Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
04-14-2015
POSTED IN CITY HALL April 9, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, APRIL 14, 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 Minutes: a. March 10, 2015 Draft Planning Commission minutes. b. March 17, 2015 Draft Planning Commission Special Meeting minutes. 6. Aldi – 3522 Sioux Drive – Variance request to the impervious surface requirements and Site Plan Review to construct an Aldi grocery store. 7. Public Hearing - Medina Golf and Country Club – 400 Evergreen Road – Planned Unit Development General Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review to construct three accessory structures on the golf course. 8. Todd Monger – 1272 Homestead Trail – Variance from 150 foot setback requirements for an animal structure on Rural Residential zoned property. 9. Council Meeting Schedule 10. Adjourn MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 17, 2015 The Planning Commission of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on March 17, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. at the Medina City Hall, 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN. The meeting was held concurrently with a Special Meeting of the City Council and Park Commission. I. Call to Order Members present: Reid, Williams, Foote, White, Murrin, Albers Members absent: Nolan Also present: City Attorney Ron Batty, City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Public Safety Director Ed Belland. Acting Mayor Pederson thanked the Planning Commission and Park Commission Members for attending the meeting. II. Emergency Incident Response Training Public Safety Director Ed Belland provided a presentation on Medina Security Training for an active shooter event. Chief Belland provided information on how to respond to the event, information on actions individuals can take, reviewed the emergency evacuation plan for City Hall and the group watched a video from Homeland Security. III. Open Meeting Law Training – Attorney Ron Batty City Attorney Ron Batty provided a presentation on the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. The presentation was followed by discussion/questions on possible scenarios and the appropriate responses. Adjournment Reid closed the meeting at 6:52 p.m. Aldi Page 1 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: April 9, 2015 MEETING: April 14, 2015 Planning Commission SUBJ: Aldi – Site Plan Review and Hardcover Variance – 3522 Sioux Drive Review Deadline Complete Application Received: March 13, 2015 Review Deadline: July 11, 2015 Summary of Request Aldi, Inc. proposes to construct a 17,825 square foot grocery store at the southeast corner of Highway 55 and Sioux Drive. The developed would require the following land use approvals in order to permit the construction proposed by the applicant: 1) Variance – the applicant requests a variance to exceed the maximum of 25% impervious surface permitted in the Shoreland Overlay district of Elm Creek. 2) Site Plan Review for construction of a new commercial building. Although this staff report will generally describe the site plan review first for the sake of context, staff recommends that the Planning Commission and City Council consider the variance request first, since the site plan review would be contingent upon the variance. The subject site currently contains the 2,670 square foot office building of Hedtke, Inc., a 1,765 square foot storage building, and a small parking lot. Much of the site is currently maintained as lawn. Elm Creek flows through the property from west to east, with many trees located on the steep slopes down to the creek. Highway 55 is located north of Elm Creek, railroad right-of-way is located to the south, and the Hamel Station commercial development is located to the west of Sioux Drive. An existing single-family home is located to the east, but the property is planned for commercial redevelopment. Uptown Hamel is located up Sioux Drive to the south. The subject site is zoned Commercial Highway-Railroad (CH-RR), the same as the property to the west of Sioux Drive. The City rezoned the property from Uptown Hamel-2 to CH-RR in 2013 at the request of the property owner. The property to the east is zoned Uptown Hamel-2. An aerial of the subject site and surrounding area can be found at the top of the following page. Site Plan Review Section 825.55 requires Site Plan Review approval prior to issuance of permits for new commercial developments to determine whether it is consistent with relevant requirements. Proposed Use Retail uses are listed as a permitted use in the CH-RR zoning district. Aldi Page 2 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Setbacks/Lot Dimensions Following is a summary of the proposed construction compared to the requirements of the CH-RR zoning district and shoreland overlay district: CH-RR Requirement Proposed Minimum Lot Area 1 acre 3.26 acres Minimum Lot Width 100 feet 380 feet Minimum Lot Depth 120 feet 380 feet Minimum Front Yard Setback 25 feet 165 feet Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback 15 feet 45 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 33 feet Street Setback (collector) 35 feet 165 feet Railroad Setback Zero, except as necessary for safety, fire access, or utilities Zero Setback from Residential 50 feet N/A Minimum Parking Setbacks Front Yard Rear/Interior Side Yards Residential 25 feet 10 feet 40 feet 25 feet 10 feet N/A Maximum Impervious Surface 25% (Shoreland Overlay) 50% Aldi Page 3 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Wetlands/Floodplain/Shoreland Elm Creek flows through the northern portion of the subject property, which has implications for the City’s wetland, floodplain and shoreland regulations. A wetland on the adjacent property to the east also extends into the southeastern corner of this site. The applicant has requested a de minimus exemption to fill 195 square feet of this wetland. This request is under review and is exempt from replacement requirements if it meets certain requirements of state rules. Elm Creek Watershed requires a vegetative buffer along Elm Creek. Their standards exceed the City’s wetland buffer requirements along the Creek. The floodplain along Elm Creek extends to elevation 962, and is located within Elm Creek’s buffer, so there are no impacts. The improvements on the site are located around elevation 978. The Shoreland Overlay District requires the following standards for property within 300 feet of streams: • 50 foot structure and parking setback: The structure is setback 105 feet from the stream and parking is proposed to be setback 50 feet. • 25% impervious surface maximum. The applicant has requested a variance to allow up to 50% of the site to contain impervious surfaces. This will be discussed more in-depth later in the report. • Lowest level of the building shall be three feet above the ordinary high water level. The proposed structure is over 10 feet above the high water level. • “Shoreland Alteration - Alteration of vegetation or topography shall be regulated to prevent soil erosion, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic sites, prevent bank slumping, and protect fish and wildlife habitat. Vegetation alteration necessary for the construction of structures and individual sewage treatment systems or for the construction of roads and parking areas shall be exempt from the vegetation alteration standards of this subdivision. Removal or alteration of vegetation, except for agricultural and forest management uses, is allowed, subject to the following standards: o Intensive vegetation clearing within the shore impact zone shall not allowed. o In the shore impact zone, limited clearing of trees and shrubs and cutting, pruning, and trimming of trees shall be allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling and to accommodate the placement of permitted accessory structures or facilities, provided that: (1) the screening of structures, vehicles, or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced; (2) along tributary streams, existing shading of water surfaces is preserved; and (3) the above provisions are not applicable to the removal of trees, limbs, or branches that are dead, diseased, or pose safety hazards.” The applicant proposes to remove almost every tree along Elm Creek and replace them with shrubs and lower understory trees. The applicant seeks to maximize visibility for their proposed building. Staff believes the removal of every tree is clearly “intensive vegetation clearing,” which is explicitly prohibited by the ordinance. Even a very exhaustive replacement plan could meet the shading and erosion control benefits of all of the existing trees. The fact that the applicant is requesting a variance to permit more hardcover on the site further supports the importance of maintaining the integrity of the streambank. Aldi Page 4 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Staff understands the applicant’s desire to have visibility for the store, and does not oppose limited and strategic trimming and removal, but staff believes what is proposed is clearly intensive and not consistent with code. Staff believes options could be discussed with signage (perhaps a variance to allow a taller sign which could extend above the vegetation), limited removal, and streambank restoration Stormwater/LID The applicant proposes two filtration basins to meet the City’s and Elm Creek’s stormwater requirements. The City Engineer has provided comments which the applicant will need to address. Building Materials The proposed structure is largely modular brick and split-face concrete masonry units. Commercial districts require a minimum of 30% of the exterior materials to be brick, stone, stucco, or glass. The code allows a maximum of 20% to be wood, metal, or hardiboard siding and a maximum of 70% “decorative concrete...color impregnated in earth tones (rather than painted) and…patterned to create a high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine appearance.” The proposed materials are 50% modular brick, 4% glass, 16% metal, 2% doors and 28% concrete. Provided the proposed concrete meets the decorative standards of the ordinance, the materials would be consistent with requirements. The applicant will provide material samples at the Commission meeting. Building Modulation/Fenestration/Multi-sided Architecture Commercial districts require that “buildings shall be modulated a minimum of once per 40 feet of building perimeter to avoid long, monotonous building walls. This modulation may include varying building height, building setback, or building materials/design.” The building is approximately 147’x140’, requiring 4 aspects of modulation on each frontage. The northern and western elevations provide more vertical and material differentiation. The loading dock provides horizontal modulation to the northern, southern, and eastern elevations. The southern and eastern elevations alternate between brick and concrete, but vertical modulation is provided only by mechanical screens on the roof and the rear of the parapet. Commercial districts require that “building elevations which face a public street shall include generous window coverage. Alternative architectural elements may be approved by the city when windows are not practical.” Commercial districts require that “any rear or side building elevation which faces a public street, an interior access drive for the development, or a residential zoning district shall include design and architectural elements of a quality generally associated with a front façade. The elevation(s) shall be compatible with the front building elevation.” In this case, the northern and eastern elevations face streets. The Planning Commission and Council can discuss whether the modulation, fenestration, and multi-sided architecture is sufficient. Aldi Page 5 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Tree Preservation/Landscaping As noted above, the applicant proposes to remove almost every tree along Elm Creek. In addition, the applicant proposes to remove the trees that are located to the east of the proposed building. The tree preservation ordinance would allow 15% of the trees on the site to be removed for “initial site development” and an additional 15% for remaining site development. There are 57 live significant trees on the site. It appears that 5 of the trees are removed for initial site development, which would be under the 15% allowance. The applicant could remove an additional 8 of the trees without replacement. The applicant proposes to remove 79% of the trees on the site, which would require a total of 334 inches of replacement trees. Landscaping requirements are based upon the lot perimeter, including: 1) 1 overstory tree per 50 feet of perimeter 2) 1 ornamental tree per 100 feet of perimeter 3) 1 shrub per 30 feet of perimeter The subject site is approximately 1710 feet in perimeter, requiring 34 overstory trees, 17 ornamental trees, and 57 shrubs. It appears that the shrub requirement would be met, but not the tree planting requirement. Existing preserved trees can be counted as landscaping, so staff recommends that the applicant reevaluate the landscaping plan after reducing the intensive removal of trees along Elm Creek. Commercial district standards require landscaping to occupy a minimum of 8% of the parking lot and loading dock area. Staff calculates that 8.3% of the proposed parking lot and loading dock area is landscaping. Comments from a landscape architect in the City Engineer’s office raised a number of concerns with the proposed landscaping plan. Staff recommends that these be addressed in the updated tree removal/landscaping plan as well. Transportation The applicant proposes an access drive onto Sioux Drive, roughly across from existing Westfalen Trail. The access includes a single lane into the site and two lanes exiting the site. The City Engineer has recommended a number of improvements to this access drive. The applicant has submitted a traffic analysis which has been reviewed by the City Engineer. The applicant concludes that no improvements are necessary to Sioux Drive to support the proposed development, but the City Engineer disagrees. The City Engineer recommends a left turn lane on Sioux Drive into the site so that traffic entering the site can do so safely, especially if traffic is backed up at the Highway 55 stop light. Staff recommends that construction of this turn lane be included as a condition of approval. The development to the west of Sioux Drive entered into a petition and waiver for construction of a left-turn lane onto Westfalen Trail. The most efficient means of construction is most likely for Aldi to also enter into a petition and waiver and for the City to construct both turn lanes as a single project. The applicant’s site design provides an access drive to the eastern property line. The applicant has stated that they are open to providing an easement to the property owner to the east to provide to Sioux Drive. Staff believes that this easement would provide flexibility to access the Aldi Page 6 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting eastern site for west bound traffic, since there is a median in Highway 55. It would also provide an opportunity to discuss access upon the ultimate redevelopment of the eastern property, with the possibility of benefitting Highway 55 by removing a direct access to the highway for the future use. It should be noted that extending this access to the eastern property would require some wetland impacts, as there is a wetland immediately to the east of the Aldi site. Off-Street Parking The City would require a minimum of 72 parking spaces (1 per 250 gross square feet of retail space). The applicant proposes 80 parking stalls. Sewer/Water The applicant proposes to connect to the utilities to existing improvements in Sioux Drive. The applicant proposes to extend a watermain to the property to the east to support that ultimate redevelopment. Loading Dock Commercial districts regulations state that “no loading dock shall encroach into the required setbacks for the front yard or a side yard adjacent to a street. Loading docks shall be located, and landscaping shall be utilized so as to minimize visibility from streets,” and that “no loading dock shall be visible, to the fullest extent possible, from any residential zoning district.” Staff believes the location of the proposed loading dock on the east of the building meets this requirement very well. Utilities/Mechanical Equipment/Trash and Recycling Commercial districts require that utilities be located under ground and that transformers by screened. The applicant proposes to relocate existing electrical lines underground. Staff recommends a condition improving the landscaping adjacent to the proposed transformer. The applicant proposes rooftop mechanical equipment to be screened with metal wall units. An example of these screens is included with the applicant’s narrative. Commercial districts require “equipment shall be screened through the use of architectural elements and materials which are compatible with the overall design of the building.” Staff calculated the metal walls as part of the overall exterior materials. The Planning Commission and Council may wish to discuss if the proposed screening is compatible with the overall design. Review Criteria/Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and City Council review the requests in the following order: 1) Hardcover Variance; 2) Site Plan Review. Variance According to Subd. 2 of Section 825.45 of the City Code, the City is required to consider the following criteria when reviewing a variance request: “Subd. 2. Criteria for Granting Variances. (a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Aldi Page 7 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting (b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (c) A variance may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. In order for a practical difficult to be established, all of the following criteria shall be met: (1) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the board shall consider, among other factors, whether the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and whether the variance confers upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district; (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” The applicant argues that the location of a commercial property along Elm Creek and at a major intersection in the City is unique and justifies a variance. The City did approve a variance for 50% hardcover on the site to the west of Sioux Drive, but the previous approval does not create precedent, as each variance is to be reviewed on its own. The proposed commercial use is permitted in the district and even a variance to 50% is significantly below the amount of hardcover which is permitted on other commercial property. Staff believes the development would be similar to the development to the west of Sioux Drive, thus not altering the essential character of the locality. If the City approves the variance, staff would recommend a condition that additional stormwater treatment or streambank restoration is provided. Staff believes the intensive vegetation removal proposed by the applicant severely undercuts the justification for the variance. With a more reasonable trimming and removal plan and enhanced stormwater and streambank restoration, staff believes it is reasonable to argue that the variance criteria are met. Site Plan Review The purpose of a Site Plan Review, as described in Section 825.55, is to review proposed construction for consistency with City regulations. Obviously, in this case, the proposed construction exceeds hardcover requirements. If the City Council does not grant approval of the variance, the Site Plan Review cannot be approved. If the Council approves the variance, it appears that other relevant regulations would be met. The City “may condition its approval in any manner it deems reasonably necessary in order to promote public health, safety or welfare, to achieve compliance with this ordinance, or to accomplish the purposes of the district in which the property is located.” The City has a fair amount of discretion when reviewing requests for variances. In fact, a variance should only be granted if the City finds that the criteria have been met. Generally, the City has a low level of discretion when reviewing on site plan applications. If the request is consistent with City regulations, it should be approved. In this case, the parking addition does not meet setback requirements without a variance. Therefore, if the variance is not granted, the Site Plan Review should not be approved. Aldi Page 8 of 8 April 14, 2015 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Staff Recommendation As noted above, staff believes the intensive removal of vegetation along Elm Creek is inconsistent with the Shoreland Overlay District standards and shows that the applicant does not propose to put the property to a reasonable use. If the applicant does not update the landscaping plan to preserve much of the vegetation, staff would not recommend approval of the variance and, therefore, also the Site Plan Review. If the applicant updates their plans consistent with Shoreland Overlay District standards and the Planning Commission and Council afterward find that the variance criteria are met, staff would recommend that the following conditions be considered: 1) The applicant shall construct the improvements as displayed on the plans received by the City 3/30/2015, except as modified herein. 2) The applicant shall update tree removal and landscaping plans as follows: a. Vegetation removal proposed in the shore impact zone shall be significantly decreased. b. Tree replacement plans shall provide for overstory replacement trees rather than the ornamental species proposed. c. The applicant shall also meet the other recommendations of the City’s landscape architect. d. Landscaping shall be provided to screen the proposed transformer location. 3) The applicant shall update plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer to provide stormwater management and/or streambank stabilization in excess of minimum City standards in order to mitigate for the hardcover permitted in excess of 25% allowed in the Shoreland Overlay District. 4) The applicant shall construct a left turn lane into the access drive or enter into a petition and waiver to pay for the cost of the City to construct such improvements in connection with other improvements to Sioux Drive. 5) The applicant shall update plans consistent with the comments of the City’s transportation engineer to improve truck turning movements and to ensure the lanes of the proposed access drive line up with the lanes of Westfalen Trail. 6) Upland buffers shall be established fully around all wetland areas, including required vegetation, signage and easements. 7) Plans shall be updated so that stormwater improvements are not located in the right-of-way. 8) Proposed concrete masonry units shall be decorative in nature consistent with the standards of Commercial Zoning Districts. 9) The applicant shall meet the recommendations of the City Engineer dated 4/6/2015. 10) The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and approvals, including but not limited to Elm Creek Watershed, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, and other relevant agencies. 11) 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. Attachments 1) List of documents submitted 2) City Engineer Comments dated 4/6/2015, 3/31/2015 and 4/9/2015 3) Applicant Narratives 4) Equipment Screening Details 5) Plans received by the City 3/30/2015 Project: LR‐15‐157 – Aldi Site Plan and Variance 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 3/13/2015 3/13/20153 Application Y Fee 3/13/2015 3/10/20151 Fee Y $7000 Mailing Labels 3/13/2015 3/2/2015 7 Labels Y Variance Narrative 3/13/2015 3/12/20152 Variance Narrative Y Site Plan Narrative 3/13/2015 3/12/20152 Site Plan Narrative Y Plans 3/13/2015 3/13/201515 Plans Y Updated Landscape Plan 3/25/2015 3/24/20151 Landscape Plan 3‐25‐2015 Y Traffic Report 3/13/2015 3/13/2015105 Traffic Report Y Site Plan Checklist 3/13/2015 3 Site Plan Checklist Y Variance Checklist 3/13/2015 4 Variance Checklist Y Stormwater Management Plan 3/13/2015 3/12/2015310 Stormwater Y Plans – Updated 3‐31‐2015 3/31/2015 3/31/201520 Plans – 3‐31‐2015 N Geotech information 3/31/2015 3/20/201550 Geotech N Engineer Response 3/30/2015 3/30/20159 Eng Response – 3‐30‐2015 N Mech Screening /Light Specs 3/30/2015 11 MechScreenLightSpecs N Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Elm Creek Comments 3/18/2015 4 Elm Creek – 3‐18‐2015 Elm Creek Comments 4/6/2015 5 Elm Creek – 4‐6‐2015 Engineering Comments 3/26/2015 8 Engineering – 03‐26‐2015 Includes stormwater, ESC, traffic Engineer Comments 4/6/2015 8 Engineering – 04‐06‐2015 Includes storm, ESC, traffic (4/9/2015) Police Comments None Fire Marshal/Building Official Comments 3/23/2015 1 Fire Marshal – 3‐23‐2015 Legal Comments 3/23/2015 1 Legal – 3‐23‐2015 Prelim Comments ‐ 120 day letter 3/27/2015 3 Prelim‐120day‐3‐27‐2015 Landscape Plan Comments 4/1/2015 2 Landscape – 4‐1‐2015 Public Comments engineering planning environmental construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 April 6, 2015 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: City Project: LR-15-157 ALDI Site Plan Review WSB Project No. 2712-370 Dear Dusty: We have reviewed the site plans dated March 30, 2015, for the proposed ALDI store located at 3522 Sioux Drive. The plans propose to construct utility and site improvements to serve a 17,825 square foot retail store. We have the following preliminary comments with regards to engineering matters. 1. The plans include the 2 hydrants previously requested. The Fire Marshal should review and approve the proposed hydrant locations. 2. The 8” watermain extended through this site is shown terminating on the property to the east. The plans should show a 10-foot permanent easement centered over the watermain on the neighboring property as well as a temporary construction easement sized to allow for this construction. 3. The proposed sanitary sewer service is shown between 6.20’ and 6.71’ deep at the two manholes on this site. We recommend the sanitary sewer service be kept at least 7’ deep wherever possible. 4. City standard details should be included in the plan set for all sanitary, storm, watermain and for the street improvements that will eventually be extend to serve the property to the east. 5. A street repair detail should be included in the plan set for repairs to Sioux Drive. 6. More detail should be provided for the structural retaining wall shown along the north edge of the roadway in the southeast corner of the site. The additional detail should include what is being proposed for a guardrail or vehicular barrier. 7. Stormwater and erosion control comments are attached. Please contact me at 612-209-5113 if you have any questions. St. Cloud Minneapolis St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com ALDI Site Plan Review April 6, 2015 Page 2 Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Tom Kellogg Attachments engineering planning environmental construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 Memorandum To: Tom Kellogg, P.E., City Engineer City of Medina From: Earth Evans, P.E. Water Resources Project Manager WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: 4.6.15 Re: Aldi Stormwater Management Plan Review City Project No. LR-15-157 WSB Project No. 2712-37 We have completed a preliminary review of the stormwater management plan for the Aldi development in Medina, MN. The site was previously reviewed on 3.18.15. The site is located east of Sioux Drive adjacent to Elm Creek. Documents provided for review include the following: • Hydrocad modeling dated 3.30.15 • Soil Borings • Response to City comments • Grading and Utility Plans dated 3.30.15 These plans were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s Stormwater Design Manual and general engineering practices for stormwater management. 1. Pretreatment must be provided upstream of the proposed infiltration basins. No pretreatment is provided upstream of the discharge into the Sioux Drive infiltration basin. The response to comments indicates that sumps will be provided. The sumps should be clearly indicated on the plans. The City does not have specific sizing criteria for pretreatment. However, due to the significant impervious surfaces and proximity to Elm Creek we recommend additional pretreatment be provided beyond the sump manholes. MIDS and the MN Stormwater Manual provide guidelines on sizing pretreatment. 2. The infiltration basins are not sized adequately to meet the City’s volume control requirement. Based on the soil borings, filtration is recommended. The City requires filtration of 1.5” off impervious which equates to 8,494 CF. The proposed filtration basins provide 1,035 CF of volume based on the Stormwater Management Report. Based St. Cloud Minneapolis St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\02712-370\Admin\Docs\Aldi Stormwater_040615.doc Aldi 4.6.15 Page 2 on our calculation, the filtration volume between the outlet and the base elevation of the two infiltration basins is approximately 6800 CF. 3. A permit will be required from the DNR for work below the OHW of Elm Creek. 4. The model should be updated to incorporate the draintile to determine if it is sized sufficiently. 5. Due to the size of the tributary impervious area to the curb cut into infiltration basin #1, we recommend two curb cuts in addition to pretreatment (see comment #1). 6. Provide a separate drainage area map corresponding to the storm sewer sizing spreadsheet. The response to comments indicates that this has been provided, however the drainage map included in the SWMP does not correspond with the storm sewer sizing spreadsheet. 7. The storm sewer sizing spreadsheet indicates that pipe diameter less than 10” is provided to serve drainage areas 6, 6A and 7. Previous comments indicate that a minimum pipe diameter of 10” is required. Verify the location of these pipes. If the pipes are rain leaders from the building, it is acceptable to have less than a 10” pipe. 8. The proposed outlet for infiltration basin #2 should be directed in-line with the flow from Elm Creek to minimize erosion. 9. Pipe slopes into Elm Creek should be reduced to allow for a maximum velocity of 6 fps. 10. Note proposed EOF elevations on the plan sheets. 11. The HWL of proposed infiltration basin #1 appears to be located within the City ROW. The HWL should be contained entirely within the proposed site. K:\02712-370\Admin\Docs\Aldi Stormwater_040615.doc Infrastructure Engineering Planning Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541-4800 Fax: 763 541-1700 Memorandum To: Tom Kellogg, P.E., City Engineer City of Medina From: Meghan Litsey Environmental Scientist WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: 04.06.15 Re: Aldi, Inc. Retail Facility Erosion Control Plan Review (City Plan Review Response) WSB Project No. 2712-370 We have completed a review of the revised erosion control plan for the Aldi, Inc. Retail Facility development. The site is located south of Highway 55 and east of Sioux Drive in Medina, Minnesota. These plans were reviewed for general conformance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction Stormwater Permit and the comments from the first review by WSB staff on March 24, 2015. Based on this review, all comments have been addressed and we offer no further comments. Infrastructure Engineering Planning Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541-4800 Fax: 763 541-1700 Memorandum To: Tom Kellogg, P.E., City Engineer City of Medina From: Chuck Rickart, PE, PTOE Transportation Engineer WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: April 9, 2015 Re: Aldi Site Updated Traffic Study Review City of Medina WSB Project No. 2712-37 An updated Traffic Impact Study was prepared by ISG Group for the proposed Aldi Retail Facility located on the east side of Sioux Drive between TH 55 and Hamel Road in the City of Medina. The updated Study was prepared in response to review comments from March 27th, 2015. Based on our review of the updated Traffic Study we offer the following questions / comments. 1. The updated Traffic Study indicates that the site access from Sioux Drive will include one entrance lane and two exit lanes. The exit lanes will include a left turn lane and a through/right lane. However, the site plan drawing shows a left turn and right turn lane and it is still unclear how the lanes line up with the Westfalen Trail approach. With the identified lane configuration the left turn lanes should be opposing and through/right lanes should line up with the opposing entrance lanes. This is also going to require that the Westfalen Trail approach have updated signing and striping. This revision should be included with the final site plans. 2. The analysis results from Synchro/ SimTraffic shows that: while the overall levels of services and 95% queue lengths are not a concern with the proposed Aldi’s development; the northbound approach on Sioux Drive to TH 55 is at LOS E or F with the maximum northbound through queue by 2036 is back to the Aldi’s Site Entrance/Westfalen Trial. This together with the potential safety of vehicles waiting to turn left from Sioux Drive into the site from the southbound through lane and the potential for vehicles to use the southbound right turn lane as a bypass lane is a concern. In addition, as a condition of approval for the development on the west side of Sioux Drive at Westfalen Trail the developer was required to sign a petition and waiver agreement to help pay for future turn lane improvements on Sioux Drive at Westfalen Trail. Aldi Site Updated Traffic Study Review City of Medina Page 2 of 2 Based on these factors/concerns a dedicated northbound and southbound left turn lane is recommended to be provided in order for vehicles waiting to turn into the Aldi’s site or onto Westfalen Trail to be out of the through lane of traffic. 3. Truck turning movements were provided separately from the updated Traffic Study. The plan showed the truck movement to and from Sioux Drive at the site entrance as well as within the site. The results show that southbound trucks turning into the site from Sioux Drive are required to turn from the southbound right turn lane. Trucks turning out of the site will be required to cut across the entire entrance and turn into the southbound Sioux Drive through lane. Internal truck circulation shows that trucks are required to drive in the opposite lanes in order to make the needed turns. These are unacceptable situations and the entrance radii should be enlarged to minimize the impacts. The previous comments requested a review of the turning movement to and from the south on Sioux Drive in relationship to the existing median. The median appears to extend into the driveway area and should be evaluated to insure that it will not create problems. The median was installed for the railroad crossing just south of the site as part of a Quiet Zone project which has specific requirements on median width, length and design. Based on my review of the updated Traffic Study and the above comments the following intersection improvements at Sioux Drive and the Aldi’s Site Entrance are recommended to adequately serve the proposed site: Provide a northbound and southbound striped left turn lane from Sioux Drive to the Site Entrance and Westfalen Trail. Increase the curb radii on the Aldi Site Entrance approach. Revise striping and signing on the Westfalen Trail approach and clearly show how the lanes at the Aldi’s entrance align with the lanes on Westfalen Trail. If you have any questions or would like additional clarification on these comments and recommendations please contact me at crickart@wsbeng.com or 612-360-1283. engineering planning environmental construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 St. Cloud Minneapolis St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\02712-370\Admin\Docs\Aldi Landscape_033115.doc Memorandum To: Tom Kellogg, P.E., City Engineer City of Medina From: Jeff Feulner, R.L.A. Landscape Architect WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: 3.31.15 Re: Aldi Landscape Plan Review City Project No. LR-15-157 WSB Project No. 02712-37 We have completed a preliminary review of the Landscape Plan for the Aldi development in Medina, MN. The site is located east of Sioux Drive adjacent to Elm Creek. Documents provided for review include the following: Landscape Plan (L1.11) dated 3.24.15 Landscape Notes & Plant List (L1.12) dated 3.24.15 Tree Removal Plan (L2.11) dated 3.24.15 These plans were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s Tree Preservation and Replacement Ordinance. 1. Selected replacement trees along Elm Creek do not include any overstory trees. Selected species are more ornamental in size/stature, and do not meet the intended objectives of the Tree Preservation ordinance. 2. Tree protection measures are not shown on plans for the existing trees to remain. 3. Clearcutting of significant trees will cause adverse impacts to the property and Elm Creek. The existing group of trees provides habitat for animals, shade for the creek, soil stabilization by the mature root systems and stormwater capturing capabilities within the established tree canopy. Replacement of these trees with dwarf and compact species will not yield the same environmental benefits of the current established woodland area. 4. Removal of numerous trees and stumps on the slopes adjacent to the creek will subject the property to increased potential for soil erosion. Identify temporary and permanent erosion control measures in this area to mitigate the loss of 42 significant trees currently lining the creek. Include maintenance procedures for any sod, seed or mulch applications in the zones adjacent to the creek. Aldi 3.18.15 Page 2 K:\02712-370\Admin\Docs\Aldi Landscape_033115.doc 5. Use of native trees: Three of the species identified as replacement trees are not on the native tree list within the city ordinance. Revise species selections to include approved natives per the ordinance. 6. Replacement trees exceed the maximum 25% per species replacement percentage stated in the ordinance. - Dakota Pinnacle Birch (33%) - Fox Valley Birch (28%) - Sugar Cone Maple (30%) Revise plans to reduce these percentages and maintain species diversity throughout the site. 7. Per Medina ordinance, “Tree” is defined as a woody plant, which at maturity, is thirteen (13) feet or greater in height and that has a more or less defined crown. 28% of trees currently specified as replacements will not reach this height at mature size (Fox Valley Birch). Revise plant selections to include trees as defined by the ordinance. 8. Plant warranty noted on plans is 1 year. City ordinance requires warranty for 2 growing seasons for all replacement trees. 9. Plan notes all trees and planting beds will be irrigated. Identify on plan how irrigation will be accomplished on the north side of the creek. Include locations and type of infrastructure required for irrigation system. 10. Diablo Ninebark planted in close proximity to water or damp areas may be susceptible to powdery mildew fungal disease. 11. Are any of the proposed removals within Mn/DOT ROW? If so, plans should be sent to Mn/DOT for separate review. March 12, 2015 Dusty Finke City Planner Planning Department City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE:ALDI, Inc. Project Description and Site Application Narrative Medina, Minnesota Dusty: Please consider the following project description narrative during the review process for the attached Site Plan Application. All supplemental information required for the site plan review process has also been attached to provide a comprehensive review. The site plan review application and supplemental information are being submitted as part of a request to allow redevelopment of an existing commercial site to accommodate a new 17,825 square foot ALDI Grocery Store as well as associated parking lot, drive aisles, stormwater facilities, and utilities. The proposed facility will also include a 714 square foot canopy at the front of the building (east side) as well as a loading dock to accept delivery of goods at the rear (west side) of the building. The proposed project is located at 3522 Sioux Drive in Medina, Minnesota. The site is described as Section 12 T118N R23W (PID 1211823410069) and is comprised of approximately 3.264 acres. The property is currently zoned as CH-RR: Commercial Highway-Railroad District with Shoreland Overlay. Grocery stores are provided as a permitted use within this district, and no zoning modifications will be required to facilitate the proposed project. The site is bordered by Elm Creek to the northeast and a branch of the Canadian Pacific Railroad to the south. The site is served by an existing access and utilities from Sioux Drive, which borders the west side of the site. The following figures describe the anticipated public utility usage generated by the redeveloped site, including estimated water and sanitary sewer usage: PROPOSED SITE USAGES PROPOSED SITE UTILITY USAGES TYPE SF % OF SITE TYPE MONTHLY YEARLY RETAIL 18,539 13.0%DOMESTIC WATER 4,500 GALLONS 54,000 GALLONS PARKING/ACCESS 49,419 34.8%SANITARY 4,500 GALLONS 54,000 GALLONS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 8,240 5.8% LANDSCAPING/OPEN SPACE 66,002 46.4% TOTAL SITE 142,200 100.0% Site work for this project will include (but not be limited to) grading, paving, landscaping, lighting, and extension of existing curb and gutter, water, storm sewer, and sanitary sewer as well as other general site work as needed to complete construction. Demolition and removal of two underutilized and outdated, existing buildings will also be required. In addition, the proposed project will construct a retaining wall on the north side of the site, running parallel with Elm Creek, as well as the northeast side of the site to control and appropriately direct drainage in the vicinity of the new loading dock. ALDI, Inc. Project Description and Site Plan Application Narrative Medina, Minnesota March 12, 2015 Page 2 of 2 Two new infiltration basins are also proposed to manage stormwater runoff created by the development of the ALDI site. These infiltration basins will be constructed on the northwest and southeast sides of the site as illustrated by the attached supplemental information. Stormwater from the west portion of the site will be directed to the corresponding northwest basin and stormwater from the east portion will drain toward the southeast basin. Stormwater will be treated by the respective infiltration basins and eventually overflow into the adjacent ditchway and into Elm Creek. In addition to this Site Plan Review Application, a request has also been submitted to the Elm Creek Watershed District for approval of the proposed site redevelopment and associated new site plan. Approval of this project will provide a complementary use and an added amenity to the area within an existing development district. It is consistent with pertinent orderly development guidelines, and all applicable local ordinances and regulations affecting development of this property have been considered and adhered to during the design process. This project is an appropriate land use within the district and meets adequate setbacks and parking requirements for the proposed use. These considerations along with the supplemental information provided within this submittal support approval the attached Site Plan Application. Please contact me at 507.331.1500 if there is any additional information we can provide in support of this request on behalf of ALDI, Inc. Respectfully Submitted, Andrew T. Brandel, PE Associate Principal, Engineer Civil Engineering Group ATB/saw March 12, 2015 Dusty Finke City Planner Planning Department City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE:ALDI, Inc. Project Description and Zoning Variance Application Narrative Medina, Minnesota Dusty: Please consider the following project description narrative during the review process for the attached Zoning Variance Application. All supplemental information required for the zoning variance review process has also been attached to provide a comprehensive review. The zoning variance application and supplemental information are being submitted as part of a request to allow redevelopment of an existing commercial site to accommodate a new 17,825 square foot ALDI Grocery Store as well as associated parking lot, drive aisles, stormwater facilities, and utilities. The proposed facility will also include a 714 square foot canopy at the front of the building (east side) as well as a loading dock to accept delivery of goods at the rear (west side) of the building. The proposed project is located at 3522 Sioux Drive in Medina, Minnesota. The site is described as Section 12 T118N R23W (PID 1211823410069) and is comprised of approximately 3.264 acres. The site is bordered by Elm Creek to the northeast and a branch of the Canadian Pacific Railroad to the south. The site is served by an existing access and utilities from Sioux Drive, which borders the west side of the site. The property is currently zoned as CH-RR: Commercial Highway-Railroad District with Shoreland Overlay. Grocery stores are provided as a permitted use within this district. While no zoning modifications will be required to facilitate the proposed project, a variance is being requested based on the proposed increase of impervious surface necessary to facilitate redevelopment of this site. Based on the Shoreland Overlay restrictions, impervious surfacing is limited to 25% of the total site area. A variance is required to increase the allowable impervious to 50% in order to accommodate the proposed site redevelopment and make productive and appealing use of a currently underutilized commercial lot. The variance requested is the minimum application required to alleviate the adverse development condition. Site area calculations performed as part of the site design process confirmed an increase of approximately 1.22 acres of impervious surface to accommodate the proposed site redevelopment. The existing impervious area totals 0.41 acres which equates to 12.6% of the existing site. The proposed increase will result in a total of 1.56 impervious acres or 47.8% of the existing site. This increase is necessary in order to accommodate the proposed loading dock, which is vital for delivery of goods and produce to the grocery store, and to facilitate adequate parking in accordance with City of Medina ordinances. The proposed open area is still well within the requirements at 1.70 acres or 52.2% of the total site. To mitigate any potential impacts created by adding impervious surfacing, two new infiltration basins are also proposed to manage stormwater runoff created by the development of the ALDI site. These infiltration basins will be constructed on the northwest and southeast sides of the site as illustrated by the attached supplemental information. Stormwater from the west portion of the site will be directed to the corresponding northwest basin and stormwater from the east portion will drain toward the southeast basin. Stormwater will be treated by the respective infiltration basins and eventually overflow into the adjacent ditchway and into Elm Creek. ALDI, Inc. Project Description and Zoning Variance Application Narrative Medina, Minnesota March 12, 2015 Page 2 of 2 ALDI is also proposing to construct two retaining walls on the property to mitigate impacts of a proposed increase in imperious surfacing to the site. One retaining wall is proposed on the north side of the site, running parallel with Elm Creek. A second retaining wall would be constructed on the northeast side of the site to control and appropriately direct drainage in the vicinity of the new loading dock. Other adjacent properties have been granted variances to mitigate similar conditions and allow performance of ordinary operations afforded to other similarly situated tenants of like businesses. This request would allow application of the same ordinary opportunities to the subject parcel. Further, the site conditions present are not related to any actions of the applicant. Rather they are existing adverse geographic and topographic elements to the property that would be considered limiting to nearly any potential tenant. Particularly limiting factors include the proximity of Elm Creek and the associated buffer setback from Elm Creek as well as the Met Council Sanitary Sewer Easement which runs along the north and east sides of the property. The variance will not be materially or otherwise detrimental to the purposes of the Medina Zoning Ordinance or to other properties within the same zone. The proposed project will not create any negative impacts to the health, safety, or welfare of neighboring properties or the general public. Due to the traffic already generated by neighboring commercial properties, traffic volume within the area is not anticipated to increase dramatically due to the development of the ALDI site. In addition, the redeveloped lot will provide adequate parking per City of Medina requirements; therefore, no negative impacts are anticipated. No pollution, negative impacts to the environment, or effects on existing waterways or the capacity of flood plains are anticipated as a result of this project. It should be noted that in addition to this Zoning Variance Application, a request has also been submitted to the Elm Creek Watershed District for approval of the proposed site redevelopment and associated new site plan. No special privileges will be result from approval of the variance. Instead, granting the requested variance will only afford this property the same rights and opportunities enjoyed by other similarly situated neighboring properties. Approval of this project will provide a complementary use and an added amenity to the area within an existing development district. It is consistent with pertinent orderly development guidelines, and all applicable local ordinances and regulations affecting redevelopment of this property have been considered and adhered to during the design process. This project is an appropriate land use within the district and meets adequate setbacks and parking requirements for the proposed use. These considerations along with the supplemental information provided within this submittal support approval the attached Zoning Variance Application. Please contact me at 507.331.1500 if there is any additional information we can provide in support of this request on behalf of ALDI, Inc. Respectfully Submitted, Andrew T. Brandel, PE Associate Principal, Engineer Civil Engineering Group ATB/saw rg eI1V(sOr7 9 An affordable solution for equipment screening is finally here... Envisor equipment screens now offer architects the flexibility to create affordable, elegant, customized screening solutions that integrate with their building design, all with no rooftop penetration. Our patented equipment screens also provide a viable solution for municipal screening code requirements on everything from HVAC units to sr Louver Panels Systom Feature. • Vertical Screen • Louver Panel Design • Cove Top Trim • Panel Color. Oyster • Top Trim Color: Terra Cutts The Ohio State University Foundation - Columbus, Ohio chillers, air handlers, power exhausts, roof stacks, communication equipment, dumpsters - you name it! Customizing a screen to fit your needs is easy... Simply choose between canted or vertical, decide on a panel design, select a top trim (optional), and pick a color. It's that simple! We can customize any feature to your particular design requirements, including custom panel designs, custom colors, and custom top trim designs. If you don't see what you need, tell us what you want. We'll build it for you. U.S. Patent No. 5,664,304 U.S. Patent No. 7,000,362 U.S. Patent No. 7.707.79 www.cityscapesinc.com COVE WIDE RIB BATTEN LOUVER Step 1: Choose a Canted or Vertical System Envisor screens arc the perfect alternative to parapet walls and they satisfy even the strictest screening code requirements. Both styles feature our patented attachment method, which secure our screens directly to the equipment with no rooftop penetration. Screen heights are available to screen virtually anything you desire. Step 2: Decide on a Panel Design 1 II PAN BRICK Panels are available in 5 standard styles allowing you to control the project without sacrificing the essential elements of the building design. The panels are constructed of thermoformed high impact ABS with a co -extruded UV protective layer on both sides. The panels are held firmly in place using a rust -free, double tracked aluminum rail system. This enables the panels to slide side -to -side for easy access to the unit during servicing and maintenance. Don't see a pane] that fits your project? Tell us and we'll make one that you design. Step 3: Select a Top Trim (optional) 7 7 ALAMO 5 1/2" 1_ STEP 1 _r STEP 2 1 FLAT Decorative top trip options offer the flexibility to further customize the elegant appearance of the screens by picking up on your building design elements and incorporating those details into the screen itself. Although optional, they offer one more way to make screens part of the design, not parr of the problem. We can manufacture any size and shape top trim you create. www.cityscapesinc.com Step 4: Pick a Designer Color ALABASTER SHADOW GRAY ALMOND SLATE GRAY OYSTER RANCHERO RED PUTTY CYPRESS MOSS KHAKI FOREST GREEN SAGEBRUSH MANSARD BROWN Our designer colors complement most architectural applications, but don't let standard colors limit your creativity. We have the ability to match to any cross-referenced color specification. Send us samples to match. We've even matched a color to a rock! Colors shown are only approximate. Please call for actual samples. Step 5: Custom Designed Solutions CUSTOM PANELS MULTIPLE UNIT SCREENS Envisor equipment screens can be manufactured in a limitless combination of shapes and configurations to help reduce cost, add to the aesthetics of a building, or both. Let us design one for you! Just tell us the equipment manufacturer, the model numbers, and the special requirements you might have. Call for a complete design kit today or visit our website at www.cityscapesinc.com. www.cityscapesinc.cotn P�R�O�P�O�S�E�D� �A�L�D�I�,� I�N�C�.� �L�O�C�A�T�I�O�N� T 1 . 1 1 T I T L E S H E E T - A L D I , I N C . R E T A I L F A C I L I T Y M E D I N A M I N N E S O T A 1 6 4 0 8 T I T L E D E H D E H A T B 1 4 - 1 6 4 0 8 0 3 / 3 0 / 1 5 T�r�u�n�k� �H�i�g�h�w� a� y� � 5� 5� R E T A I L F A C I L I T Y A L D I , I N C . P R O J E C T I N D E X : P L A N S F O R : P R O J E C T G E N E R A L N O T E S O W N E R : A l d i , I n c . O W N E R C O N T A C T : A n d r e w M a c k 4 2 0 1 B a g l e y A v e n u e N o r t h F a r i b a u l t , M i n n e s o t a 5 5 0 2 1 P H : 5 0 7 - 3 3 3 - 9 4 6 0 x 1 2 3 F a x : 5 0 7 - 3 3 3 - 9 4 7 5 P R O J E C T A D D R E S S : 3 5 2 2 S i o u x D r i v e H a m e l , M N 5 5 3 4 0 S : 1 2 , T : 1 1 8 , R : 2 3 H a m e l , H e n n e p i n , M i n n e s o t a M A N A G I N G O F F I C E : P R O J E C T M A N A G E R : A n d y B r a n d e l E m a i l : A n d y . B r a n d e l @ i s - g r p . c o m 1 4 1 5 T o w n S q u a r e L a n e F a r i b a u l t , M i n n e s o t a 5 5 0 2 1 P h : 5 0 7 - 3 3 1 - 1 5 0 0 F a x : 5 0 7 - 3 3 1 - 1 5 0 1 F a r i b a u l t , M i n n e s o t a O F F I C E 1 " = 5 0 0 ' L O C A T I O N M A P M E D I N A , M I N N E S O T A I S G P R O J E C T # 1 4 - 1 6 4 0 8 T I T L E C L I E N T P R O J E C T N O . S H E E T T I T L E S H E E T T H I S D O C U M E N T I S T H E P R O P E R T Y O F I S G A N D M A Y N O T B E U S E D , C O P I E D O R D U P L I C A T E D W I T H O U T P R I O R W R I T T E N C O N S E N T . P R O J E C T P R O J E C T N O . F I L E N A M E D E S I G N E D B Y D R A W N B Y I S S U E D A T E R E V I E W E D B Y R E V I S I O N S C H E D U L E N O D A T E D E S C R I P T I O N Z O N I N G V A R I A N C E / S I T E P L A N R E V I E W A R C H I T E C T : A P D E n g i n e e r i n g & A r c h i t e c t u r e , P L L S . A R C H I T E C T C O N T A C T : B r i a n G r i n n e l l 6 1 5 F i s h e r s R u n V i c t o r , N e w Y o r k 1 4 5 6 4 P h : 5 8 5 - 7 2 4 - 2 2 2 2 F a x : 5 8 5 - 9 2 4 - 4 9 1 4 C�i�t�y� M�e�d�i�n�a�,� �M�i�n�n�e�s�o�t�a�o�f� I H E R E B Y C E R T I F Y T H A T T H I S D O C U M E N T W A S P R E P A R E D B Y M E O R U N D E R M Y D I R E C T S U P E R V I S I O N A N D T H A T I A M A D U L Y L I C E N S E D P R O F E S S I O N A L E N G I N E E R U N D E R T H E L A W S O F T H E S T A T E O F M I N N E S O T A . K E Y P L A N L I C . N O . D A T E I H E R E B Y C E R T I F Y T H A T T H I S D O C U M E N T W A S P R E P A R E D B Y M E O R U N D E R M Y D I R E C T S U P E R V I S I O N A N D T H A T I A M A D U L Y L I C E N S E D L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U N D E R T H E L A W S O F T H E S T A T E O F M I N N E S O T A . L I C . N O . D A T E A n d r e w T . B r a n d e l 4 7 0 7 8 4 2 0 1 B a g l e y A v e . N F a r i b a u l t , M N 5 5 0 2 1 T e l : 5 0 7 / 3 3 3 - 9 4 6 0 F a x : 5 0 7 / 3 3 3 - 9 4 8 5 B . M . E L E V A T I O N = 9 7 6 . 3 0 H�a�m�e�l� � R� o� a� d�S�i�o�u�x� �D�r�i�v�e�H�u�n�t�e�r� �D�r�i�v�e�B�r�o�c�k�t�o�n� �L�a�n�e� �N�o�r�t�h�C�a�n�a�d�i� a� n� � P� a� c� i� f� i� c� � R� a� i� l� r� o� a� d� C�a�n�a�d�i�a�n� �P�a�c�i�f�i�c� �R�a�i�l�r�o�a�d� O� l� d� � M� e� m� o� r� i� a� l� � H� i� g� h� w� a� y� (�t� r� u� n� k� � H� i� g� h� w� a� y� � 5� 5� )�C�o�u�n�t�y� �R�o�a�d� �1�0�1�E�v�e�r�g�r�e�e�n� �R�o�a�d� 1 . A L L W O R K S H A L L C O N F O R M T O T H E C O N T R A C T D O C U M E N T S , W H I C H I N C L U D E S , B U T A R E N O T L I M I T E D T O , T H E O W N E R - C O N T R A C T O R A G R E E M E N T , T H E P R O J E C T M A N U A L ( W H I C H I N C L U D E S G E N E R A L S U P P L E M E N T A R Y C O N D I T I O N S A N D S P E C I F I C A T I O N S ) , D R A W I N G S O F A L L D I S C I P L I N E S , A N D A L L A D D E N D A , M O D I F I C A T I O N S A N D C L A R I F I C A T I O N S I S S U E D B Y T H E A R C H I T E C T / E N G I N E E R . 2 . C O N T R A C T D O C U M E N T S S H A L L B E I S S U E D T O A L L S U B C O N T R A C T O R S B Y T H E G E N E R A L C O N T R A C T O R I N C O M P L E T E S E T S I N O R D E R T O A C H I E V E T H E F U L L E X T E N T A N D C O M P L E T E C O O R D I N A T I O N O F A L L W O R K . 3 . W R I T T E N D I M E N S I O N S T A K E P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D D I M E N S I O N S . N O T I F Y A R C H I T E C T / E N G I N E E R O F A N Y D I S C R E P A N C I E S O R C O N D I T I O N S R E Q U I R I N G I N F O R M A T I O N O R C L A R I F I C A T I O N B E F O R E P R O C E E D I N G W I T H T H E W O R K . 4 . F I E L D V E R I F Y A L L E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S A N D D I M E N S I O N S . N O T I F Y A R C H I T E C T / E N G I N E E R O F A N Y D I S C R E P A N C I E S O R C O N D I T I O N S R E Q U I R I N G I N F O R M A T I O N O R C L A R I F I C A T I O N B E F O R E P R O C E E D I N G W I T H T H E W O R K . 5 . D E T A I L S S H O W N A R E I N T E N D E D T O B E I N D I C A T I V E O F T H E P R O F I L E S A N D T Y P E O F D E T A I L I N G R E Q U I R E D T H R O U G H O U T T H E W O R K . D E T A I L S N O T S H O W N A R E S I M I L A R I N C H A R A C T E R T O D E T A I L S S H O W N . W H E R E S P E C I F I C D I M E N S I O N S , D E T A I L S O R D E S I G N I N T E N T C A N N O T B E D E T E R M I N E D , N O T I F Y A R C H I T E C T / E N G I N E E R B E F O R E P R O C E E D I N G W I T H T H E W O R K . 6 . A L L M A N U F A C T U R E D A R T I C L E S , M A T E R I A L S A N D E Q U I P M E N T S H A L L B E A P P L I E D , I N S T A L L E D , C O N N E C T E D , E R E C T E D , C L E A N E D A N D C O N D I T I O N E D A C C O R D I N G T O M A N U F A C T U R E R S ' I N S T R U C T I O N S . I N C A S E O F D I S C R E P A N C I E S B E T W E E N M A N U F A C T U R E R S ' I N S T R U C T I O N S A N D T H E C O N T R A C T D O C U M E N T S , N O T I F Y A R C H I T E C T / E N G I N E E R B E F O R E P R O C E E D I N G W I T H T H E W O R K . 7 . A L L D I S S I M I L A R M E T A L S S H A L L B E E F F E C T I V E L Y I S O L A T E D F R O M E A C H O T H E R T O A V O I D G A L V A N I C C O R R O S I O N . 8 . T H E L O C A T I O N A N D T Y P E O F A L L I N P L A C E U T I L I T I E S S H O W N O N T H E P L A N S A R E F O R G E N E R A L I N F O R M A T I O N O N L Y A N D A R E A C C U R A T E A N D C O M P L E T E T O T H E B E S T O F T H E K N O W L E D G E O F I S G . N O W A R R A N T Y O R G U A R A N T E E I S I M P L I E D . T H E C O N T R A C T O R S H A L L V E R I F Y T H E S I Z E S , L O C A T I O N S A N D E L E V A T I O N S O F A L L I N P L A C E U T I L I T I E S P R I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . C O N T R A C T O R S H A L L I M M E D I A T E L Y N O T I F Y E N G I N E E R O F A N Y D I S C R E P A N C I E S O R V A R I A T I O N S F R O M P L A N . 9 . T H E C O N T R A C T O R I S T O C O N T A C T " G O P H E R S T A T E O N E C A L L " F O R U T I L I T Y L O C A T I O N S , 4 8 H O U R S P R I O R T O E X C A V A T I O N / C O N S T R U C T I O N ( 1 - 8 0 0 - 2 5 2 - 1 1 6 6 ) . S H E E T I N D E X T 1 . 1 1 T I T L E S H E E T C 1 . 1 1 E X I S T I N G S I T E & R E M O V A L P L A N C 2 . 1 1 S I T E P L A N C 2 . 1 2 S I T E U T I L I T Y P L A N C 3 . 1 1 S I T E G R A D I N G P L A N C 4 . 1 1 E X I S T I N G S T O R M W A T E R P O L L U T I O N P R E V E N T I O N P L A N C 4 . 1 2 P R O P O S E D S T O R M W A T E R P O L L U T I O N P R E V E N T I O N P L A N C 4 . 1 3 S T O R M W A T E R P O L L U T I O N P R E V E N T I O N P L A N N O T E S C 5 . 1 1 S I T E D E T A I L S C 5 . 1 2 S I T E D E T A I L S C 5 . 1 3 S I T E D E T A I L S C 5 . 1 4 S I T E D E T A I L S C 5 . 1 5 S I T E D E T A I L S C 6 . 1 1 S I T E L I G H T I N G P L A N L 1 . 1 1 L A N D S C A P E P L A N L 1 . 1 2 L A N D S C A P E N O T E S & P L A N T L I S T L 2 . 1 1 T R E E R E M O V A L P L A N 1 O F 1 A L T A / A C S M L A N D T I T L E S U R V E Y A - 1 3 1 O P E R A T I O N S P L A N E X T E R I O R E L E V A T I O N C1.11 EXISTING SITE & REMOVAL PLAN - ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA DEH DEH ATB 14-16408 03/30/15 THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ISG AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 C1-EXISTING REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE Andrew T. Brandel 47078 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 B.M. ELEVATION=976.30 THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ISG AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 C2-SITE REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION C2.11 SITE PLAN - ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA DEH DEH ATB 14-16408 03/30/15 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE Andrew T. Brandel 47078 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 B.M. ELEVATION=976.30 CONSTRUCT INFILTRATION BASIN #2 (HATCH) TOP = 974.50' OUTLET = 972.50' BASE = 971.00' SITE AREA CALCULATIONS EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA EXISTING OPEN AREA TOTAL SITE AREA = = = = = = = 17,896 sf 124,304 sf 142,200 sf 0.41 ac 2.85 ac 3.26 ac 12.6% 87.4% 100% * 71,100 sf 74,242 sf 67,958 sf 142,200 sf * 1.63 ac 1.70 ac 1.56 ac 3.26 ac * 50% 52.2% 47.8% 100% * 25% MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS AREA ALLOWED PER SHORELAND OVERLAY. IMPERVIOUS AREA UP TO 50% REQUIRES VARIANCE EXISTING SITE * REQUIRED OPEN AREA PROPOSED OPEN AREA PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA TOTAL SITE AREA PROPOSED SITE SITE SETBACK DATA 25' 15' 25' 50' PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT CH-RR: COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY-RAILROAD DISTRICT WITH SHORELAND OVERLAY SETBACKS PARKING:BUILDING: 25' 10' 10' 50' FRONT SIDE REAR ELM CREEK CONSTRUCT INFILTRATION BASIN #1 (HATCH) TOP = 975.50' OUTLET = 973.50' BASE = 972.00' THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ISG AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 C2-SITE REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION C2.12 SITE UTILITY PLAN - ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA DEH DEH ATB 14-16408 03/30/15 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE Andrew T. Brandel 47078 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 B.M. ELEVATION=976.30 CONSTRUCT INFILTRATION BASIN #2 (HATCH) TOP = 974.50' OUTLET = 972.50' BASE = 971.00' CONSTRUCT INFILTRATION BASIN #1 (HATCH) TOP = 975.50' OUTLET = 973.50' BASE = 972.00' NOTES: x ALL UTILITIES THAT ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO 5' OUTSIDE OF BUILDING ARE TO BE CONNECT TO BUILDING BY MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR. x ENSURE 18" VERTICAL BETWEEN ALL PROPOSED & EXISTING WATER, STORM, & SANITARY. C3.11 SITE GRADING PLAN - ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA DEH DEH ATB 14-16408 03/30/15 THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ISG AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 C3-GRADE REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE Andrew T. Brandel 47078 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 B.M. ELEVATION=976.30 CONSTRUCT INFILTRATION BASIN #2 (HATCH) TOP = 974.50' OUTLET = 972.50' BASE = 971.00' CONSTRUCT INFILTRATION BASIN #1 (HATCH) TOP = 975.50' OUTLET = 973.50' BASE = 972.00' C6.11 SITE LIGHTING PLAN - ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA KDM KDM MDN 14-16408 03/30/15 THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ISG AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 C6-LIGHT REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE Andrew T. Brandel 47078 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 N.T.S.1 MANUFACTURER/MODEL NUMBER LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE STYLETYPE LAMPS REMARKS Provide light fixtures as shown on Fixture Schedule. Substitutions shall have prior approval by the Project Engineer before bid date. Being listed as an acceptable Manufacturer in no way relieves the Contractors obligation to provide all equipment and features in accordance with these specifications. FOOTCANDLE LEGEND THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF I+S GROUP, INC. AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 LBASE-ALT REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA LANDSCAPE PLAN L1.11 - DEH DEH ATB 14-16408 03/30/15 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 DECIDUOUS TREES PLANT SYMBOL KEY EVERGREEN TREES EVERGREEN SHRUBS DECIDUOUS SHRUBS UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING UTILITIES ON-SITE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CREEK ZONE REPLACE LARGE TREES WITH SHOWN PLANTINGS (IN DASHED) CREEK ZONE ADD PLANTINGS AS SHOWN (IN DASHED) PLANT BED (TYP.) PLANT BED (TYP.) PLANT BED (TYP.) THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF I+S GROUP, INC. AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 LBASE-ALT REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA LANDSCAPE NOTES & PLANT LIST L1.12 - CWT CWT CWT 14-16408 03/30/15 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 LANDSCAPE NOTES: 1.0 General: 1.01 Landscape work includes, but is not limited to, removal of weeds, top soil installation, soil preparation, installation of edging, installation of irrigation system, planting of trees, shrubs, and groundcover, final grading, installation of erosion control fabric, mulching, weed control, clean-up, and regular maintenance during construction and the establishment period. 1.02 No part of this work shall be performed or installed in any location or manner, which may endanger the health, safety, or welfare of the public now, or in the future. Construction means, methods, techniques, sequencing, etc., are the sole responsibility of the Contractor. 1.03 The Contractor agrees that he/she shall assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold the Owner and Landscape Architect harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, excepting for liability arising from the sole negligence of the Owner or Landscape Architect. 1.04 The Contractor shall comply with all applicable rules, regulations, laws, and ordinances imposed by Authorities having Jurisdiction over this project site. 1.05 Contractor shall immediately give written notice to the Landscape Architect of conflict in any part of plans, notes, or specifications. Request clarification from I&S Group as appropriate. 1.06 Contractor shall field-verify existing conditions. 1.06.1 "Existing conditions" for the work as specified herein are based on the work described in the I&S Group drawings, and on the assumption that the work described in these drawings will be completed as described. 1.06.2 Immediately report discrepancies or variances between the existing conditions and the I&S Group drawings in writing to the owner's representative. If the Contractor begins work specified herein without the notification to I&S Group, the Contractor thereby acknowledges acceptance of the site "As-Is" and shall perform the work shown on the drawings and specified herein in accordance with the accepted base bid. 1.07 Prior to construction, the Contractor shall be responsible for locating all underground utilities. 1.07.1 Existing utility lines to be removed which may not be shown on construction drawings are presumed to be present within the Site. Contractor shall not proceed with such utility lines removal. Contractor shall contact I&S Group immediately upon discovery of an unidentified underground utility piping. I&S Group will then direct the Contractor as to the appropriate action to be taken. 1.08 Contractor shall avoid damage to utilities, structures, site appurtenances, etc., which occur as a result of the landscape construction. 1.09 The Landscape Contractor is responsible for verifying all quantities shown on these plans before pricing the work. Any difference in quantities shall be brought to the attention of I&S Group for clarification. 1.10 All substitutions shall be requested in writing and shall be approved by the I&S Group landscape architecture department, 507-387-6651. 1.11 If any areas which appear to need landscape installation, but are not shown as landscaped on the plans, notify I&S Group landscape architecture department immediately. 1.12 All registered chemicals used on this project shall be handled and applied in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. 1.13 Clean-up the site at completion of this work, leave the site in an attractive condition. 1.14 Upon completion of installation the contractor shall issue a Certificate of Completion stating the project name and the following: "I, (state licensed contractor's name) hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the installation of landscape and irrigation for the above project is complete and conforms with the city and owner approved plans and specifications, with the exception of the following deviations (list approved deviations, and who approved them)." The certificate shall be signed by the Contractor's license holder. 1.15 Prior to starting installation the contractor shall confirm that the construction set of plans are signed or stamped for approval by the city. Notify the landscape architect immediately if a city approval stamp or signature is not visible on the drawings. 2.0 Site and Soil Preparation: 2.01 The top 8 inches of soil shall be free of rocks, concrete, and foreign materials larger than 2 inches in diameter. Road base material shall not be present in the top 24 inches of soil. Any soil mixed with road base shall be removed and disposed of off-site. 2.02 Final grades shall be smooth and even, providing an attractive appearance. Concentrated flows of water shall not drain over walks. Contact landscape architect if this appears unavoidable. Landscape materials shall not block or interfere with the free flow of drainage water. 2.03 Planting areas shall slope at 2% minimum away from building foundations and footings. Positive drainage shall be provided in all planting areas. No standing water shall be permitted. A maximum grade difference of 1/2 inch shall be allowed between sidewalks or curbs and the finish surface in planters. 2.04 The planting soil mixture specified for planters shall be free of clay and is to be composed of topsoil and additional amendments and backfilled to a depth of 24". Amend the top 8 inches of topsoil in all planted areas with the following materials. Quantities are minimums per 1000 square feet. 2.04.1 [3] cubic yards of nitrolized compost. Compost shall have a 1/2 inch maximum particle size, a ph of 6.5 or higher, shall be cured for 60 days or more after composting, shall meet all EPA guidelines, and shall be weed and pathogen free. 2.04.2 [10] lbs of agricultural gypsum. 2.04.3 [26] lbs of 16-16-16 fertilizer. 2.05 All planting areas, including areas to be sodded, shall receive the following soil preparation prior to planting: a minimum of 8 inches of lightly compacted topsoil shall be installed over the subsoil if topsoil has been removed or is not present. If topsoil filters down into the subsoil, additional topsoil shall be applied until a stable 8 inch deep layer of topsoil is maintained. The top 8 inches of topsoil in the planters shall be machine-tilled to aerate the soil and alleviate any surface compaction. 2.06 The burden of proof of soil amendment installation rests with the Contractor. Soil tests may be required at the Contractor's expense in order to confirm amendment installation. 3.0 Planting: 3.01 Rough grading shall be completed prior to the start of planting in any given area of the project site. 3.03 Plants shall be well branched and bushy with good color, plant size should be in proportion to the pot as described by the American Standard for Nursery Stock. Plants delivered to the site that are yellow, sparse, burned, or barren will be rejected. Plant pots shall have soil to within 1 inch of the rim and the plants shall be fully rooted in the container. Plant material with cracked or broken root-balls shall be removed from the site. All plants shall be high quality with a securely attached id tag, have normal growth and should be free from disease, insects, or insect eggs. Plants shall conform with the minimum standards of ANSI z60 - the American Standard for Nursery Stock. Trees may not have been topped (upright branches at top of may not be cut or pruned). 3.04 Plants shall exceed the minimum size at planting requirements noted on the plans, regardless of the size of the container. No exceptions. Prepare bids based on the plant size, not the container size. A larger container size plant may be required to meet the plant size minimums. No cost adjustments will be allowed for use of larger container plants. Measurements shall be made with the plant in a natural, unsupported position. 3.05 Plants specified as "gallon," "container," or "box" on the plans shall conform to the ANSI z60, American Standard for Nursery Stock requirements for sizes with equivalent numbers (#1, #5, #15, #24, etc.,) as if specified as such on the plans. Thus a plant labeled as "5 gallon" size on the plans must be equivalent to a #5 container size plant as described in the American Standard for Nursery Stock. 3.06 Tree calipers shall be measured 6 inches above the rootball per ANSI z60, American Standard for Nursery Stock. Tree heights shall be measured from top of rootball to top of highest branch. 3.07 Trees shall be planted 4'0" or more from hardscapes, such as sidewalks, foundations, curbs, patios, etc. when possible. 3.08 Trees shall not be planted within 4'0" of buried utility lines, relocate trees slightly, if not possible notify landscape architect. 3.09 A vertical clearance of 114 inches is required above all disabled accessible parking spaces, a vertical clearance of 80 inches is required above all walkways. Trim trees to remove all limbs within these areas for ADA compliance. 3.10 Turf areas shall be sloped as required to provide positive drainage to the perimeter, or to drain inlets. Turf shall be installed flush with the top of surrounding curbs and walks so as to prevent water from puddling at the turf edges, import top soil if necessary to comply with this requirement. 3.11 All sod turf shall be rolled with a weighted roller after installation. 4.0 Mulch: 4.01 When rock mulch is indicated, install a 3" deep layer of 1"-2" dia. rock. 4.02 When rock mulch is indicated, place mulch onto a water permeable filter fabric. Such fabric shall be of substantial quality and include a manufacturer warranty of a minimum of 10 years. 4.03 When wood mulch is indicated, install premium shredded hardwood mulch to a minimum depth of 3 inches. All mulched areas shall also incorporate a granular pre-emergent herbicide, such as Preen, to aid in weed abatement. No permeable filter fabric should be used unless called for on the plan. 5.0 Slopes: 5.01 See grading plans for slopes locations and gradients 5.02 Notify the landscape architect prior to starting work if any area on this site is found to have a slope exceeding 3:1. 7.0 Landscape Maintenance: 7.01 The Contractor shall maintain the landscape & irrigation throughout construction and up to opening date. 7.02 The Contractor shall be responsible for maintaining a regular watering schedule for all sodded areas for a minimum of 30 days after installation to ensure proper establishment. 7.03 The Contractor shall take all reasonable precautions required to protect plants throughout the maintenance period from abnormal temperatures. 8.0 Observations: 8.01 The Contractor shall request a final observation by the owner's representative upon completion of installation. 8.02 Observation must be requested 7 days in advance of the anticipated date of the observation. 8.03 Prior to requesting the final observation it is the contractor's responsibility to assure that the work is finished and complies with all clearly stated requirements of the plans, including plant sizes and quantities. Substantial non-compliance will result in the assessment of penalties against the Contractor, to be not less than the cost of the observation. Any of the following shall be considered proof of substantial non-compliance: 8.03.1 Installed quantity of any item is less than 95% of that specified. 8.03.2 More than 3% of any plant variety are undersize. 8.03.3 More than 3% of any plant variety are dead or dying. Dying is defined as wilting or loss of more than 30% of leaves (deciduous leaf drop excepted.) 9.0 Guarantee: 9.01 The Landscape Contractor shall guarantee all landscape work for a period of time, beginning at the start of the maintenance period, as follows: 9.01.1 Trees - one year. 9.01.2 Shrubs, lawn and groundcover - one year. 9.01.3 Irrigation system - one year. 9.02 Theft, vandalism, and death due to acts of God are excluded from this warranty. TREE PLANTING DETAIL UNDISTURBED SOIL FINISHED GRADE SET ROOT BALL FLAT ON UNDISTURBED SOIL. REMOVE OR CUT TOP AND FOLD DOWN WIRE BASKET AND BURLAP. REMOVE ALL POLY TIES. BACKFILL WITH EXISTING SOIL. WATER THOROUGHLY TO ELIMINATE AIR. DO NOT TAMP. 2 TIMES ROOT BALL DIA. DO NOT STAKE THROUGH ROOT BALL 3" DEEP HARD WOOD MULCH. MULCH 6" BACK FROM TRUNK. ROOT COLLAR SHALL BE SET 1" ABOVE FINISH GRADE. ROOT BALL HOWEVER, IF NEEDED, USE 2" WIDE WEBBING STRAPS WITH HEAVY GAUGE WIRE. WIRE SHOULD STICK STRAIGHT OUT AS SHOWN, BUT NOT TIGHT. REMOVE AFTER ONE YEAR. IF AN EVERGREEN: - NEVER CUT LEADER - PRUNE ONLY TO REMOVE DAMAGED BRANCHES OVER PRE-EMERGENT WEED CONTROL GRANULES. KEEP STAKING IS DISCOURAGED, SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL 2' MIN. TO PAVED SURFACE LC BACKFILL WITH PLANTING MIX. 6" AT SIDES AND ALL SPACE BETWEEN PLANTS TO FULL DEPTH. UNDISTURBED SOIL FINAL GRADE EDGER MULCH AS SPECIFIED ON PLAN OVER SIDEWALK/CURB MIN. 6" (TYP.) PRE-ENERGENT WEED CONTROL GRANULES SOD/SEED - REFER TO CIVIL PLANS FOR LOCATIONS AND TYPE. SITE NOTES: IRRIGATION REQUIRED - ALL TREES, SODDED AREAS, AND PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE IRRIGATED. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THE IRRIGATION DESIGN. PLANT BED EDGER - USE POLY EDGER PLANTING BEDS - SHALL BE MULCHED WITH 3" DEPTH HARDWOOD MULCH. DO NOT USE AN UNDERLAYMENT. NO PLASTIC OR FILTER FABRIC. GENERAL NOTES: - LANDSCAPE WORK TO BE COMPLETED AFTER COMPLETION OF FINISH GRADING. FINISH GRADING BY OTHERS. - LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR WILL VISIT SITE BEFORE SUBMITTING A BID. THIS WILL ALLOW FOR A MORE FULL UNDERSTANDING OF SITE CONDITIONS. - IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE NUMBER OF PLANTS OR AREAS INDICATED ON THE PLANT LIST OR NOTES AND THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLAN, THE NUMBERS OR AREAS SHOWN ON THE PLAN WILL BE CORRECT. - ALL PLANTS AND MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. - ALL DECIDUOUS TREES MEASURED BY CALIPER SHALL BE MEASURED AT A POINT 6" UP FROM THE TRUNKS ROOT COLLAR. - ALL TREE TRUNKS SHALL BE SURROUNDED BY A MINIMUM 2 FOOT RADIUS BED WITH 3 INCH DEPTH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. - CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS WILL HAVE BEEN PLANTED IN THE CONTAINER FOR A MINIMUM OF SIX MONTHS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION ON-SITE. - ALL PLANTS WILL BE GUARANTEED FOR FULL REPLACEMENT A MINIMUM OF AT LEAST ONE FULL YEAR (365 DAYS) AFTER INSTALLATION ON SITE. - IF THE CONTRACTOR FEELS THERE MAY BE AN ERROR, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. - PLANT SYMBOLS SHOWN ARE FOR LOCATING THE POSITIONS FOR PLANTING. SIZES SHOWN DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE TRUE PLANT SIZE EITHER AT TIME OF INSTALLATION OR WHEN FULL GROWN. - LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR WILL REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO THE PROPERTY FROM INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES AT NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. TREE REMOVALS AND REQUIRED CALIPER INCHES THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED TABLE L2.11 TREE REMOVAL PLAN - ALDI, INC. RETAIL FACILITY MEDINA MINNESOTA DEH DEH ATB 14-16408 03/30/15 THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ISG AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY TITLE ISSUE DATE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET 16408 TREE REMOVAL ALT REVIEWED BY TITLE SHEET REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. KEY PLAN LIC. NO.DATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LIC. NO.DATE Andrew T. Brandel 47078 4201 Bagley Ave. N Faribault, MN 55021 Tel: 507/333-9460 Fax: 507/333-9485 LOCKERS COAT CLOSET ELECTRIC SWITCHGEAR & BOLLARDS NO PARKINGNO PARKING40'-0"6'-8"±36'-0" 6'-8"±3'-0" 11'-1" 96'-0" McCUE SECURITY RAIL TUBE STEEL (5) SPOT MERCHANDISERS 15'-0"56'-11 3/8" CLEARWATER & FIRE RISERS CHECK LANE49'-3"REF. DRINKING FOUNTAINS 15 DOOR FREEZER 19'-0" x 41'-0" 17 DOOR COOLER 24'-0" x 65'-7" TRASH CAN 6" DIA. COVERED STEEL PIPE BOLLARD (TYP. OF 7) 41'-0"19'-0"1'-1 1/2" TYP.EXTERIORWALLTHICKNESSDUMPSTER ROOF LEADER 7'-4" 22'-1 1/2" 147'-4"22'-8"118'-0"140'-8"106'-6 1/2" PALLET JACK 3'-0"7'-10 3/4"7'-0"7'-0"8'-0"7'-0"8'-0"7'-0"10'-5 3/4"3'-0"3'-0" (73) MODEL 563W CART STORAGE (38) MODEL 563W CART STORAGE 10'-0" FLOOR DRAIN PROTOCOL UNIT McCUE GUARDRAIL 6'-0"4'-11"9'-1"5'-0"4'-11"10'-5"65'-7"24'-0"11'-4"11'-11" 2'-0" 6'-0" HUB DRAIN 10'-6" CLEAR TUBE STEEL BACK ROOM 110 WOMENS 104 BREAK ROOM 107 OFFICE 108 HALL 105 MENS 106 SALES 103 ENTRY 101 EXIT 102 7'-6"10'-5 3/4"6'-9 3/4"5'-9 1/2"CLEAR3'-0" 3'-0"36'-0"3'-0" FREESTANDING SACKING COUNTER 12'-0"ALDI FINDS 12' D6XULEPDELI12' C6XLEPFRESH MEAT7'-0"8'-0"7'-0"HUB DRAIN(CAPPED @ F.F. FOR FUTURE USE) 3'-0" 72'-0" MCCUE BUMPER 4'-8"4'-8"3'-0"4'-8"3'-0"4'-8"3'-0"18'-9 7/8"72'-11"145'-1" 14'-0" 34'-0"6'-8" ±48'-0" ALDI FINDS 12'-0"56'-8 3/8" MULTI-DECK UNITS15'-3 3/4" CLEAR8'-2"5'-0"RACKING6'-0"RACKING6'-0"RACKINGWALK OFF MAT FLOOR SCRUBBER 8'-1"MEAT COOLER 8' C6XLEPFRESH MEAT3'-0" 3'-0" NOTES: 1. THIS DRAWING IS FOR GENERAL FIXTURING LAYOUT AND REFERENCE TO EQUIPMENT ONLY. ALL INFORMATION IS FOR ALDI OPERATIONAL USE ONLY AND SHALL NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRCUTION OR BIDDING PURPOSES. 2. ALL DIMENSIONS TO WALLS ARE TO FACE OF STUD. CHARGER SHELF STACKER MANAGER ORGANIZATION DESK REMOTE RECEIVER 8'-0" 8'-2" CLEAR HUB DRAIN HUB DRAIN HUB DRAIN HUB DRAIN HUB DRAIN 12' D6XULEPDELI12' D6XULEPDELI7'-6"HUB DRAIN BALER 3'-0"McCUE SECURITY RAIL TUBE STEEL PALLET JACK 6'-0" 11'-7" 12'-0"8'-0"8'-0"4'-8"40'-0"3'-0"ROOF LADDER 6'-8 1/2" PRODUCE 3'-0" (1) SPOT MERCHANDISER 2'-0"2'-0" 4'-0"7'-0"3'-0" HUB DRAIN HUB DRAIN HUB DRAIN HUB DRAIN 18'-8" 6'-0" REAR DOCK AREA SUMMARY OCCUPANCY USE ROOM NAME SQUARE FOOTAGE MERCANTILE SALES / ENTRY / EXIT 10,597 OFFICE 215 BREAK ROOM 294 MEN'S ROOM 86 WOMEN'S ROOM 85 HALL 180 SUBTOTAL (MERCANTILE)11,457 STORAGE / STOCK BACKROOM 3,229 COOLER 1,470 FREEZER 730 SUBTOTAL (STORAGE / STOCK)5,429 SUBTOTAL (OCCUPANCIES)16,886 EXTERIOR /INTERIOR WALLS / UNOCCUPIED SPACE 939 BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE 17,825 EXTERIOR CANOPY 714 TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE (INCLUDING CANOPY)18,539 REAR DOCK OPERATIONS DATA ITEM V6.0 PROTOTYPE ALDI MEDINA PLAN LINEAR FOOTAGE OF BASE (PRODUCE INCLUDED)842'-0" 842'-0" ASSUMED PALLET STORAGE 70 70 BUILDING DIMENSIONS 118'-0" x 147'-4" 118'-0" x 147'-4" SALES FLOOR DIMENSIONS 72'-11" x 145'-1" 72'-11" x 145'-1" LENGTH OF MULTI-DECK 56' 56' COOLER MILK DOORS 5 5 COOLER GENERAL DOORS 12 12 FREEZER ICE CREAM DOORS 6 6 FREEZER GENERAL DOORS 9 9 SPOT MERCHANDISERS 6 6 CART STORAGE (101) MODEL 563W (101) MODEL 563W PLAN NORTH Drawing No.Scale: Project No. Type: Date: Drawn By: Date: A Issued: Project Name & Location: Drawing Name: PROJECT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER DATE PROJECT LEAD DATE Seal Seal DATEPROJECT DESIGNER B C D 1 2 3 4 Date:Revisions: 5 4 5 14-0173A ALDI Inc. ALDI Medina, MN 3522 Sioux Dr. Hamel, MN 55340 Hennepin County 03/06/15 RHSD-V6 As Noted Store #: XX Issued for Use/Reference 03/30/15 Inc. DO NOT SCALE PLANS Copying, Printing, Software and other processes required to produce these prints can stretch or shrink the actual paper or layout. Therefore, scaling of this drawing may be inaccurate. Contact APD Engineering with any need for additional dimensions or clarifications. 585.742.2222585.924.4914.fax 615 Fishers RunVictor, NY 14564 615 Fishers RunVictor, NY 14564 585.742.2222 585.924.4914.fax Drawing Alteration It is a violation of law for any person, unless acting under the direction of licensed Architect, Professional Engineer, Landscape Architect, or Land Surveyor to alter any item on this document in any way. Any licensee who alters this document is required by law to affix his or her seal and to add the notation "Altered By" followed by his or her signature and the specific description of the alteration or revision. APD Engineering & Architecture, PLLC www.apd.com C APD Engineering & Architecture, PLLC www.apd.com Copyright 2015 PLOTTED: 3/30/2015 4:12 PM1 Operations Plan SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" Operations Plan SRS A-131 EQEQ GRADE LINE - SEE CIVIL DWGS. 16'-9 1/2" A.F.F. T.O. STUD 24'-6" A.F.F. T.O. TOWER OUTRIGGER STUD 12'-0" A.F.F. B.O. PANELS 11'-0" A.F.F. T.O. CANOPYSTEEL 0'-0" FIN. FLOOR 7'-11 5/8" SIGN OPNG. TYP.20'-6" A.F.F. T.O. TOWER OUTRIGGER STUD EQEQEQEQ EQEQ9'-6"SIGNOPNG.C1 A504 @ CART WALL @ BUILDING WALL 16'-9 1/2" A.F.F. T.O. STUD 0'-0" FIN. FLOOR TYP. GRADE LINE - SEE CIVIL DWGS. EQEQ 16'-9 1/2" A.F.F. T.O. STUD 0'-0" FIN. FLOOR 24'-6" A.F.F. T.O. TOWER OUTRIGGER STUD 12'-0" A.F.F. B.O. PANEL 11'-0" A.F.F. T.O. CANOPYSTEEL @ CART WALL @ BUILDING WALL 7'-11 5/8" SIGN OPNG. TYP. GRADE LINE - SEE CIVIL DWGS. TYP.20'-6" A.F.F. T.O. TOWER OUTRIGGER STUD EQEQEQEQ EQEQ9'-6"SIGNOPNG.C1 A504 OPP. HAND @ CART WALL @ BUILDING WALL IVIL DWGS. 16'-9 1/2" A.F.F. T.O. STUD 0'-0" FIN. FLOOR GRADE LINE - SEE CIVIL DWGS. TYP.TYP. TYP. 16'-9 1/2" A.F.F. T.O. STUD 0'-0" FIN. FLOOR SIGNAGE DESCRIPTION QUANTITY SQ. FT. PER SIGN TOTALS TOWER SIGN 2 74.9 149.8 FOOD MARKET SIGN 2 21.3 42.6 TOTAL SIGNAGE 192.4 SIGNAGE IS SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND SHALL BE UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT SUBMITTAL VIL DWGS.. EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE KEY MATERIAL / MFG. COLOR / NO.NOTES EDGE METAL BY FIRESTONE A1 - SLATE GRAY A1a - SILVER METALLIC MODULAR BRICK FIELD COLOR - SEE SPEC FIELD AND TRANSOM WINDOW SILLS MODULAR BRICK ACCENT COLOR - SEE SPEC PILASTERS STOREFRONT ANODIZED ALUM. RE: DWG. A602 METAL WALL PANELS SLATE GRAY METAL SOFFIT PANELS SOLID PANELS - SEE SPEC RE: DWG. A301-A304 EXTERIOR PAINT BY SHERWIN-WILLIAMS PT-10 / CL-5 RE: DWG. A603 ALUMINUM COMPOSITE PANEL A9 - BRIGHT SILVER A9a - SLATE GRAY PROVIDE PANEL JOINTS AS SHOWN - AT ALDI LOGO SIGN FIELD AND FOOD MARKET SIGN FIELD, PROVIDE ONE PIECE TIGHT FIT EXTRUDED MOLDING INSTALLATION SYSTEM WITH CENTER REVEAL TRIM BETWEEN PANELS AND J TRIM AT PANEL EDGES. AT CANOPY FASCIA, PROVIDE 'CLIP AND CAULK' INSTALLATION SYSTEM. SPLIT-FACE CMU SEE SPEC WATER TABLE FIELD BLRD-2 PT-10 / CL-4 RE: DWG A603 BLRD-4 FACTORY FINISH - CHARCOAL RE: DWG A603 GUARD RAIL TYPE "A"PT-11 / CL-5 RE: DWG A3/A503, A603 GUARD RAIL TYPE "B"PT-11 / CL-5 RE: DWG A3/A503, A603 CART RAIL & STARTER POST GALVANIZED DOCK LEVELER / SEAL AND BUMPERS LEVELER - FACTORY FINISH / SEAL AND BUMPERS - FACTORY FINISH - BLACK PROVIDE BRICK BEHIND DOCK SEAL IN LIEU OF CAST STONE SILL CONTROL JOINT MAX 30' OC RE: DWG. A504 OVERFLOW SCUPPER PT-10 / CL-5 RE: DWG C3/A503 FOOD MARKET SIGNAGE BY SIGN VENDOR 14'-2 3/4"w. x 1'-6"h. ALDI TOWER SIGN BY SIGN VENDOR 7'-11 1/8" w. x 9'-5 1/2" h. SEE DETAIL D1/A504; VERIFY SIGN SIZE PRIOR TO FRAMING OPENING CRTB NATURAL RE: DWG A603 - SEE STRUCTURAL DWGS CAST STONE SILL SEE SPEC WATER TABLE TRIM PREFABRICATED SUN SHADE SILVER POWDER COAT MANUFACTURED BY C. R. LAURENCE; RE: DWGS A306, A505 ROOF SCREENS SLATE GRAY SEE SPEC EXIT DISCHARGE LIGHT FACTORY FINISH MOUNT @ 8'-0" A.F.F. WALL SCONCE FACTORY FINISH MOUNT @ 7'-6" A.F.F. EXTERNAL SIREN FACTORY FINISH MOUNT @ 12'-0" A.F.F. UTILITY METERING & C.T. FACTORY FINISH SEE ELECTRICAL DWGS EXTERIOR WALL PACK FACTORY FINISH MOUNT @ 12'-0" A.F.F. EXTERIOR DUPLEX RECEPTACLE FACTORY FINISH MOUNT @ 1'-6" A.F.F. FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION FACTORY FINISH SEE FIRE PROTECTION DWGS MOTOR GONG FACTORY FINISH SEE FIRE PROTECTION DWGS HOSE BIB FACTORY FINISH SEE PLUMBING DWGS STOREFRONT KEY ANODIZED ALUMINUM RE: DWG A602 NOT USED 1 Rear Elevation SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 2 Front Elevation SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 3 Side Elevation SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 4 Side Elevation SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ALDI - MEDINA, MN EXTERIOR ELEVATION COPYRIGHT © 2015 APD ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURE, PLLC 615 Fishers Run Victor, NY 14564 585.742.2222 585.924.4914.fax www.apd.com Inc. Please note that the colors shown here are a graphical representation to show contrast in materials only. Due to the nature of electronic media, colors may vary depending on computer or printer used. For review of actual colors, a material sample board should be created on a project specific basis. ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY KEY PLAN I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE LIC. NO.43110 DANIEL L. STUEBER ALDI INC. RETAIL FACILITY 1OF 1 16408 ALTA KH 14-16408 --/--/-- TITLE CLIENT PROJECT NO. SHEET TITLE SHEET THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF I+S GROUP, INC. AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. PROJECT PROJECT NO. FILE NAME DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY ISSUE DATE REVIEWED BY REVISION SCHEDULE NO DATE DESCRIPTION 1 CITY OF MEDINA 1 PLANNING COMMISSION 2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3 Tuesday March 10, 2015 4 5 1. Call to Order: Chairperson Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 6 7 Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Randy Foote, Kim Murrin, Charles Nolan, 8 Janet White, and Kent Williams. 9 10 Absent: Victoria Reid. 11 12 Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke and City Councilmember John Anderson. 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 Councilmember Anderson reported that the City Council considered the Concept Plan from 21 Stonegate Farms, noting that the Council echoed some of the same concerns the Planning 22 Commission had. He reported that the Council also approved the Final Plat approval for 23 Wakefield. 24 25 Murin asked for additional information regarding the solar energy discussion the Council had 26 and whether their recommends were different from the Planning Commission. 27 28 Anderson stated that he was not present at the meeting when the Council discussed that item. 29 30 Finke reported that the Council did make two amendments from what the Planning 31 Commission had recommended including a reduction from 500 to 300 feet in regard to the 32 setback from residential properties and the Council also removed the one-acre maximum 33 from the maximum allowed footprint. 34 35 4. Planning Department Report 36 37 Finke provided an update. 38 39 5. Approval of the February 10, 2015 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 40 41 Motion by Williams, seconded by Foote, to approve the February 10, 2015, Planning 42 Commission minutes with noted corrections. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Reid) 43 44 6. Public Hearing – Jeff Varney – 3985 County Road 19 – Conditional Use 45 Permit for Construction of a 10,080 Square Foot Accessory Building in the 46 RR-UR Zoning District 47 48 Finke identified the applicant’s property, which is a 113-acre parcel on County Road 19. He 49 stated that the applicants are proposing to construct the new accessory building and relocate 50 an existing accessory building on the site. He displayed an aerial photograph of the subject 51 site, highlighting the location of existing buildings, wetland, and land used for agricultural 52 2 purposes. He advised that more than two accessory structures on rural residential property 53 are allowed through the use of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). He reviewed the planting 54 plans, which would assist in breaking up the mass of buildings and would also provide color 55 relief. He reviewed the proposed setback information as well as the proposed size and height 56 of the building, which will be a pole frame type structure. He reviewed the proposed storm 57 water management aspects proposed for the site and noted that even with the additional 58 building the hardcover of the site would only equal about two percent of the site. He stated 59 that staff recommends approval of the CUP with the conditions noted in the staff report. He 60 stated that staff received two written comments, including suggestions from the City of 61 Loretto and a letter of support from a Loretto resident. 62 63 White asked for additional information regarding the proposed setback from County Road 19. 64 65 Finke explained how the setback was calculated noting that while there is no dedicated right-66 of-way, the applicant did account for an estimated right-of-way. 67 68 Williams referenced the comments made from the City of Loretto and questioned the 69 difference moving the building 30 feet would make. 70 71 Finke explained that moving the building would have an impact on grading and storm water 72 treatment as proposed. 73 74 Williams questioned if the berm would be able to be installed or whether there would be an 75 impact on the vegetative swale. 76 77 Albers questioned if the swale would be regularly mowed or whether the vegetation would be 78 allowed to grow. 79 80 Finke stated that the applicant is open to either but explained that generally the plantings are 81 placed lower in the swale and allowed to grow. 82 83 Jeff Varney, applicant, stated that the building location was determined because of the steep 84 drop off and additional fill that would need to be brought in if the building were to be moved 85 to the location proposed by Loretto. 86 87 Nolan questioned if a second berm would be feasible. 88 89 Varney stated that he would be open to that option, if the berm were to be three to four feet in 90 height. He stated that he would be willing to let the swale grow but would want to mow 91 every 30 days or so in order to maintain the healthy vegetation and aesthetic of the property. 92 93 White stated that she often drives by the property and commended the property owner on the 94 aesthetic. She questioned if the landscaping could be continued to the end of the shed that 95 will be moved, noting that she would prefer trees to a berm. 96 97 Varney stated that he would not be against that option, noting that he is open to work with the 98 City on their suggestions. 99 100 Murin asked for the applicant’s input regarding the plan submit from Loretto. 101 102 Varney stated that the area where Loretto proposed to locate the building is actually wetland 103 and therefore that location is not feasible. 104 105 3 Murin questioned if someone is living in the farmhouse on the property. 106 107 Varney stated that no one is living in that house at this time. He confirmed that the house is 108 in very nice condition. 109 110 White stated that the second berm would not create the appropriate screening and believed 111 that the trees would provide a better buffer. 112 113 Nolan opened the public hearing at 7:27 p.m. 114 115 Roger Georges resides at 6773 County Line Road SE of Medina stated that he likes the 116 proposed plans and believed that buildings are a better use for storage of materials and 117 equipment. He believed that the trees would provide sufficient screening and was not in 118 favor of the berm as the property is very uniform and clean. 119 120 Nolan closed the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. 121 122 Nolan commented that while he originally was in favor of the berm he did not feel strongly 123 and felt that the extended tree line and landscaping would be a benefit. He noted that this 124 property is substantial in size and questioned what would occur should some of the property 125 be sold. He suggested placing a minimum lot size that would be necessary to support the 126 accessory buildings. 127 128 Finke reviewed the current standards under the zoning district and the process of review that 129 would be conducted should the property subdivide in the future. 130 131 Nolan suggested using the language 40 acres or a certain percentage. 132 133 Foote agreed that the berm could create more problems than benefit, as it would not screen 134 anything. 135 136 Murin referenced the comments from Loretto as the suggestions would not be appropriate in 137 this situation. 138 139 Motion by White, seconded by Foote, to recommend approval of the Conditional Use 140 Permit subject to the conditions noted in the staff report and as discussed by the Commission. 141 Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: V. Reid) 142 143 7. Public Hearing - Puptown, LLC – 810 Tower Drive – Amended Conditional Use Permit 144 to Increase Maximum Number of Dogs Permitted at Existing Dog Daycare/Boarding 145 Facility 146 147 Finke stated that the Puptown facility opened in 2011 and provided background information 148 on the use and what is allowed under City Code. He stated that in the originally approved 149 CUP there was a limit on the maximum number of dogs. He explained that even when at full 150 capacity of allowed dogs, the site is far from utilizing the indoor space and the applicant is 151 requesting an increase to the number of allowed dogs. He explained how calculations could 152 be made to determine the amount of space needed per dog. He stated that staff visited the 153 property and has not received any complaints through the police department or from 154 neighboring property owners. He stated that staff recommends approval as presented subject 155 to the conditions listed in the staff report. 156 157 Albers questioned if there were any concerns regarding waste. 158 4 159 Finke stated that the facility is clean and he did not see any concerns, but noted that a waste 160 management plan is required under the CUP. 161 162 Tom Kingstead, owner of Puptown, LLC, stated that the business has been open since 2011. 163 He referenced a color photo shown in the Commission packet. He stated that the driveway 164 paving and turf installation occurred prior to the doors being opened. He stated that he stays 165 overnight at the facility as they do not believe in caging the animals. He stated that there is 166 room to grow at the facility. He reviewed how the waste management plan was developed 167 and is followed. He stated that typically there is not noise from the dogs and the facility does 168 not cause an odor. 169 170 Murin stated that she visited the site and questioned where the owner sleeps at the facility. 171 172 Kingstead identified the area where he sleeps with the dogs, noting that the room is air 173 conditioned and heated. He stated that the dogs play so hard during the day that they sleep 174 well throughout the night. He stated that if the dogs need to go out during the night they do 175 take them out to the bathroom. 176 177 White stated that the maximum limit of dogs is probably self-imposing as the level of service 178 could most likely not continue past what the business can support. 179 180 Kingstead agreed that he is the one who feeds the dogs every morning and stays at the 181 facility. He stated that with spring break coming up they would like to be allowed to have 182 additional dogs. He noted that there are employees in addition to him and his wife. 183 184 White stated that she was pleasantly surprised that there was not an odor when she visited the 185 site. 186 187 Kingstead explained that their facility is run differently than other kennel and facilities of this 188 type, which sets them apart from those other facilities in terms of quality. 189 190 Williams questioned how the site would handle inclement weather, such as 20 below zero. 191 192 Kingstead stated that the dogs often like to go outside even in the cold temperatures but noted 193 that there are additional inside areas for recreation as well. He noted that the dogs are tested 194 to ensure that they are a good fit for the facility. 195 196 Nolan asked for additional information regarding the interaction between the indoor and 197 outdoor play areas. 198 199 Kingstead explained that there are areas, which allow the dogs to travel between the inside 200 and outside areas freely. 201 202 Nolan opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. 203 204 No comments made. 205 206 Nolan closed the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. 207 208 Williams stated that he originally had concern with the additional dogs but the applicant was 209 able to sooth his concern. He confirmed that the CUP would remain with the property and 210 not the applicant and was concerned with possible change in ownership. 211 5 212 Nolan stated that as long as the access between the indoor and outdoor play spaces are 213 uncontrolled he would not see a problem. 214 215 Murin referenced a condition which states that sufficient space be available within the facility 216 but recognized the lack of information available to determine sufficient space. She stated that 217 she did reach out to gather additional information to determine if the necessary space 218 recommended by the ASPCA includes indoor and outdoor play space. She stated that when 219 she viewed the ASPCA website she did notice rules for dog daycare and questioned if the 220 City is supposed to regulate those requirements. 221 222 Nolan stated that his biggest concern coming into this discussion was the amount of space 223 and whether that needs to be inside or outside. He stated that he is convinced that there is 224 sufficient space at the facility, especially because the indoor and outdoor access is provided to 225 the dogs freely. He believed that the applicant is running their business well and did not see a 226 need to further regulate the other aspects. 227 228 Williams stated that there are conditions in the CUP, which were created to address some of 229 the ASPCA recommendations. 230 231 Motion by Williams, seconded by White, to recommend approval of the amended 232 Conditional Use Permit based upon the findings noted in the staff report and subject to the 233 conditions recommended by staff, along with the added condition that the number of dogs 234 permitted is subject to the dogs having free access to use the outside play area. Motion 235 approved unanimously. (Absent: V. Reid) 236 237 8. Call Special Meeting for March 17, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. to Discuss: A) Emergency Incident 238 Responses; and B) Open Meeting Law 239 240 Finke explained that there will be a special meeting discussing emergency incident responses 241 and open meeting law. He advised that all members of the Planning Commission, City 242 Council and Park Commission are invited to participate. He noted that the meetings will run 243 concurrently and this will not be considered a joint meeting. 244 245 Motion by Foote, seconded by White, to call for a special meeting on March 17, 2015 at 246 6:00 p.m. to discuss emergency incident responses and open meeting law. Motion approved 247 unanimously. (Absent: V. Reid) 248 249 9. Council Meeting Schedule 250 251 White volunteered to provide an update to the Council at the March 17th meeting. 252 253 10. Adjourn 254 255 Motion by Williams, seconded by Albers, to adjourn the meeting at 8:26 p.m. Motion 256 carried unanimously. . (Absent: V. Reid) 257 258 Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 April 7, 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: April 1, 2015 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates April 7, 2015 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Puptown CUP Amendment – 810 Tower Drive – Puptown has requested an amendment to their CUP to permit additional dogs on the property for daycare/playcare. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on March 10 and recommended approval. Staff intends to present to the Council on April 7. B) Varney Accessory Building CUP – 3985 County Road 19 – Jeff Varney has requested a CUP to construct a 10,000 square foot storage building for storing hay and farm equipment. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on March 10 and recommended approval. Staff intends to present to the Council on April 7. C) Aldi Site Plan and Variance – 3522 Sioux Drive – Aldi has requested approval to construct a 18,000 square foot grocery store at the southeast corner of Highway 55 and Sioux Drive. The applicant has also requested a variance to exceed the maximum 25% hardcover limitation in the shoreland overlay district of Elm Creek. Staff is conducting a preliminary review, and the request will be presented when complete, potentially at the April 14 Planning Commission meeting. D) Medina Country Club Site Plan – The Medina Country Club has requested a site plan review for construction of a new maintenance facility to replace the existing barn which will be demolished as part of the Villas project. The applicant also proposes to construct small restroom facilities on the course. The Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing at their April 14 meeting. E) Monger Animal Structure Setback Variance – 1272 Homestead Trail – Todd and Katie Monger have requested a variance to reduce the required setback for an animal structure from 150 feet to 75 feet. The property includes enough grazeable acres for a few small animals, but has no location which can meet animal structure setbacks. The Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing at their April 14 meeting. F) Villas at Medina Country Club Final Plat – East of CR116, south of Shawnee Woods Road – Rachel Contracting has requested final approval of a subdivision to include 43 single family homes along the west and north of the Medina Golf and Country Club. Staff is conducting a preliminary review and the application may be presented at the April 21 meeting. G) Wealshire LLC Comp Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Site Plan Review – Wealshire, LLC has requested a site plan review for construction of an 173,000 square feet 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 applicant has requested a delay in the review of the request while they review project costs. The requests are tentatively planned to be presented to the City Council on April 21. H) Enclave at Brockton 5th Addition – Lennar has requested final plat approval for the next phase of the Enclave at Brockton project. This phase is proposed to include 38 lots in the south and west portion of the site. The Council adopted a resolution of approval at the March 17 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant on the conditions of approval. I) Wakefield Valley Farm – 3385 County Road 24 – The applicant has requested final plat approval. City Council granted preliminary plat approval during the fall of last year. The City Council granted final plat approval at the March 3 meeting. Staff will work with applicant on conditions of approval. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 April 7, 2015 City Council Meeting J) Dominium Affordable Rental Townhomes – 510 Clydesdale – Dominium has applied for a Stage II Plan to develop 26 affordable rental townhomes on 3.85 acres. The townhomes would include rent and income limitations because the developer has received pledges for funding through Minnesota Housing. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at the November 12 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. The City Council reviewed at the December 2 meeting and directed staff to prepare resolution of approval. The City Council adopted a resolution approving the Stage II plan and preliminary plat at the December 16 meeting and the final plat at the January 20 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant to complete the conditions of approval. K) Munsell Easement Vacation, Soiney Right-of-way Vacation, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery, 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. L) Property Resources Development Co. (PRDC) Conservation Design PUD Concept Plan – West of Willow Drive, southwest of Deerhill Road – PRDC has requested a Concept Plan for a Conservation Design subdivision to include 42 residential lots on 170 acres. The applicant proposes to preserve 30% of the buildable property with a conservation easement. The Planning Commission held a hearing at the February 10 meeting and the Park Commission reviewed on February 18 and provided comments. The City Council provided comments on March 3. Staff will await a formal application. M) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll– these preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat application N) Woodland Hill Preserve, Enclave at Brockton 4th, Hamel Haven, Morrison lot split, Three Rivers/Reimer Rearrangement subdivision – These subdivisions have all received final approval. Staff is working with the applicant on the conditions of approval before construction begins. O) John Day Companies Variance – 695-775 Tower Drive – The City Council adopted a resolution of approval at the March 17 meeting. The project will now be closed. Other Projects A) Metropolitan Council Housing Plan – Reduced affordable housing needs – The Met Council has released the Housing Plan for comment until May 15. The full draft is available online, but I reviewed very briefly and here is a synopsis: a. Medina’s allocation for 2020-2013 is DOWN from 506 to 216. Please note this is 10 years, not the full 20 year planning horizon. b. In addition, an “upper band” of affordable was added up to 80% of AMI (which is 25% of the total). If you consider this fact, our allocation of <60% AMI (the old definition) drops by more like 2/3. c. The definition of how a community may plan for the affordable housing has been clarified. The City is able to meet our allocation by planning for enough residential development at higher densities. In our case, the City could meet the 216 units by guiding 27 acres of property for development >8 units/acre OR guiding 16.25 acres for development >12 units/acre + and additional 3.5 acres for development >6 units/acre. Our current land use plan would exceed either of these strategies, but our staging plan may need an adjustment to bring higher density development into an earlier development timeframe. Staff intends to provide comments supporting the reduction of affordable housing need in the City and also supporting the updated definition of affordable housing. B) Stormwater Utility –staff updated the list of stormwater utility Residential Equivalent Factors (REFs) for the year. C) County Road 116/Highway 55 Interim Improvements – staff met with Hennepin County about the interim improvements to provide two left-turn lanes for County Road 116 at Highway 55. D) Wayzata Schools – staff met with representatives from Wayzata Schools, who reported on their recently completed demographic and attendance study. E) Tower Drive – staff met with Finance and Engineering to discuss the assessment roll. PLANNING REPORT To: Medina Planning Commission From: Nate Sparks Date: April 8, 2015 Re: Medina Country Club General Plan PUD / CUP Amendment / Site Plan Review File No: LR-15-155 Application Date: March 11, 2015 Review Deadline: May 10, 2015 BACKGROUND The Medina Golf and Country Club has made an application for a Planned Unit Development General Plan, Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and Site Plan Review to allow for the construction of a new maintenance facility and two accessory restroom facilities. SUBJECT SITE The subject site is the Medina Golf and Country Club at 400 Evergreen Road. City recently approved a rezoning to Planned Unit Development which allows for the golf course use as a conditional use permit. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposal is for a new 5000 square foot maintenance building and the two restroom facilities which are about 300 square feet each. The existing maintenance building on site is intended to be converted into a storage facility. The area where the new maintenance facility is proposed is to the south of the existing clubhouse parking lot and to the east of the existing maintenance facility. The two restroom buildings are proposed on the north end of the course. SITE PLAN REVIEW Building Location and Setbacks The site will be zoned PUD but the PUD ordinance defers the golf course use standards to that of the Public-Semi Public Zoning District. The setback requirements are 50 feet to the front and 30 for side and rear yards. The westerly restroom building is about 140 feet to the nearest lot line. The eastern restroom building is about 50 feet to the rear of one of the single family lots in the Villas. The maintenance facility is over 200 feet to the nearest property line. Building Design & Materials The proposed restroom facilities are intended to be painted wood siding. The roof is proposed with asphalt shingles. The maintenance facility is designed with a metal exterior and roof. The City’s Zoning Ordinance Section 828.04 states acceptable exterior finishes for new commercial buildings within the City. Specifically, the section states that “metal may be used on a maximum of 20 percent of the visible exterior building surface, except that metal lap siding may be used in any amount on the exterior of residential- style accessory buildings not exceeding 4000 square feet of gross floor area.” It also states that buildings with a roof pitch greater than 3/12 cannot be constructed with visible aluminum, iron, or steel roofing materials. The proposed structure has a roof pitch of about 6/12. In Section 825, it’s stated that commercial accessory buildings must be constructed in a manner compatible with the materials and features of the principal building. The existing maintenance facility is made primarily of concrete block. The proposed project will place a new metal roof on this structure, as well. Building height is limited to 30 feet. The proposed structures all are less than 30 feet in height. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The restrooms are intended to be connected to the municipal sewer and water system. Details on these utility connections must be provided. The additional impervious surfaces related to the new maintenance facility exceed 5000 square feet. This amount requires stormwater management. The applicant has indicated that this may be treated by the stormwater system of the Villas development. However, the City Engineer has noted that the stormwater from this site will not reach the Villas as graded. Therefore, the proper stormwater management is necessary in the opinion of the City Engineer. The City Engineer's comments are attached for review. Tree Removal & Replacement The maintenance facility construction will result in the removal of four trees. The applicant is proposing to plant nine new trees in the general vicinity. Details on the trees to be removed should be provided in order to determine if the replacement is acceptable. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW The addition of these facilities to the site requires a conditional use permit. In granting a conditional use permit, the City shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of occupants or surrounding lands. Among other things, City Officials shall consider the following: 1) 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. 2) 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. 3) That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. 4) That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. 5) 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. 6) 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. 7) 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. 8) The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City. 9) The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion. 10) Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. 11) The developer shall submit a time schedule for completion of the project. 12) The developer shall provide proof of ownership of the property to the Zoning Officer. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW As the site is zoned PUD, the proposed facilities require a PUD Amendment. In Section 827.25, the City states the purpose of a planned unit development. It states that the PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to zoning development standards is intended to encourage: 1) Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2) Higher standards of site and building design. 3) The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4) Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low-impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. 5) Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. 6) A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. 7) An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. 8) A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. PUDs are not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles. 9) A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. STAFF REVIEW In general, the uses of the maintenance facility and the restrooms are acceptable. However, there are concerns with the impact the structures may have on neighboring properties. The maintenance facility does not meet the City's typical building standards for a commercial accessory building. This is concerning due to the building's visibility from the residential area to the south. Because the property is zoned PUD, the City would have flexibility to deviate from the general standards of the zoning ordinance. However, such deviations should be allowed in order to support the purpose and intent of the PUD zoning district. The applicant has argued that the proposed materials will “complement but not compete with” the architecture of the other improvements on the site. Staff believes this description would not take into consideration the views from the south of the site, where the maintenance building will be prominent and the clubhouse will not. Staff believes that if deviation is to be considered, it may be worth reviewing alternative materials. Perhaps fiber cement (hardiboard) siding would provide a more residential feel instead of typical brick and concrete materials expected for commercial buildings. If the Planning Commission is comfortable with the deviation from the typical building standards through the PUD process, staff would recommend a substantially higher degree of landscape screening provided. The restroom facilities are generally consistent with the requisite building standards. One of the restroom facilities will be placed in the view of the planned houses in the Villas development. Noting that the buildings are planned to be used as restrooms and will be equipped with security lighting, some additional landscaping may be appropriate. The more easterly restroom will be largely obscured by the preserved trees and may not be as great of a concern. ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission should review the proposed site plan and determine if it is consistent with the CUP and PUD review criteria. If the Commission were to recommend approval, Staff would recommend that it be with the following conditions: 1. All comments from the City Engineer shall be addressed. 2. All comments from the Building Official shall be addressed. 3. Additional landscape screening shall be provided in areas where the new structures are directly visible to adjacent residential areas. The revised landscaping plan is subject to review and approval by the City Planner. 4. Any proposed lighting shall be downcast and provide 0.0 FC of light at property lines. 5. Details on the trees to be removed shall be provided. 6. All comments from the City Attorney shall be addressed. 7. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat, construction plans, and other relevant documents. Attached Exhibits: A – Document List B – Engineering Comments dated 3/26/2015 and 4/3/2015 C – Building Official/Fire Marshal Comments dated 3/16/2015 D – Applicant Narratives E – Plans Project: LR‐15‐155 – Medina Country Club Maintenance Facility Site Plan Review 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 3/11/15 3/11/15 3 Yes yes Revised 4/6/2015 Fee 3/11/15 3/11/15 N/A Yes yes Copy of check at back of application Mailing Labels 3/11/15 3/11/15 3 Yes Yes Narrative 3/12/15 3/12/15 1 Yes Yes Plan Set 3/11/15 3/13/15 11 Yes Yes Plan set date is wrong Applicant response 4/2/2015 4/2/2015 3 Yes No Stormwater Management Summary 4/2/2015 2/24/20151 Yes No Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Police Dept Comments 3/13/15 1 Yes Metro West Inspections 3/16/15 1 yes Transmittal sheet to distribute to DRC 3/12/15 1 yes Engineering Comments 3/26/2015 1 Yes Engineering Comments 4/3/2015 1 Yes Public Comments engineering planning environmental construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 St. Cloud Minneapolis St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com March 26 2015 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: City Project: LR-15-155 Medina Golf Facility Site Plan Review WSB Project No. 2712-390 Dear Dusty: We have reviewed the site plans dated March 11, 2015 for the proposed site improvements located at Medina Golf and Country Club. The plans propose to construct a new maintenance facility, rest rooms and utility extensions to serve the improvements. We have the following preliminary comments with regards to engineering matters. 1. Stormwater improvements are required for any projects that construct over 5,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces. The plans note this project will result in a net impervious surface increase of 5,621 square feet. The plans should incorporate stormwater improvements in accordance with the City’s Stormwater Design Manual. 2. It appears the sanitary sewer and water main extensions may impact an existing wetland. The applicant should provide documentation to verify wetlands will not be impacted or acquire a wetland no-loss permit. 3. The applicant should verify the proposed 4” watermain is sized to provide the required fire protection to the proposed and existing buildings. 4. The plans should show alignments and grades for the utility extensions required to serve the proposed rest rooms. Please contact me at 612-209-5113 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Tom Kellogg 1 Dusty Finke From:Nate Sparks <nsparks@nacplanning.com> Sent:Friday, April 10, 2015 10:43 AM To:Dusty Finke Subject:FW: Medina Golf Facility Site Plan Review - City Comments From: Tom Kellogg [mailto:TKellogg@wsbeng.com] Sent: Friday, April 03, 2015 12:33 PM To: Nate Sparks Subject: RE: Medina Golf Facility Site Plan Review ‐ City Comments Nate, In discussions previously with Dusty these improvements do require stormwater improvements due to a net hardcover increase that exceeds 5,000 s.f. In their response (B1) they state their stormwater requirements are being met by the Villas project. The stormwater runoff generated by the new building does not get to the Villas site or stormwater BMP’s, in fact it flows south. The fact that the Villas was able to demonstrate their stormwater improvements have enough treatment capacity to treat this site has no bearing on meeting the City’s stormwater requirements since none of this stormwater will ever be treated by the Villas improvements. Therefore the applicant must provide stormwater improvements to meet City standards. Thanks, Tom Tom Kellogg Senior Project Manager d: 612-209-5113 | c: 612-209-5113 WSB & Associates, Inc. | Oddfellows Building 23 2nd Street SW Suite #200 | Rochester, MN 55902 This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB & Associates, Inc. does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy. From: Nate Sparks [mailto:nsparks@nacplanning.com] Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 4:24 PM To: Tom Kellogg Subject: FW: Medina Golf Facility Site Plan Review - City Comments METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES, INC. Loren Kohnen, Fres. March 16, 2015 TO: Planning Commission City Council FROM: Loren Kohnen RE: Medina Country Club Golf - Facility Improvements Medina, Minnesota (763) 479-1720 FAX (763) 479-3090 Mtrowst76@aol,com Items from review: 1) Both buildings existing and proposed may have to be fire sprinklered, one being new and existing because of change of use. 2) Accessible parkingand accessibility will be required for both buildings. 3) The comfort stations appear not to be served by sanitary sewer or water, but can be permitted with use of holding tanks. All will have to be accessible. LK:jg Box 248, Loretto, Minnesota 55357 MEDINA GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB 12 March 2015 Mr. Dusty Finke City Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Site Plan Review Medina Golf and Country Club Maintenance Facility Improvements and Comfort Stations Dear Mr. Finke: Medina Golf and Country Club will be losing a cold storage building with the proposed development on the west side of the property. The loss of the storage space and the need to update an older Maintenance Facility has produced the current plan being presented for Site Plan Review. This application includes a new 5,000 sf Maintenance Building, minor remodeling to the existing 6,000sf Maintenance Building and the addition of two Comfort Stations (toilet structures) on the golf course. The new Maintenance Building will accommodate a mechanics shop, chemical storage, staff offices, meeting space and staff toilets. The existing building will be converted to a cold storage facility for maintenance equipment. The flat roof will be replaced with a new pitched roof to aesthetically relate to the New Building, the Clubhouse and the campus. This project is designed to replace the square footage lost by the loss of the existing Barn, and will not affect the number of staff, hours of operation or change the current water or sanitary sewer usage. Campion Engineering has confirmed that the storm water management design for the adjacent housing development project has been designed with capacity to accommodate the additional 6,000 square feet of impervious surface resulting from this project. Thank you for consideration of our application. Sincerely, Scott Peterson President Medina Golf and Country Club Enclosure(s): Copy: File ( ) 763.478.6021 - Facsimile 763.478.6025 -- 400 Evergreen Road — Medina, MN 55340-2106 www.medinagolfcc.com MEMORANDUM COMM. NO.: 2675.001.00 CLIENT: Medina Golf and Country Club (MGCC) PROJECT: Facility Improvements SUBJECT: Response to City Review Comments City Project No: LR-15-155 MEMO BY: Mark Forsberg AIA DATE: 02 April 2015 COPY: Nate Sparks Planning Consultant City of Medina This memo is in repose to the Site Plan Review Comments received from the City of Medina on March 30, 2015 for the above referenced project. Nate Sparks, Planning Consultant City of Medina 763 231-2555 A1. The application form (attached) needs to be revised to include a request for a Planned Unit Development General Plan and Conditional Use Permit. Response: The application has been revised and attached as requested. A2. The City of Medina does not typically allow for metal commercial buildings. A narrative describing the justification for the flexibility from the City’s standards to allow for this type of construction should be provided. Response: The applicant is proposing to use ribbed metal siding and roofing in an earth tone color palette that complements (but does not compete with) the existing Clubhouse and Pool Building. While metal commercial buildings may not typically be allowed in Medina, the Club feels that for the scale of this project, ribbed metal is more appropriate than precast concrete or CMU and more durable and maintenance free than painted wood siding. The buildings are “back of the house” facilities, not intended for direct use by Members or Guests, so replicating the architectural style of the Clubhouse in not appropriate. Furthermore, the buildings will be screened from view with landscaping from residential neighbors to the South East. MEMORANDUM Response to City Review Comments 26 March 2015 Page 2 of 3 Tom Kellogg, City Engineer WSB & Associates, Inc 612-209-5113 B1. Stormwater improvements are required for any projects that construct over 5,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces. The plans note this project will result in a net impervious surface increase of 5,621 square feet. The plans should incorporate stormwater improvements in accordance with the City’s Stormwater Design Manual. Response: The new impervious surface proposed in our submittal have City stormwater requirements that are being incorporated/accounted for within the Villas at Medina Country Club development stormwater treatment system as shown in attached stormwater management design computation sheet. These calculations have been engineered/computed by the adjacent development’s design engineering company, Campion Engineering – 2/24/2015. B2. It appears the sanitary sewer and water main extensions may impact an existing wetland. The applicant should provide documentation to verify wetlands will not be impacted or acquire a wetland no-loss permit. Response: The applicant has contracted with Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company to locate and delineate the wetland in question. The field work can be completed in the next two weeks, and the requested documentation will be included with the building permit application. B3. The applicant should verify the proposed 4” watermain is sized to provide the required fire protection to the proposed and existing buildings. Response: The MEP systems will be “design build”. The Mechanical design-builder will verify site utilities for the project to support their MEP design prior to submitting for permit. B4. The plans should show alignments and grades for the utility extensions required to serve the proposed rest rooms. Response: The sanitary sewer and water service will be designed and constructed by the adjacent residential developer under a separate contract. As noted on the Civil Drawings, “Final sanitary sewer and watermain service size and location invert elevation to be determined with the mechanical contractor and adjacent development engineer.” MEMORANDUM Response to City Review Comments 26 March 2015 Page 3 of 3 Loren Kohnen, City Building Inspector Metro West Inspection Services, Inc 763-479-1720 C1. Both buildings existing and proposed may have to be fire sprinklered, one being new and existing because of change of use. Response: We anticipate the requirement for fire sprinklers in the proposed building. We are not expanding or intensifying the use of the existing storage building, and therefore do not believe sprinklers will be required. C2. Accessible parking and accessibility will be required for both buildings. Response: One accessible parking space will be provided adjacent to the employee entry of the proposed building. C3. The comfort stations appear not to be served by sanitary sewer or water, but can be permitted with use of holding tanks. All will have to be accessible. Response: The Comfort Stations are designed to be fully accessible. The sanitary sewer and water service will be designed and constructed by the adjacent residential developer under a separate contract. As noted on the Civil Drawings, “Final sanitary sewer and watermain service size and location invert elevation to be determined with the mechanical contractor and adjacent development engineer.” ATTACHMENTS: Revised application form Stormwater management design computation sheet – Campion Engineering END OF MEMO Todd Monger Page 1 of 4 April 14, 2015 Animal Structure Setback Variance Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: April 7, 2015 MEETING: April 14, 2015 Planning Commission SUBJ: Todd Monger – Animal Structure Setback Variance – 1272 Homestead Trail Review Deadline Complete Application Received: March 17, 2015 Review Deadline: July 14, 2015 Overview of Request Todd Monger had requested a variance to reduce the required setback for a small animal structure from 150 feet to 75 feet. The applicant proposes to house a few miniature goats and potentially chickens on the property, but there are no locations to locate a barn or coop which would meet the required 150 foot setback. The subject site is 2.25 acres in area and includes the home and a detached garage. The property slopes towards Homestead Trail, and is fairly steep along the western side of the property. A small wooded area is located in the southwest portion of the site. There is a grove of pine trees is located along the north and northeast which is flatter than the remaining lot. The applicant proposes place the small barn in this grove. An aerial photograph of the site can be found at the top of the following page. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR). According to the district “Livestock or traditional farm animals are permitted on properties two acres or larger at a maximum density of one animal unit for the first two Grazable Acres of land and one additional animal unit for each Grazable Acre of land thereafter.” The subject site includes approximately one Grazable Acre and is 2.28 gross acres in area. The RR district would permit 0.5 animal units to be kept on the site. 0.5 animal units is equivalent to 5 goats (or 50 chickens, or some combination). However, a structure for animals is required to be setback 150 feet from property lines. Because of the shape of the lot, there is no location on the site which could meet this setback. The applicant proposes a small shed no larger than 120 square feet to be set 75 feet from the northern and eastern property lines. The shed would be 244 feet from Homestead Trail. As a condition of the variance, the applicant has suggested a more stringent condition on the number of animal units allowed on the property, perhaps limited to 0.3 animal units. The applicant points out that this sort of arrangement is not unprecedented in the City. The RR1 zoning district requires only a 75 foot setback for animal structures, and places limitations on the number of horses permitted on a property at two. Todd Monger Page 2 of 4 April 14, 2015 Animal Structure Setback Variance Planning Commission Meeting Analysis According to Subd. 2 of Section 825.45 of the City Code, the City is required to consider the following criteria when reviewing a variance request: “Subd. 2. Criteria for Granting Variances. (a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. (b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (c) A variance may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. In order for a practical difficult to be established, all of the following criteria shall be met: Todd Monger Page 3 of 4 April 14, 2015 Animal Structure Setback Variance Planning Commission Meeting (1) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the board shall consider, among other factors, whether the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and whether the variance confers upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district; (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” The applicant argues that the triangular shape of the lot is unique, as is the fact that the lot is uniquely small for a rural lot, having been created prior to more current standards. The applicant argues that the proposed use is reasonable, since animals are permitted on the property but with no place for shelter. The applicant also argues that their proposed animals are more like pets than livestock and that a similar setback would not be required for a dog house. It may be reasonable to find the opposite: the fact that a location for a shelter cannot be found that meets setbacks could suggest that keeping animals on the property is not a reasonable use. Staff does believe that the 150 foot setback was established with larger livestock in mind. With the increased interest in urban agriculture, chickens, bees, and similar activities, many communities are currently discussing regulations for smaller-scale situations. For example, perhaps the Planning Commission and City Council would want to discuss reduced setbacks for chicken coops or perhaps shelters for other smaller farm animals (perhaps under 0.5 animal units). Current RR zoning regulations permit a property under 2 acres to have 0.1 animal unit. A parcel under 2 acres could geometrically never accommodate a chicken coop with a 150 foot setback. If the City were to go down this path, it may be that no variance is necessary in this case. Staff believes it could be found that the applicant’s argument related to the variance criteria is reasonable and staff does not oppose the variance. The proposed location is surrounded by significant vegetation which should limit impacts on adjoining property. Staff also believes the applicant’s suggestion to limit the animal units to 0.3 will help limit impacts. If the Commission finds that the variance criteria are met, staff would recommend the following conditions be attached to any recommendation of approval: 1) The applicant shall allow no more than 0.3 animal units to be kept on the property. 2) The applicant shall not remove any of the vegetation surrounding the proposed animal structure without replacing on an inch:inch basis. 3) The applicant shall utilize the variance within one year of approval, or the variance shall be considered null and void. 4) The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the variance and other relevant documents. Todd Monger Page 4 of 4 April 14, 2015 Animal Structure Setback Variance Planning Commission Meeting Potential Motion If the Commission finds that the variance criteria are met, the following motion would be in order: Move to recommend approval of the variance based upon the findings noted in the staff report and subject to conditions recommended by staff. Attachments 1. Document List 2. Applicant Narrative 3. Site Plan received by the City 4/10/2015 Project: LR‐15‐156 – Monger Variance 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 3/13/20153/13/20154 Application Y Fee 3/13/2015 1 Fee Y $1000; From “CrossVision” Mailing Labels 3/17/20153/16/20155 Labels Y Narrative and Sketches 3/13/20153/10/20151 Narrative Y Site Plan 3/16/2015 1 Site Plan Y Site Plan – Updated 4/10/20154/10/20151 Site Plan – 4‐10‐2015 Y Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes City Attorney Email 3‐23‐2015 1 Legal Comments Public Comments City of Medina Variance Application Narrative 3/10/2015 Property/Owner: Todd Monger 1272 Homestead Trail Medina MN 55356 The applicant is the owner of an irregularly-shaped rural residential [RR] lot. The shape of the lot is triangular with no perpendicular side lot lines. The applicant wishes to introduce 2-3 miniature goats for the function of family pets, but does not meet the zoning requirements of a 150 foot setback for the livestock housing structure. This property was purchased in 2013 with current property dimensions now creating “practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance.” Currently the property meets the City of Medina’s code to allow for up to 5 goats on the 2.28 acres, however, because of the unique shape of the property I cannot establish any place on this land for a small structure to house desired goats. I would like to utilize the back east corner of the property to maximize both the space allocation and the protection of the established grove to maintain the aesthetics of introducing a small shed and enclosure onto the property. Additionally, the entire property is considerably sloped thus this identified location is ideal for both its more level ground and appropriate run off during rain/snowfall. The structure is to be 120 square feet, with an estimated footprint of 120 square feet or less, and no more than eight feet in height. See site plan and aerial map. The purpose of the goats is to provide further experience in the rural area for my two daughters to engage in unique animal care and experience. My eldest daughter has considerations to explore 4-H projects and we believe dwarf or miniature goats would be a great project and experience for her. I would like the City Board to consider a 75 foot setback variance and I would be open to an adjustment of reducing our maximum livestock number of 5 goats down to 3 if this may help in the decision making process. In consultation with the City Planning Staff, it was brought to my attention that there already exists a 75 foot setback allotment in another zoning district, “Hunter Farms,” due to lot shape and thus I would like this to be considered as a comparable adjustment due to my hardship. “Hunter Farms” includes Carriage Drive, Bridal Path Trail, and Red Fox Drive. Respectfully submitted, Goat house dimensions: 10 ft 8 ft 12 ft Window Grove Property line 75 ft North 75' Setback994992996990988986998984982980978976974100097210029701004100610089681010 1012101410161018 10201022102410261028 97 8 HOMESTEAD05010025FeetSite Plan is approximate, applicant to verify 75 foot setback prior to placing shed.Topography provided by MnDNR LiDAR¯Site Plan: Todd and Katie Monger1272 Homestead TrailLegendProposed 75' SetbackShedProposed Shed LocationMap Date: 4/10/2015 OWNERARCHITECTRSP Architects, Ltd.1220 Marshall Street NEMinneapolis, MN 55413Phone: 612/677-7100Fax: 612/677-7499David Norback, PrincipalPhone:612/677-7100Mark Forsberg, Project Architect/ManagerPhone:612/677-7308Email:mark.forsberg@rsparch.comTed Kisner, Intern ArchitectPhone:612/677-7197Email:ted.kisner@rsparch.comCIVIL ENGINEERSJames R Hill, Inc.2500 West Country Rd 42, #120Burnsville, MN 55337Phone: 952/890-6044Fax: 952/890-6244Kurt QuaintancePhone:612/508-8890Email:kquaintance@jrhinc.comMedina Golf & Country Club400 Evergreen RdMedina, MN 55340Phone: 763/478-6021Scott Peterson, Club PresidentErin McManus, SuperintendentPhone:763/238-2753Email:egmcmanus@hotmail.com000COLUMN OR GRIDLINE - NEWNameElevationELEVATION /LEVEL TAG1REVISIONREFERENCEMATCH LINESEE X/XXXEL. = 100'-0"SPOT ELEVATIONMATCH LINEXXXXPARTITION TAGT.O. FOOTINGEL. = 96'-0"DRAWING TITLENORTH ARROWA1011SIM1A101SIMELEVATION TAG -SINGLE VIEWELEVATION TAG -MULTIPLE VIEWDETAIL TAGWALL SECTIONTAG1A101SIMBUILDINGSECTION TAGENLARGED PLANOR DETAILREFERENCEA1011SIMVIEW NAME1/8" = 1'-0"12NORTHCOLUMN OR GRIDLINE - EXISTING234ROOM NAME101150 SFROOM TAGKEYNOTE1tWINDOW TAGEQUIPMENT TAG101DOOR TAGPNT1CPT1FINISH TAG -WITH EXTENTOF FINISHFINISH TAG -ALL SURFACESFINISHTRANSITIONVB1CPT1VB1CPT-01CPT-02(WALL FINISH)(BASE FINISH)(FLOOR FINISH)(ROOM NAME)(ROOM NUMBER)(ROOM AREA)12023A1011A10121NORTHISSUE KEY:1ISSUED (WITH SIGNATURE)2REVISED AND RE-ISSUED (WITH SIGNATURE)3NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - REFERENCE ONLY4RE-ISSUED FROM A PRIOR BID PACK - NO REVISIONS1220 Marshall Street NEMinneapolisMinnesota 55413-1036612.677.7100612.677.7499 faxwww.rsparch.comRSP ArchitectsConsultantsCertificationProject ForProject No.Drawn ByChecked ByDateNOTICE: The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings,graphics, and models thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplicated orcommercially exploited, in whole or in part, without express written permission ofRSP Architects. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients,consultants, contractors, government agencies, vendors and office personnel onlyin accordance with this Notice.© Copyright RSP Architects 2012. All rights reserved.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensedArchitect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.DateRegistration NumberSignatureRevisions3/11/2015 11:24:30 AMC:\Revit Projects\Existing Maintenance - 2015_TKisner.rvtG000COVER SHEETMFTAK03/13/20152675.900.00RSP PROJECT NUMBER:MEDINA GOLF & COUNTRY CLUBMAINTENANCE FACILITY & COMFORT STATIONS400 EVERGREEN RD MEDINA, MN 553402675.900.00DRAWINGSISSUESSHEET NO.NAME03/13/15 SITE PLAN REVIEW 00 GeneralG000 COVER SHEET302 CIVILC1.1 GRADING & UTILITY PLAN-MAINTENANCE BUILDING 3C1.2 GRADING PLAN-COMFORT STATION #13C1.3 GRADING PLAN - COMFORT STATION #23C2.1 DETAILS304 ArchitectureA001 COMPLETE SITE PLAN3A002 ARCHITECTURAL SITE & LANDSCAPE PLAN3A101 ARCHITECTURAL FLOORPLANS3A102 COMFORT STATIONS FLOORPLANS & ELEVATIONS 3A401 MAINTENANCE FACILITY ELEVATIONS3A402 COLD STORAGE ELEVATIONS3ISSUED: 03/13/2105PACKAGE:CITY SUBMITTAL - SITE PLAN REVIEWDOCUMENT PACKAGESHEET INDEXPROJECT TEAMCODE SUMMARYDRAWING SYMBOLSLOCATION MAPKEY PLANNo. Date Description zzz z zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz z z zzzz z zzzzzzzzzzzz z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz z z z zzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzz z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z zz z z z z zz z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz z z zzzzz zz z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzz z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ADDITIONAL SWPPP NOTES 1. All perimeter sediment control devices must be in place before any up-gradient land disturbing activities begin. These devices shall remain in place unitl final stabilization has occurred. 2. All Erosion and Sediment Control facilities shall be inspected, maintained, and documented by the contractor during the construction operations. Any temporary facilities which are to be removed as called for on these plans and specifications shall be removed by the contractor at the time directed by the engineer. The contractor shall then restore the subsequently disturbed areas in accordance with these plans and specifications. 3. Wherever practical and feasible, the contractor shall protect and preserve existing natural trees, grass and other vegetative cover in effort to provide natural buffering and filtering of runoff. 4. Contractor shall be adaptable in adjusting construction schedules in anticipation of weather forecasts of precipitation, in order to minimize risk of erosion and sediment transport. 5. It is the responsibility of the contractor to keep public streets, travel ways, parking lots and trails utilized for ingress to and egress from the construction site free of dirt, sediment and debris, resulting from construction activity. 6. Adequate control of dust shall be maintained by the contractor. 7. Perimeter controls shall not be removed until final stabilization of areas draining toward the control devices. 8. When temperatures do not exceed 40 degrees F, areas that require seed and mulch stabilization shall be dormant seeded. Application rate shall be two times the normal rate. No dormant seeding shall be done on ice or snow greater WKDQ´LQGHSWK 4TH HOLE - TEECOMFORT STATION3RD HOLE - GREENEXISTING CART PATH14TH HOLE - TEECOMFORT STATION13TH HOLE - GREENEXISTING CART PATH1220 Marshall Street NEMinneapolisMinnesota 55413-1036612.677.7100612.677.7499 faxwww.rsparch.comRSP ArchitectsConsultantsCertificationProject ForProject No.Drawn ByChecked ByDateNOTICE: The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings,graphics, and models thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplicated orcommercially exploited, in whole or in part, without express written permission ofRSP Architects. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients,consultants, contractors, government agencies, vendors and office personnel onlyin accordance with this Notice.© Copyright RSP Architects 2012. All rights reserved.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensedArchitect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.DateRegistration NumberSignatureRevisions3/11/2015 2:15:40 PMP:\Retail\Medina Golf & Country Club\Revit\Toilet Shelter.rvtA001MAINTENANCE & COMFORTSTATIONSITE PLANSMFTAK03/13/152675.900.004TH HOLE - TEE14TH HOLE - TEECOMFORT STATIONSCLUBHOUSENEW MAINTENANCEFACILITYEXISTING MAINTENANCEFACILITY - NEW COLD STORAGEGOLF COURSE SITE PLANNo. Date Description1 2 1" = 20'-0"COMFORT STATION #1 SITE PLAN1 1" = 20'-0"COMFORT STATION #2 SITE PLAN2A002SEE DRAWING A102SEE DRAWING A102NORTH0'20'10'20'40'SCALE : 1" = 20'-0"NORTHNORTH DN10001000100210041004100099499699810029909889909949929949969961000100099899010041008100610081006996100299499699810001004100610041002100610021006100816" PINE14" PINE11"-10" PINE14" PINEFFE1012.05DCJTDCNMSMNMCSBSCSPARKING SPACESREMOVE 4EXISTING TREES TO REMAINEXISTING TREES TO REMAINNEW TREES - SEE CHART FOR SPECIESNEW TREES - SEE CHART FOR SPECIESCONCRETE SIDEWALKEXISTING BITUMINOUSNEW BITUMINOUSNEW TREES - SEE CHART FOR SPECIESNOTE: 4 EXISTING TREES WILLBE REMOVED FOR CONSTRUCTIONOF NEW FACILITYTRUENORTH0'20'10'20'40'SCALE : 1" = 20'-0"30' - 0"11' - 7"NORTHWOODS MAPLE - ACER RUBRUM - 'NORTHWOODS'SIENNA MAPLE - ACER X FREMANII - 'SIENNA'JAPANESE TREE LILAC - SYRINGA - RECTICULATADONALD WYMAN CRABAPPLE - MALUS SP - 'DONALD WYMAN'BLACK HILLS SPRUCE PICEA GLAUCA DENSATACOLORADO SPRUCE PICEA PUNGENSCOMMON/BOTANICAL NAMEQUANITY211212KEYNMSMJTDCBSCSSIZE4"4"4"3"2.5"2.5"1220 Marshall Street NEMinneapolisMinnesota 55413-1036612.677.7100612.677.7499 faxwww.rsparch.comRSP ArchitectsConsultantsCertificationProject ForProject No.Drawn ByChecked ByDateNOTICE: The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings,graphics, and models thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplicated orcommercially exploited, in whole or in part, without express written permission ofRSP Architects. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients,consultants, contractors, government agencies, vendors and office personnel onlyin accordance with this Notice.© Copyright RSP Architects 2012. All rights reserved.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensedArchitect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.DateRegistration NumberSignatureRevisions3/11/2015 2:23:39 PMC:\Revit Projects\Existing Maintenance - 2015_TKisner.rvtA002ARCHITECTURAL SITE &LANDSCAPE PLANMFTAK03/13/20152675.900.00 1" = 20'-0"ARCHITECTURAL SITE & LANDSCAPEPLAN1No. Date DescriptionEXISTING CLUBHOUSEEXISTING MAINTENACEBUILDINGMODIFIED INTO COLDSTORAGENEW MAINTENANCEFACILITYEXISTING PARKING LOTPLANTING SCHEDULE WDREF.DW1000100299610009983A4012A4011A4014A401OFFICE100OFFICE101EMPLOYEE STORAGE102GRINDING103OFFICE/PARTS104MUDROOM105BREAK ROOM106CHEMICAL107MECH108LAUNDRY109110MENSTOILET111WOMENSTOILETSHOWER112SHOP11414x1214x1214x1214x1212x1231 LOCKERSSTORAGE117WORKBENCHPARTS118PARTS119BALL WASHER1201A4022A4023A4024A402COLD STORAGE121COLD STORAGE12241' - 0"30' - 0"90' - 3"80' - 10"53' - 11"33' - 4"1220 Marshall Street NEMinneapolisMinnesota 55413-1036612.677.7100612.677.7499 faxwww.rsparch.comRSP ArchitectsConsultantsCertificationProject ForProject No.Drawn ByChecked ByDateNOTICE: The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings,graphics, and models thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplicated orcommercially exploited, in whole or in part, without express written permission ofRSP Architects. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients,consultants, contractors, government agencies, vendors and office personnel onlyin accordance with this Notice.© Copyright RSP Architects 2012. All rights reserved.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensedArchitect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.DateRegistration NumberSignatureRevisions3/11/2015 2:22:04 PMC:\Revit Projects\Existing Maintenance - 2015_TKisner.rvtA101ARCHITECTURALFLOORPLANSMFTAK03/13/20152675.900.00 1/8" = 1'-0"COLD STORAGE & TURFGRASS FACILITYFLOOR PLAN1No. Date Description0'SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"8'4'8'16'TRUENORTH 1' -2" 6'-6" 6'-6" 117--11I-1-17 u -J T •._ // I / I ! I r 0 L J m L u COMFORT STATION FLOORPLAN A102) 1/4" =1'-0" .lIulImlIIII .ii IU i111111rn ml r1lllft•l11lft♦lnlfl11l11lff +FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" (2) SOUTH ELEVATION NOTE: ALL MATERIALS ON COMFORT STATIONS WILL MATCH EXISTING CLUBHOUSE ATTIC VENT ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF SECURITY LIGHTS UNDER CANOPY PAINTED WOOD COLUMNS PAINTED WOOD DOOR WITH FROSTED GLAZING 1/4" =1'-0" CONCRETE SLAB FIRST FLOOR 4111-1 100'-0" C39 EAST & WEST ELEVATIONS 1/4" = 1'-0" i 1 I I I 1 ! I I II CI 1 I l I I I I i 1 1 1 ( 1 JI I I I, 1 , 1 V'1 NOTE: ALL MATERIALS ON COMFORT STATIONS WILL MATCH EXISTING CLUBHOUSE ATTIC VENT ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF EXTERIOR WINDOW WITH FROSTED GLAZING PAINTED WOOD SIDING PAINTED WOOD TRIM 4 -FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" 4 NORTH ELEVATION j 1/4"=1.0" 1 .11IinlIII �idIIIIIiinnl 01111 : lllflflllfl111lllff111lllr IIII hIIIIIi1ls.- 11111 IIIIIIImImUi.1 111111101111111111111111116 1111111•1111. 8' 4' 0' 8' 16' SCALE : 118" = RSP Architects 1220 Marshall Street NE Minneapolis Minnesota 55413-1036 612.677.7100 612.677.7499 fax www.rsparch.com Consultants Certification I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature Registration Number Date Project For Project No. Drawn By Checked By 2675.900.00 TAK MF Date 03/13/15 NOTICE: The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings, graphics, and models thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or in part, without express written permission of RSP Architects. These are available for limited review and evaluation bydents, consultants, contractors, government agencies, vendors and office personnel only in accordance with this Notice. © Copyright RSP Architects 2012. All rights reserved. Revisions No. Date Description COMFORT STATION FLOORPLAN & ELEVATIONS P:\Retail\Medina Golf & Country CIub\Aevit\Toilet Shelter.rvt 3/10/2015 7:1227 PM A102 +TRUSS BEARING 114'-0" FIRST FLOOR 100'-0" 4' 2' 0' 4' 8' NORTH ELEVATION 114" =1'-0" +TRUSS BEARING 114'-0" +FIRST FLOOR 100'-0" SECURITY LIGHT ABOVE DOOR EXTERIOR DOOR AND WINDOWS EAST ELEVATION METAL ROOF CANOPY OVER DOOR WITH SECURITY LIGHT EXTERIOR DOORS & WINDOWS 'I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I y 1/8" =1'-0" 4411 TRUSS BEARING 114'-0" FIRST FLOOR 100'-0" WEST ELEVATION 1/8" =1'-0" II II m METAL ROOF METAL SIDING O.H. SECTIONAL DOORS EXTERIOR WINDOW METAL BASE SIDING SECURITY LIGHT ABOVE DOOR EXTERIOR DOOR & WINDOWS METAL ROOF METAL SIDING TRUSS BEARING 114' - 0" FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" METAL ROOF METAL SIDING O.H. SECTIONAL DOORS METAL BASE SIDING SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" I�I 3 /1 SOUTH ELEVATION \ 1/8" =1'-0" O.H. SECTIONAL DOOR METAL BASE SIDING lir Ai 11 1 lillil LISUILISISWILIMILi 1 METAL ROOF CANOPY OVER DOOR WITH SECURITY LIGHT EXTERIOR DOOR 8' 4' 0' 8' 16' SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" RSP Architects 1220 Marshall Street NE 612.677,7100 Minneapolis 612.677.7499 fax Minnesota 55413-1036 www.rsparch.com Consultants Certification I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature Registration Number Date Project No. Drawn By Checked By 2675.900.00 TAK MF Date 03/13/2015 NOTICE: The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings, graphics, and models thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or in part, without express written permission of RSP Architects. These are available for limited review and evaluationbyclients, consultants, contractors, government agencies, vendors and office personnel only in accordance with this Notice. © Copyright RSP Architects 2012. All rights reserved. Revisions No. Date Description MAINTENANCE FACILITY ELEVATIONS C:\Revit Projects\Existing Maintenance-2015_tkisner.M 3/4/20158:32:47 AM A401 *TRUSS BEARING 114'-0" +FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" EXISTING WINDOWS i1 EXISTING - NORTH 1/8" =1'-0" +TRUSS BEARING 114'-0" 4 -FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" NEW O.H. DOOR PAINTED TO MATCH DOORS ON NEW FACILITY EXISTING - SOUTH \„__3_,/ 1/8" =1'-0" D EXISTING WINDOWS EXISTING O.H. DOORS TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH DOORS ON NEW FACILITY r NEW METAL SIDING TO MATCH NEW FACILITY NEW METAL ROOF EXISTING PLYWOOD FASCIA TO BE DEMOLISHED N +TRUSS BEARING 114'-0" EXISTING CMU TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH NEW FACILITY EXISTING DOOR TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH O.H. DOORS +FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" NEW METAL SIDING TO MATCH NEW FACILITY NEW METAL ROOF Ik‘\ EXISTING WINDOWS EXISTING - EAST 1/8"=11-0" - EXISTING PLYWOOD FASCIA TO BE DEMOLISHED EXISTING CMU TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH NEW FACILITY - — 4 -TRUSS BEARING N\ 114'-0" +FIRST FLOOR 100'-0" EXISTING O.H. DOOR TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH DOORS ON NEW FACILITY 4 \EXISTING WEST 1/8" =1'-0" NEW O.H. DOOR & DOOR PAINTED TO MATCH DOORS OF NEW FACILITY DEMOLISH EXISTING O.H. DOORS INFILL WITH MATCHING CMU NEW DOOR PAINTED TO MATCH DOORS OF NEW FACILITY 8' 4' 0' 8' 16' SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" RSP Architects 1220 Marshall Street NE Minneapolis Minnesota 55413-1036 612.677.7100 612.677.7499 fax www.rsparch.com Consultants Certification I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature Registration Number Date Project For Project No. Drawn By Checked By 2675.900.00 TAK MF Date 03/13/2015 NOTICE: The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings, graphics, and models thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or in part, without express written permission of RSP Architects. These are available for limited review and evaluation bydents, consultants, contractors, government agencies, vendors and office personnel only in accordance with this Notice. © Copyright RSP Architects 2012. All rights reserved. Revisions No. Date Description EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATIONS C:\Revit Projects\Existing Maintenance-2015_TKisner.rvt 3/10/2015 2:26:44 PM A402