Loading...
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