQUIRED.
D 'uRoUIIAND CONIFEROUS TREES:
TOP AKES ABOVE GROUND
(MA%.)TOR TO
BOTTOM OFSTAKE 3B (MIN.)
BELOW GROUND. STAKING POSTS
TO BE 2.X2. STAINED WOOD OR
PAINTED STEEL DELINEATOR
POSTS. PLACE 3 EQUIDISTANT AROUNDSAND
TS
OUTSIDE ROOT BALL.
TREE TO POSTS WIT( 16' LONG
POLYPROPYLENE OR
POLYETHYLENE 40 MIL., LS.
WIDE STRAP.
TREE WRAP MATERIAL FROM
GRQUNDLNE UPWARD TO FIRST
BRANCHES, AS REQUIRED.
PLACE MULCH, DEP. AS SPECIFIED,
OVER PLANT PITS - DO NOT PILE
AGAINST TRUNK.
FORM 3. DEEP
AFERING BASIN.
YBACKFILL PLANT PIT WITH SPECIFIED
BACKFILL
SCARIFYSIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE.
REFER TO AMERICAN STANDARD FOR
NURSERY STOCK FOR MINIMUM BALL
SIZE. ROOT FLARE TO BE PLANTED
AT OR NEAR FINISHED GROUNDLINE.
SET ROOT BALL ON UNDISNRBED
SUBSMATCHING TREESL OR PACTED NATURALOIL MOUND
GRADE.
NUN FINISHED SIZE
R E. N.TS
w
REMOVE CONTAINER, SET SOIL MASS
ON COMPACTED SOIL MOUND
MATCHDLINEW THSFINISHED LG
ALL PLANING BEDS SHALL RECEIVE
4" OF SPECIFIED MULCH AND WEED
BARRIER FABRIC.
EDGE ALL PLANING BEDS
SPECIFIED WHEREADJACENT
TO LAWN AREAS.
SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF
HOLE.
BACKFILL PLANT PIT MTI SPECIFIED
w
REMOVE CONTAINER. SET SOIL
SC ON COMPACTED SOIL MOUND
MAT NATURAL
GRQUNIDLINEEWITH (FINIALSSHED SITE
GRADE.
ALL PERENNIAL PLANING BEDS
MULCH.SHALL RECEVE 2. COMPOST
EDGE ALL PLANING BEDS WITH
SPECIFIED ADJACENT EDGER
WHERE
LAWNAREAS.
CARIFY SIDESIAND (BOTTOM OF
HOLE.
PART COMPOSTRTFIR PART /4
EXISTING TOPSOIL, WELL MIXED.
EVERGREEN TREE
PLANTING
LA29
DECIDUOUS TREE
PLANTING
LA281
SHRUB PLANTING
,LA27
PERENNIAL PLANTING
LA26
LAWN GRASS
FINISHED GRADE
ADED EDGE SHAPED,
MORE VERTI V'CALEON LAWN SIDE
P=NGTAREA
II I I I III
LAWN GRASS SD \L \\�vi
\11K L\
\i�\ ;LAMING 3DIL
FINISH GRADE
FORLAWN
EXISIING SOIL
II I I I I I I
I I I 1 1 1-1 1 1
el I 1 I
1 1 1 1
ANCH. FLANGE
VINYL STEEL
STTAK E NGE DRIIV STAKE
THRO
GH
OR
FLANGE (MAX
IMUM
SPACING 6' Sc.).
VINYL BED EDGING
SPECIFIED MULCH
BED
SOIL MIX TO BE
MINIMUM OF 4"
BEL
TOP
TO
O EDGING
�/\k�/�\�/�\\/ FOR ADEQUATE LIP
SPECIFIED TOPSOIL
N T S.
w
SIDEWALK
AGGREGATE SUBBASE
EXISTING SOIL
LOWER THANPEXISAt-L2GH
PLANTING BED SOIL MIX TO BE
MINIMUM OF 4. BELOW
A=ALTEEDPEFOR R
SPECIFIED MULCH
SPECIFIED TOPSOIL
treINTAN
POSIn�E
EFROM BUILDIT
BUILDING
WAIL R OR
w
SPADED EDGE
EXISING SOIL
FINISH GRADE FOR LAWN
6' MINIMUM MDT1 MAINTENANCE STRIP
NN TL BED EDGING
PLANING BED SOIL MIX TO BE
MINIMUM OF 4' BELOW EDGING
TOP TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE
LIP FOR MULCH.
1-111-111 1
11-111-111
1 Sulu
u11\/K.,/,
SPECIFIED
-111= c TOPSOIL
SPECIFIED MULCH
LAST REVIr
LA09
MAINTAIN POSITIVE
DRAINAGE AWAY
FROM BUILDING
NUn
w
VINYL EDGER
MING GRADE
CUT AREA
PLANT ACCORDING TO
DNG
APPIICABLEETAILSAS SHOWN
BACKFILL AREA
1 TO OR LOWER IN ELEVAION NANFILL THE SOIL
TO TOMAOFOIHE HOLESDIRECTYUAL
BENEATH THE PLANT GRANULAR SOIL MUST BE ADDED AS BACKFILLIN"AREAS of POOR DRAINAGE.
w
MAINTENANCE STRIP
LAo u WLA12 I
STEEP SLOPE
PLANTING
I °nLA17
SIDEWALK &
PLANTER EDGE
Seed Mix #2
tLA11�m.
31-262
S11W 1 pow
CMM1242 NAM
.206050[ NY. R.I4
066.1
nee
lil"61
%N MR
I%131.6
0040,1
NI It
04 Modem
Andeemen New"
1.66
t56
210%
550
Mwulerr ewe%ryas.
/4nhB.RR...re6,.ernr
1.00
1.50
212%
VIA
Mead Rent.
Brower ahem
1.00
1.56
910%
065
n.emn 1111 IV
ENmw ownM5B.e
422
45111
9d0%
lee
WelLr Wwabfre.a
E,jmuse u
4.1E
402
9.10%
10.16
10001 N1tl rW
Ffrme0e eo0
290
2.50
5.67%
0.05
PM ayn 205.00
0..5
00
off 1%
255
e.1 Wager
Poe plums
1.70
1.60
214%
70.50
loam�
.saly,..e.,m nrmw.
1. 00
,56
31
514
rw Mears
.2.7,1
11.54
41616.0%
.gua
malty max../
A.0151,ec.010IIS
0.07
000
0.13%
0.10
14W Pr.kY now
im�upux
6,10
006
021%
540
Cw1.W504 tr4N*
Uehrodwn conWanse
0.10
000
031%
0.18
ewe/.
f.210PW5B.ndnleu
010
OLDS
030%
521
11.15offel mew
0Am420111lwre
0 O
0.07
0.17%
216
Oefe lrrlrq
N'.500rn..lH.
6.11
010
020%
9.30
Yetat Fenn
Ode
0.50 1.19%
536
1104 or renter x10.1010. nets Wt
62500% of ter for
*WWI)
AI 02
27.02
2503
2500
58.22%
11.11
T16 Cover Croce
6012%
11.54
ToWsLI 11.92 _ 10.00 1[0.60%
10400
P.P.*:
T. o 4808ONd..1.nn.pmm.0 sewn,
Plinth,, Awe.
Sollem Anew 5.21040%. Pm.%P00106 grad Sawn. Dema dRo a
00.605x. f54000 DkahB 2B...Q, 711, 4, /A W o, 0. 7 0 A
Seed Mix #1
2.151
Lew MMM.n1ng. Turf
Gammon NOW
.201,.654 NAM Rate
101.0
Rap
MN.]
%of MR
I% WW1
94406
.50
� 56
PupWos.. MPL4tE 1Real
40.76
WAS
16.90%
114032
Eh6.P Fe40u.
Fiefs. ems
7. .07
25.00
11.21%
]31.22
red 1540114
FM. mina
71.19
000
8%4%6
507.1*
Chwmy. Fgeas
Forma .03 .303 oo 0enfw.
10 82
2206
2050%
45600
ela.d hee0r
F.e6ra cadllyfr/Y.`
3112
20011
12.611E
76610
Peramld Raft...
lei. pewee
2254
2106
6.64E
131.00
,
TL11.:
20.51
=VS
150.05%
]070.22
Pueseffel
045, Were elddmtg01 bkrn,luragrass
Yd hie lerNlla11n than eoeramone,
wipe..
Require. leer 5.80.1 et p
Pinata, 081. s:
601410/00
Planting Notes
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT COMMON GROUND ALLIANCE AT 811 OR CALL811.COM TO VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PLANTS OR LANDSCAPE MATERIAL.
2. ACTUAL LOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS.
3. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE
AREA.
4. ALL SUBSTITUTIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF ANY BID AND/OR
QUOTE BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TWO YEAR GUARANTEE OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS. THE GUARANTEE BEGINS ON THE
DATE OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S OR OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE OF THE INITIAL PLANTING. REPLACEMENT
PLANT MATERIAL SHALL HAVE A ONE YEAR GUARANTEE COMMENCING UPON PLANTING.
6. ALL PLANTS TO BE SPECIMEN GRADE, MINNESOTA -GROWN AND/OR HARDY. SPECIMEN GRADE SHALL ADHERE TO,
BUT IS NOT LIMITED BY, THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS:
ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WOUNDS, SCARS, ETC.
ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM NOTICEABLE GAPS, HOLES, OR DEFORMITIES.
ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES.
ALL PLANTS SHALL HAVE HEAVY, HEALTHY BRANCHING AND LEAFING.
CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL HAVE AN ESTABLISHED MAIN LEADER AND A HEIGHT TO WIDTH RATIO OF NO LESS THAN
5:3.
7. PLANTS TO MEET AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1-2004 OR MOST CURRENT VERSION)
REQUIREMENTS FOR SIZE AND TYPE SPECIFIED.
8. PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER MNLA & ANSI STANDARD PLANTING PRACTICES.
9. PLANTS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL AT SITE. PROPERLY HEEL -IN MATERIALS IF NECESSARY;
TEMPORARY ONLY.
10. PRIOR TO PLANTING, FIELD VERIFY THAT THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR IS LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE BALLED &
BURLAP TREE. IF THIS IS NOT THE CASE, SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED DOWN TO THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR.
WHEN THE BALLED & BURLAP TREE IS PLANTED, THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR SHALL BE EVEN OR SLIGHTLY
ABOVE FINISHED GRADE.
11. OPEN TOP OF BURLAP ON BB MATERIALS; REMOVE POT ON POTTED PLANTS; SPLIT AND BREAK APART PEAT POTS.
12. PRUNE PLANTS AS NECESSARY - PER STANDARD NURSERY PRACTICE AND TO CORRECT POOR BRANCHING OF
EXISTING AND PROPOSED TREES.
13. WRAP ALL SMOOTH -BARKED TREES - FASTEN TOP AND BOTTOM. REMOVE BY APRIL 1ST.
14. STAKING OF TREES AS REQUIRED' REPOSITION, PLUMB AND STAKE IF NOT PLUMB AFTER ONE YEAR.
15. THE NEED FOR SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED UPON SIZE SOIL CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING.
LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THE NEED OF ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS.
16. BACKFILL SOIL AND TOPSOIL TO ADHERE TO MN/DOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION 3877 (SELECT TOPSOIL BORROW) AND
TO BE EXISTING TOP SOIL FROM SITE FREE OF ROOTS, ROCKS LARGER THAN ONE INCH, SUBSOIL DEBRIS, AND LARGE
WEEDS UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. MINIMUM 4" DEPTH TOPSOIL FOR ALL LAWN GRASS AREAS AND 12" DEPTH
TOPSOIL FOR TREE, SHRUBS, AND PERENNIALS.
17. MULCH TO BE AT ALL TREE, SHRUB, PERENNIAL AND MAINTENANCE AREAS. TREE AND SHRUB PLANTING BEDS
SHALL HAVE 4" DEPTH OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO BE USED AROUND ALL
PLANTS WITHIN TURF AREAS. PERENNIAL AND ORNAMENTAL GRASS BEDS SHALL HAVE 2" DEPTH SHREDDED
HARDWOOD MULCH. MULCH TO BE FREE OF DELETERIOUS MATERIAL AND COLORED RED, OR APPROVED EQUAL.
MULCH AND FABRIC TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. MULCH TO MATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS
(WHERE APPLICABLE).
18. EDGING TO BE COMMERCIAL GRADE VALLEY -VIEW BLACK DIAMOND (OR EQUAL) POLY EDGING OR SPADED EDGE, AS
INDICATED. POLY EDGING SHALL BE PLACED WITH SMOOTH CURVES AND STAKED WITH METAL SPIKES NO GREATER
THAN 4 FOOT ON CENTER WITH BASE OF TOP BEAD AT GRADE, FOR MOWERS TO CUT ABOVE WITHOUT DAMAGE.
UTILIZE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS FOR EDGING WHERE POSSIBLE. SPADED EDGE TO PROVIDE V -SHAPED DEPTH AND
WIDTH TO CREATE SEPARATION BETWEEN MULCH AND GRASS. INDIVIDUAL TREE OR SHRUB BEDS TO BE SPADED
EDGE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. EDGING TO MATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS (WHERE APPLICABLE).
19. ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE SODDED OR SEEDED, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PARKING LOT ISLANDS TO BE
SODDED WITH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH AROUND ALL TREES AND SHRUBS. SOD TO BE STANDARD MINNESOTA
GROWN AND HARDY BLUEGRASS MIX, FREE OF LAWN WEEDS. ALL TOPSOIL AREAS TO BE RAKED TO REMOVE DEBRIS
AND ENSURE DRAINAGE. SLOPES OF 3:1 OR GREATER SHALL BE STAKED. MN/DOT SEED MIX 25-131 LOW
MAINTENANCE TURF SHALL BE USED FOR ALL UPLAND SEEDING AREAS. MN/DOT SEED MIX 33-262 DRY
SWALE-POND SHALL BE USED FOR ALL PONDING AREAS. SEED AS SPECIFIED AND PER MN/DOT SPECIFICATIONS. IF
NOT INDICATED ON LANDSCAPE PLAN, SEE EROSION CONTROL PLAN.
20. PROVIDE IRRIGATION TO ALL PLANTED AREAS ON SITE. IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO BE DESIGN/BUILD BY LANDSCAPE
CONTRACTOR. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL
PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE OPERATION MANUALS, AS -BUILT PLANS,
AND NORMAL PROGRAMMING. SYSTEM SHALL BE WINTERIZED AND HAVE SPRING STARTUP DURING FIRST YEAR OF
OPERATION. SYSTEM SHALL HAVE ONE-YEAR WARRANTY ON ALL PARTS AND LABOR, ALL INFORMATION ABOUT
INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR.
21. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE NECESSARY WATERING OF PLANT MATERIALS UNTIL THE PLANT IS FULLY ESTABLISHED
OR IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS OPERATIONAL. OWNER WILL NOT PROVIDE WATER FOR CONTRACTOR.
22. REPAIR, REPLACE, OR PROVIDE SOD/SEED AS REQUIRED FOR ANY ROADWAY BOULEVARD AREAS ADJACENT TO THE
SITE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION.
23. REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY FROM PLANTING OPERATIONS AT NO COST TO OWNER.
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 1210 Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Phone 320-253-9495
Fax 320-253-8737
Toll Free 1-800-270-9495
westwoodps.com
Checked:
Drew.
Record Drawing by/date
CRP
ReWeioae
ae Newa,epemgw
a eWy umuei
Chad 6 Pepe% PLA
ou. 01/29/15 soar rro 46508
Prepared for:
Wealshire, LLC
10601 Lyndele Avenue South
Bloomington, MN
Wealshire of
Medina
Medina, MN
Landscape Details
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Date 01/09/15
Reek 16 OF 16
P
FIRST LEVEL
PHASE I
ABEVE
FIRST LEVEL
PHASE I H
ABOVE
FIRST LEVEL
PHASE I
ABOVE
7
L1
MECHANICAL
STDRA E
FIRST LEVEL
H PHASE I
ABEVE r
ACCESS TO LOWER LEVEL
PREP KITCHEN
MECH
rJ
CORR
STORAGE/
CIRCULATION/
MECHANICAL
2
C
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
3
4
UNDERGROUND PARKING
FIRST LEVEL
PHASE I
ABEVE
I I
/ /\ /COWER LEVE \
PHASE II ��
/ \FIRST \/\ LEVEL/
L -----J / / PHASE II \
/ \ / \PHASE
\ /
\�/ < \\ / \,
\ / /
6 7 8 9
10
11
5
12
6
3
17
4
5
16
7
r
/\
/\/ \
5
FIRST LEVEL FIRST LEVEL
PHASE II PHASE II /\i
ABOVE �\ //\> ABOVE
/,/ \\
/
Z S \
OVERALL LOWER LEVEL PLAN
N
LOWER LEVEL AREA
29,922 SF
UNDERGROUND PARING - 34 STALLS
HCP PARKING - 3 STALLS
RIVERA ARCHITECTS INC
WEALSHIRE OF MEDINA
OVERALL LOWER LEVEL PLAN
Architecture Planning Interiors
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SCALE 1/32 " = I' - O"
A2.1
540'-8
175'-34`
180'-62'
ACCESS TO
SECURED
COURTYARD
V
ACCESS TO
SECURED
COURTYARD
PHASE I
t4 _REF S
24,210 SF
` PHAS-E 7
14 ROOMS
PHASE I FIRST LEVEL AREA
85,091 SF
ACCESS TO
SECURED
COURTYARD
ACCESS TO GOLD DOOR
18 II20
PHASE I
28 R❑❑MS
23,057 SF
542'-5i
446' 9'
DOOR 4 ACCESS TO ACCESS TO
SECURED SECURED
COURTYARD COURTYARD
PORCH
8,626 SF 1
PHASE II
T❑WNSQUAREDDOR
COMMONS
4,375 SF
BAY WINDOW
ENTRANCE
BAY WINDOW
PHASE I
28 R❑❑MS
22,350 SF
BAY WINDOW
ACCESS TO
SECURED
COURTYARD
BAY WINDOW
BAY WINDOW
PHASE II FIRST LEVEL AREA
56,379 SF
TOTAL AREA
141,470 SF
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STUCCO -
CO
U STUCCO
UTILITY BRICf J
PHASE I
STONE STONE
STUCCO -
ASPHALT SHINGLES
L UTILITY BRICK STUCCO -
PHASE II
ASPHALT SHINGLES -
ASPHALT SHINGLES
STUCCO
STUCCO -
STUCCO STUCCO -
UTILITY BRICK UTILITY BRICK
STUCCO - STUCCO
PHASE I
ASPHALT SHINGLE
STUCCO -
ASPHALT SHINGLES -
PHASE I
STONE STONE
STUCCO J
PHASE II
STUCCO -
ASPHALT SHINGLES
STUCCO -
STUCCO
PHASE I
STUCCO STUCCO
STUCCO
STONE
UTILITY BRICK UTILITY BRICK
STUCCO
PHASE II
STONE
STUCCO -
STUCCO
FUTILITY BRICK
A
s@qwestoffice.net
WEALSHIRE OF MEDINA
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
A5.0
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
TASK 1 Background/Demographic1.1 Demographic Info1.2 Finalize Schedule TASK 2 Public Participation2.1 Finalize Public Participation Plan2.2 Medina Celebration Day 2.3 Community Visioning Meeting 2.4 Steering CommitteeSteering Committee #42.5 Interagency Coordination 2.6 Online Engagement (my sidewalk)2.7 Planning Commission/City Council Joint PC/CC WorksessionTASK 3 Land Use & Housing3.1 Compile DataRefined Concept Finalize LU Plan 3.2 Create Goals & Implementation Steps 3.3 Draft of overall chapter, one revision, compilation of final document TASK 4 Transportation 4.1 Compile Data 4.2 Prepare Future Traffic Volumes4.3 Prepare Roadway System Plan 4.4 Prepare Transit Information4.5 Prepare Ped. & Bike Plan4.6 Provide Aviation Basic Language 4.7 Provide Freight Section Language4.8 Provide language regarding a healthy environment for transportation4.9 One draft plan and one revision4.10 GIS Maps TASK 5 Comprehensive Sewer Plan Component 5.1 Compile relevant documents5.2 Update capacity analysis 5.3 Complete goals & implementation steps5.4 GIS Maps TASK 6 Comprehensive Water Plan6.1 Compile relevant documents6.2 Update previously completed model 6.3 Complete goals & implementation steps 6.4 GIS MapsTASK 7 Parks, Trails, Open Space7.1 Update existing maps 7.2 Establish goals and implementation steps7.3 Coordinate with other agencies (SEE ABOVE)7.4 GIS Maps 7.5 Summary map of other outside planned investments7.6 Attend Parks Commission Meeting TASK 8 Surface Water Management Plan8.1 Compilation of drainage information8.2 Establishment of goals & implementation steps 8.3 Exhibits TASK 9 Other Required Components 9.1 Met Council Compile Impacts of LU PlanCompile impacts of LU Plan Compile impacts of LU PlanTransportation Modeling Sewer Model Water Modeling September 2016Joint PC/CC WorksessionLand Use ConceptLg Com. Meeting(LU PLAN)January 20164 Interagency Meetings CC Final Presentation PC Public Hearing my Sidewalk Steering Committee #3October 2015November 2015 December 2015Steering Committee #2Lg. Com. Visioning Session Steering Committee #6August 2016July 2015Celebration DayFinalize Public Participation Plan February 2016March 2016April 2016 May 2016June 2016 July 2016August 2015 September 2015Steering Committee #1(On LU Plan )Demographic InfoFinalize ScheduleSteering Committee #5
2040 Comp Plan Page 1 of 2 September 1, 2015
Process/Schedule City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: August 27, 2015
MEETING: September 1, 2015 City Council
SUBJ: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Process/Schedule
Background
Later in September, the Metropolitan Council will be releasing System Statements for
communities throughout the metro. This will trigger the requirement that the City submit a
decennial update of its Comprehensive Plan by the end of 2018.
Staff has been discussing the process and tentative schedule for the update process. It appeared
from discussions during the amendment completed at the end of last year that almost everyone
wanted to complete the decennial update as quickly as possible. As such, staff’s draft schedule is
fairly aggressive, seeking to have the update submitted for review in approximately a year (fall
of 2016).
A draft schedule is attached. Breanne Rothstein from WSB and Associates will be coordinating
much of the public participation process and has recommended the attached schedule. She is
experienced in coordinating this process in various communities and WSB is able to provide
online public participation tools.
Public Participation
The proposed public participation (not including worksessions, etc.) includes the following:
Online participation throughout process
“Kick-off” event at Medina Celebration Day
2 community meetings
o 1 concentrating on visioning and goal setting
o 1 to solicit feedback on draft land use plan
Formal public hearing at Planning Commission
In addition to these opportunities, there will be more formal worksessions and steering
committee meetings throughout the process. These are described in the schedule, and generally
include:
6 steering committee meetings
2 joint planning commission/city council meetings
Formal public hearing at Planning Commission
City Council review
If the City Council is interested in holding more community meetings (or considering
neighborhood meetings, etc.), worksessions, and the like, it would take more time and the
Agenda Item # 9C
2040 Comp Plan Page 2 of 2 September 1, 2015
Process/Schedule City Council Meeting
schedule would need to be expanded accordingly. Staff believes that a longer process will tend
to discourage involvement over time, even if there are more meetings and events that people
would be able to attend, as people tend to get “worn out by the process.” The proposed schedule
is based on this premise.
Steering Committee
The Comprehensive Plan is a large and complex document. Although staff intends to take the
lead in drafting the document, staff believes it is important that policy direction throughout the
process will be provided by a representative group of City residents.
The Planning Commission could serve this role, but it is a lot to ask of all of the Commissioners
who will also have the regular Planning Commission duties to attend to. Doing so also does not
encourage new people to become active in the process.
As an alternative, the City Council could appoint a steering committee to provide direction
throughout the process. This group would present a draft for formal Planning Commission and
City Council review. Staff recommends that any such committee be a manageable size, ideally 7
members, perhaps 9. Staff believes it may be advisable to include 1 or 2 members from the City
Council and Planning Commission on the steering committee and potentially a park
commissioner. Remaining positions could be appointed by the City Council in order to provide
adequate representation.
If the City Council intends to appoint a Steering Committee, staff would seek direction on how it
will be constituted. Staff would also seek direction on how to solicit members. The City
Council could review “applications” or staff could provide a slate of interested persons. As
noted above, staff would recommend a committee similar to:
2 Council members
2 Planning Commissioners
1 Park Commissioner
2 At-large members
Council Direction Requested
Staff seeks approval of the proposed process and schedule to update the Comprehensive Plan as
described on the attached document.
Staff also seeks direction on the potential appointment of a Comprehensive Plan Steering
Committee to provide direction during the process.
Attachment
DRAFT Schedule