HomeMy Public PortalAbout08.18.2021 Park Commission Meeting Packet Posted 8/13/2021 Page 1 of 1
AGENDA
MEDINA PARK COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2021 7:00 P.M.
MEDINA CITY HALL
2052 COUNTY ROAD 24
1) Call to Order
2) Additions to Agenda
3) Approval of the Minutes from:
July 21, 2021 Regular Meeting
4) Public Comments (on items not on the agenda)
5) City Council Update
6) Medina Townhome Development LLC – 1432 County Road 29 Planned Unit
Development – Park & Trail Review
7) Staff Report
a) General Items
8) Adjourn
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina Park Commission
FROM: Jodi Gallup, Assistant City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: August 12, 2021
DATE OF MEETING: August 18, 2021
SUBJECT: Park Commission Meeting Report
2. Additions to Agenda
If any Park Commissioner wishes to add an item to the agenda after the agenda has
already been posted, the agenda item must be proposed at this point in the meeting. The
Park Commission must agree to add the item by motion.
No attachments for this item.
5. City Council Update
This is a reoccurring agenda item to have the City Council Liaison to the Park
Commission give an update at each meeting on what is happening at the Council level.
City Council member Joseph Cavanaugh has been appointed as the Liaison to the Park
Commission for 2021.
No attachments for this item.
6. Medina Townhome Development LLC - 1432 County Road 29 Planned Unit Development
– Park & Trail Review
Medina Townhome Development LLC has requested a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) General Plan Review and Site Plan Review for a proposed 23-unit townhome
development at 1432 County Road 29, north of Highway 12 and east of County Road 29.
The Planning Commission reviewed at the August 10 and recommended approval.
Because the property is proposed to be rental townhomes and not proposed to be
subdivided, park dedication is not triggered, but the PUD allows some City flexibility to
incorporate open space, trails, and trail easements within the plan.
See attached report.
Recommended Action: Provide recommendation on potential park or trail land.
7. Staff Report
a. Lakeshore Park. Staff met with Landscape Architect Candace Amberg with WSB at
Lakeshore Park on August 5th to request a quote to provide some high-level design ideas
for Lakeshore Park. The quote came in at a reasonable rate for a price not to exceed
$3,200 to produce two alternative high-level conceptual designs based on programming,
existing conditions, opportunities, site circulation, and unique features. Staff plans to
bring these designs to the September 15th Park Commission meeting for initial review.
b. General Items. This agenda item is to give a verbal update on any other general park
items.
Medina Park Commission Meeting Minutes - DRAFT
July 21, 2021
Page 1 of 4
The Park Commission of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on July 21, 2021 at 7:00
p.m., at Medina City Hall. Park Commission Chair John Jacob presided.
1) Call to Order
Commissioners Present: Mary Morrison, John Jacob, Nila Norman, Steve Lee, Troy
Hutchinson
Youth Member Present: Katya Cavanaugh
Commissioners Absent: Angela Bernhardt, Terry Sharp
Youth Member Absent: Emily Jans
Also Present: Public Works Director Steve Scherer, Assistant City
Administrator Jodi Gallup, Administrative Assistant Lisa
DeMars, Councilmember Joe Cavanaugh
2) Additions to the Agenda: None.
3) Approval of the Minutes from:
• May 19, 2021 Meeting
o A motion was made by Lee and seconded by Morrison to approve the
minutes from May 19, 2021 as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
• June 30, 2021 Meeting
o A motion was made by Hutchinson and seconded by Norman to approve
the minutes from June 30, 2021 as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
4) Public Comments (on items not on the agenda): None.
5) City Council Update
Cavanaugh provided an update on recent City Council actions.
6) Hamel Athletic Club Request
Ryan Wilson with the Hamel Athletic Club (HAC) Board provided an overview of their
program to the Park Commission and presented their vision to turn the Paul Fortin Memorial
Field into a “Field of Dreams” ballpark that would be an enduring destination for players,
fans, and the community.
Wilson explained that HAC is starting to prepare for their 100-year celebration, which will
take place in 2026 by collecting history of the townball teams and fields. He stated HAC’s
goal would be to fundraise and construct a grandstand prior to the 100-year celebration to be
able to hold a Minnesota townball tournament in their centennial year.
Medina Park Commission Meeting Minutes - DRAFT
July 21, 2021
Page 2 of 4
Wilson projected the new multi-use stadium would be able to be used seven days a week,
100 games a season, and attract 15,000 additional park visitors. The vision would be to
attract community members, families, and fans to watch VFW, American Legion, and
townball baseball. The grandstand could also be used for community gatherings for movies,
concerts, and fireworks.
Wilson explained the existing chain link fencing behind the backstop would come down and
a nylon netting would be used to allow for better visibility.
Wilson showed pictures of area grandstands similar in size to what HAC envisions with
seating between 200-250, including the Delano Municipal Park, Anoka Castle Field, Toro
Stadium at Red Haddox Field, and Waconia.
Wilson stated as part of the project additional field improvements at the Paul Fortin Field
would include dugout upgrades, improved bench storage, expanded walking area by pushing
out the fence from dugouts, new scoreboard, infield turf improvements, and upgraded
batters’ and catchers’ box.
Wilson reiterated that the new stadium would be a community gathering place, which would
also increase visibility for the Uptown Hamel businesses. The stadium would bring visitors
from our community and communities around the state.
Wilson explained how this new stadium would serve youth ages 14+, VFW and American
Legion baseball, and will allow more fans to attend our local townball team, the Hamel
Hawks. He explained how townball is a high-level adult amateur baseball program that has
been part of Minnesota for over 100 years.
The Park Commission asked questions regarding the possibility of utilizing the space for
community events, such as how much availability there would be for events other than
baseball and how would a concert work in a field?
Wilson explained that HAC’s program runs primarily Monday through Thursday evenings,
so there would be weekend availability for community events. He stated a temporary stage
would have to be placed on the field for a concert.
The Park Commissioners questioned the projected cost and funding for the project. Wilson
stated it would cost around $550,000 and be funded through donations, corporate sponsors,
fundraising, and pledges.
The Park Commissioners raised the issue of limited parking and questioned where the
additional park visitors would park their vehicles?
Wilson explained their parking areas and stated they also had an agreement with the bank to
allow parking in their lot in the evenings when the bank is closed.
Medina Park Commission Meeting Minutes - DRAFT
July 21, 2021
Page 3 of 4
The Park Commissioners questioned the life of a stadium. It was projected to last around 40
years.
The Park Commissioners thanked Wilson for attending the meeting and everything HAC has
done for the community.
7) 2022-2026 Capital Improvement Plan – Park Funding Discussion
Gallup provided a brief overview on park funding and stated that each year, the Park
Commission reviews the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to plan for future capital
park and trail projects over the next five years. The Park Commissioners reviewed the notes
from the June park tour, the park asset inventory sheet showing asset replacement years, and
the draft CIP to begin planning for future park improvements.
Discussion took place on how to improve Lakeshore Park. It was noted that the residents in
the neighborhood had several ideas, which some contradicted each other. It was suggested to
create a committee involving Park Commissioners and community members. Staff proposed
hiring a landscape architect again to help with design ideas. The Park Commissioners were
hesitant to spend too much money on design but saw value in it if the price was right.
The following changes were incorporated into the 2022-2026 Capital Improvement Plan:
• Lakeshore Park redesign – move $100,000 from 2021 to 2022
• Medina Morningside redesign – add $100,000 in 2026
• Medina Morningside baseball backstop – add $15,000 in 2022
• Arrowhead Trail Connection 555 – Meander/Signal – Move from 2021 to 2022
• Hackamore Trail – Move from 2021 to 2022
• Medina Road Trail – breakup total dollar amount of $200,000 to be spread out over
next several years
• Medina Lake Preserve – Add pavilion once City gains access to park
• Hamel Legion Park – Add $5,000 in 2022 for new parking lot lights
• Hamel Legion Park – Show $500,000 in 2023 for grandstand with the funding source
coming from donations
• Shawnee Woods – Add $5,000 for new park entrance sign in 2022
• Deerhill Road Preserve Trail – budget money in 2022 for paved trail
A motion was made by Lee and seconded by Hutchinson to recommend to the City Council
the discussed changes to the 2022-2026 Capital Improvement Plan. Motion passed
unanimously.
8) Staff Report
General Items – Scherer provided an updated on trail paving throughout the city.
Medina Park Commission Meeting Minutes - DRAFT
July 21, 2021
Page 4 of 4
9) Adjourn
A motion was made by Lee, seconded by Hutchinson, and passed unanimously, to
adjourn the meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 1 of 4 August 18, 2021
PUD General Plan Park Commission Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Park Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
DATE: August 13, 2021
MEETING: August 18, 2021 Park Commission
SUBJ: Medina Townhome Development LLC –
1432 County Road 29 – PUD General Plan and Site Plan Review
Summary of Request
Medina Townhome Development LLC has requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
General Plan Review and Site Plan Review for a proposed 23-unit townhome development at
1432 County Road 29, north of Highway 12 and east of County Road 29. The Planning
Commission reviewed at the August 10 and recommended approval.
An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found below.
Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 2 of 4 August 18, 2021
PUD General Plan Park Commission Meeting
PUD Purpose/Information
The applicant has requested rezoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as an alternative to
developing under the R4 zoning district. A PUD provides flexibility to the underlying zoning
requirements in cases where the City determines that such flexibility better serves the purpose of
the PUD ordinance and other City objectives.
Purpose of a Planned Unit Development
According to Section 827.25, PUD provisions are established to provide comprehensive
procedures and standards designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of
neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing
for a mixture of uses. The PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this
Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other 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. (PUD is
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.
Proposed General Plan
The plan proposes 23 townhome units amongst four structures on a lot sized 2.12 acres. This
density would be at low end required within the High Density Residential (HDR) land use and
R4 district. The applicant has indicated that they would intend to offer the townhomes for rent.
The R4 zoning district is intended to implement development in the HDR land use. As noted
above, a PUD allows “deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot
area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards” to serve the purposes described
in the PUD ordinance. To analyze whether to approve a rezoning to PUD, the City compares the
request to the expectations of the underlying zoning designation.
The applicant has requested the PUD for primarily flexibility from the setback requirement to the
new public street along the south of the property. The applicant has stated that this flexibility is
Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 3 of 4 August 18, 2021
PUD General Plan Park Commission Meeting
necessary to obtain the minimum density of 12 units/acre with townhome units. The applicant
states that townhomes could not be developed at this density without some flexibility through a
PUD. The alternative would likely be for a 3-story multi-family structure, which the applicant
argues would not be economically viable at this scale.
The following compares the concept to the R4 district requirements.
R4
Requirement
Proposed Townhomes
Minimum Net Area per Unit 3400 s.f. 3922 s.f.
Maximum Net Area per Unit 3650 s.f. 3922 s.f.
Minimum Setback from Perimeter 20 feet 20 feet
Arterial Road setback 50 feet 50 feet from existing ROW
(33’ from additional ROW)
Local Road Setback (new road on south) 40 feet 20 feet
Private Road Setback (internal driveway) 25 feet 19 feet - drive to garage
Minimum Distance Between Buildings 30 feet 50 feet
Max. Hardcover–w/o wetlands and ponds 70% 67%
The applicant proposes a density of approximately 10.85 units/acre, just under 12 units/acre,
which is the lower end of the density range required in the HDR land use. The Comprehensive
Plan allows the city to consider flexibility to the density standards as follows: “exceptions to or
modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed
other standards of the zoning district. Such modification shall generally not exceed -10% of the
minimum density or +20% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use.”
The proposed 23-units falls within this allowed -10% flexibility. During the concept plan
review, staff’s impression was that the Planning Commission and City Council believed the
reduction would be appropriate to provide townhome development at this density while taking
into account the site constraints.
The applicant has indicated that they will agree to rent at least two of the units at 80% of the area
median income (AMI) to help provide options at a lower rent point. The remaining units would
be market rate rents, starting at approximately $2,000/month.
Park/Trails/Multi-Modal
The applicant proposes a small “tot-lot” playground within the project and a sidewalk along
the new road. The nearest park is located approximately ½ mile to the northwest at the Orono
School Early Learning Center in Maple Plain.
Staff recommends additional recreational amenities as part of the amenities of the PUD. This
may include something like a basketball hoop or similar amenity.
Because the property is proposed to be rental townhomes and not proposed to be subdivided,
park dedication is not triggered.
There is an existing trail in Maple Plain on the west side of County Road 29. Staff has
engaged with Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District to determine whether a trail
Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 4 of 4 August 18, 2021
PUD General Plan Park Commission Meeting
connection should be constructed along the west side of the subject property (east of County
Road 29) as well.
There is a trail access into Baker Park 800 feet north of the site east of Main Street. Having a
trail along the east side of County Road 29 would prevent residents from this development and
the future high density to the east from needing to cross County Road 29 to get to the trail in
Maple Plain. However, Three Rivers Park owns most of the property to the north and has not
indicated whether it will construct a trail connection. Unless and until Three Rivers continues
the trail to the north, it would only get 1/3 of the way to trailhead and abruptly end at the edge
of property of the single family home in the meantime.
If the City decides against requiring construction of the trail along the west of the subject site,
staff would recommend that sufficient right-of-way or trail easement be provided for a future
trail, that capacity be provided in the stormwater system, and that the grading plan provide a
convenient bench for future construction. This would lower the cost of future constructure if
Three Rivers Park constructed the connection to the north. The Park Commission and City
Council can discuss whether construction of the trail should be required as consideration for
the PUD.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the following be required as part of the amenities of the Planned Unit
Development:
1) Substantial play equipment and amenities for tot lot
2) Easement and grading for potential future trail
3) Account for future trail in stormwater system
4) Improved pedestrian connectivity to south and east
The Park Commission can discuss whether construction of the trail along the west of the site
should also be required.
Attachments
1. Applicant Narrative
2. Plans
PUD and Site Plan Approval Submission – 1432 Co Rd No 29, Medina, MN
55359
Statement on compliance with the Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan calls for the following:
• Minimum of 951 new households
• 244 Units of higher density housing
• Minimum overall average density of 3 homes/acre
• Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to
support residents at all stages of their lives
• High density housing planned in the southwest corner of the City
Our proposal meets all of the objectives listed above and is in direct alignment with the
Comprehensive Plan. Our proposal is to provide 23 rental townhomes on 2 acres of land,
which gives a density just under 12 units/acre. The townhomes will consist of both three-
bedroom and four-bedroom homes that will be rented to families in need of rental
housing (including 2 units limiting rents at the 80% AMI level). The driving factor
behind this use type is the lack of rental housing options for families in the area. In
addition to contributing to the density and new development objectives, this rental
opportunity will help the City to provide a more diverse array of housing options at a
wider range of costs.
Statement describing the PUD and the market it is intended to serve:
Currently this 2 acre property is used as a vacant single family home, garage, and land.
The proposal is to remove the single family home and garage and construct 23 new townhomes
(4 buildings), some private outdoor space and recreational area, as well as a new public road.
Site design will also take into account the grading changes on the property as well as the need for
stormwater management.
The townhomes will consist of both three-bedroom and four-bedroom homes that will be
rented to families in need of rental housing (including 2 units limiting rents at the 80% AMI
level). The driving factor behind this use type is the lack of rental housing options for families in
the area. A 3rd party rental housing demand assessment was conducted by Viewpoint Consulting
and it estimated the unmet rental demand for the primary market area surrounding this site is 168
units. Construction of new rental townhomes will help meet that unmet demand.
While we understand that sometimes PUD’s are applied for as a means by which to deal
with wetland requirements or tree conservation, our intention is to use the PUD designation as a
vehicle by which we can meet the Comprehensive Plan recommendations while at the same
providing a rental opportunity for larger families. While the number of bedrooms in each unit
could be reduced, and therefore the footprint of the buildings, it would result in the exclusion of
larger families as potential renters. We believe having units with larger bedroom counts allows
families with kids to have the living space they need while also benefiting from the local schools,
parks and amenities Medina has to offer.
Once construction is completed the site will have density just under 12 units/acre. The
proposed use of rental townhomes and density of almost 12 units/acre fits within the
recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan.
To further address Section 827.25 of the City Zoning Code, rental townhomes are not
something that currently exists in abundance in Medina. In order to make this project a reality
and make it comply with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan a PUD is needed.
Provision of these townhomes will allow for those who for various reasons cannot purchase a
home in Medina to still live in this community, thereby helping to meet the demands for all
styles of economic expansion (Subd. 1). Without a PUD the density recommendation on this 2
acre site is not physically or economically feasible, so the classification of a PUD allows for a
higher and better maximization of the site (Subd. 2), which in the long term is a better use for the
City (per the Comprehensive Plan) with the expected growth. The completion of this project
also includes constructing an access road to the 14 acre parcel located immediately to the SE of
the subject property, which will make development of that parcel more feasible and convenient
(Subd. 6). Without a PUD, the setback requirements in the underlying zoning code would
require this project to be less than 23 units, which means it would not meet the density
recommendation, which in theory would mean it cannot move forward. A 23 unit project meets
the density recommendation, maximizes the use of the site area, and allows for more diversity of
housing options to be offered in the City (Subd. 8 and 9). We have done all that we can to
minimize the exceptions asked for, and although we are asking for the PUD the only exception
we are really requesting is a lesser setback length from the SW building to the entry drive.
Statement on total number of units and square footage.
There will be 23 total units with a square footage of 27,980.
Describe public or private open spaces:
Part of the site plan includes some private outdoor space which will include a playground and
seating area. We also have room for guest parking, snow storage, sidewalks connecting out to
the future trail along Baker Park Road, and numerous trees/landscaping. Additionally, we will
be constructing a new public entry drive which will better allow for future development on the
land to the southeast of our site.
Restrictive covenants:
Two of the units will have rents limited to the 80% AMI level.
Jul 27, 2021 - 2:27pm - User:mlong L:\PROJECTS\22471\CAD\Civil\Sheets\22471-C1-COVER.dwg
C1.01
COVER SHEET
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issued:
Client
MEDINA
TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT,
LLC.
MEDINA
TOWNHOMES
MEDINA, MN
1432 COUNTY ROAD 29
JEB JGP
JEB
PRELIMINARY 06/30/2021
22471
PRELI
M
I
N
A
R
Y
6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF
DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL
7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
GEOTECHNICAL
CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING, INC.
414 37TH AVE NST. CLOUD, MN 56303
TEL 320-774-3500
VERDEGAN@CHOSENVALLEYTESTING.COM
CONTACT: COLBY VERDEGAN
DEVELOPER/OWNER
MEDINA TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
TEL 949-439-8425
JOSHSANDERSON@EDINAREALTY.COM
CONTACT: JOSH SANDERSON
ARCHITECT
KAAS WILSON ARCHITECTS
1301 AMERICAN BLVD E
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425
TEL 612-879-6000
COLLINK@KAASWILSON.COM
CONTACT: COLLIN KAAS
CIVIL ENGINEER
SAMBATEK
12800 WHITEWATER DRIVE, SUITE 300
MINNETONKA, MN 55343
TEL 763-476-6010
@SAMBATEK.COM
CONTACT:
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
SAMBATEK
12800 WHITEWATER DRIVE, SUITE 300MINNETONKA, MN 55343
TEL 763-476-6010
JMCKINNEY@SAMBATEK.COM
CONTACT: JOSH MCKINNEY
SURVEYOR
GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC.
445 WILLOW DR N
LONG LAKE, MN 55356
TEL 952-473-4141
ERICD@GRONBERGASSOC.COM
CONTACT: ERIC DAGGETT
SHEET INDEX
SHEET DESCRIPTION
C1.01 COVER SHEET
C3.01 SITE PLAN
C4.01 GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN
C5.01 UTILITY PLAN
C8.01 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
L1.01 LANDSCAPE PLAN
L1.02 LANDSCAPE DETAILS AND NOTES
for
General Plan of Development
Medina Townhomes
Medina Townhome Development, LLC.
Medina, Minnesota
Presented by:
NO SCALEVICINITY MAP
SITE
CONSULTANT CONTACT LIST:
N.T.S.
CITY ENGINEER'S ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (2013)
MNDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION (2018 EDITION)
GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS
12
BA
K
E
R
P
A
R
K
R
O
A
D
24
ATTACHED
ALTA / NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY GRONBERG AND
ASSOCIATES, INC. DATED JANUARY 17, 2017.
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME6,080 S.F.FFE=1000.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1000.0TOTLOT
T
PROPOSED FILTRATION BASIN100-YEAR HWL = 992.39BOTTOM POND = 989.00BOTTOM SAND = 986.50260 LF 6" DRAINTILE
PROPOSED SUBSURFACEFILTRATION SYSTEM100-YEAR HWL = 995.27BOTTOM ROCK = 992.00BOTTOM SAND = 989.50270 LF 6" DRAINTILE
6
15.6'24'18'
13
.
5
'
12
'
13
.
5
'
36'
20
'
20'
20
'
93'100'
5.
5
'
13
.
5
'
6.
5
'
5'
5'
10
'
16'36'
30
'
4'
6'
6'
16'36'16'
18
'
24
'
18
'
18
'
24
'
18
'
7'
28
'
63
'
5.67'
10.9'
36'16'17.33'
B
B
B B
EE
E
E
E
E E
F
F
K
K
K
L
5'
32'
4'
J
9'
50'22.5'
33.2'
SCALE IN FEET
0 4020
NORTH
Jul 27, 2021 - 2:27pm - User:mlong L:\PROJECTS\22471\CAD\Civil\Sheets\22471-C3-SITE.dwg
C3.01
SITE PLAN
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issued:
Client
MEDINA
TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT,
LLC.
MEDINA
TOWNHOMES
MEDINA, MN
1432 COUNTY ROAD 29
JEB JGP
JEB
PRELIMINARY 06/30/2021
22471
PRELI
M
I
N
A
R
Y
6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF
DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL
7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
1.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT.
2.ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3.CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT “GUTTER OUT” WHERE WATERDRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS “GUTTER
IN” CURB. COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.
4.ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT.
5.ALL PARKING STALLS TO BE 9' IN WIDTH AND 18' IN LENGTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
6.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE
LOCATIONS.
7.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR PYLON SIGN DETAILS
8.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL AND FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF LIGHT
POLE.
9.REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, LOT NUMBERS, LOT AREAS, AND LOT DIMENSIONS.
10.ALL GRADIENTS ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE
OF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). THE
MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE 2.08%
(1:48). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADAROUTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFYTHE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS
THE DESIGN GRADIENT AND COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.
11."NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL DRIVEWAYS AS REQUIRED BY CITY.
12.STREET NAMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY.
LEGEND
EASEMENT
CURB & GUTTER
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
SAWCUT LINE
NUMBER OF PARKING
STALLS PER ROW
SIGN
PIPE BOLLARD
STANDARD DUTYASPHALT PAVING
HEAVY DUTYASPHALT PAVING
CONCRETE PAVING
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
KEY NOTE
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
DEVELOPMENT NOTES KEY NOTES
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
XX
XX
THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED
ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING
SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING
UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THE
CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY
HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).
IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
AREAGROSS SITE AREA
BUILDING SETBACKSFRONT YARDREAR YARDSIDE YARD
ZONING
EXISTING ZONING
PROPOSED ZONING
95,114 SF 2.18 AC
50 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET
R-4 R-4
PAVEMENT BY OTHERS
(SEE ARCHITECTURAL
PLANS)
A.BUILDING, STOOPS, STAIRS (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)
B.B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
C.B-618 6CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
D.FLAT CURB SECTION
E.CONCRETE SIDEWALK
F.SEGMENTAL BLOCK RETAINING WALL
G.ACCESSIBLE RAMP
H.ACCESSIBLE STALL STRIPING
I.ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN
J.TRANSFORMER
K.60" FENCE
L.CONCRETE STEPS AND HANDRAIL
IP1 IP3 IP1 IP3 IP1 IP3 IP1 IP3
IP1 IP3
IP1 IP3
IP1 IP3
IP1 IP2 IP1 IP2
IP1 IP2IP1IP2
10
0
0
1000
9909
9
5
10
0
0
987988989991992993
9
9
4
9
9
6
9
9
7
9
9
8
999
100
0
99
9
999
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME6,080 S.F.FFE=1000.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1000.0TOTLOT
987988989
99
5
99
299
3
99
499
6
99
7
99
8
99
9
997998
999
10001000
999 999
99
799
899
9
98
6
98
7
98
8
98
9
997
998999
999.551000.14 1000.29 999.57 1000.00
1000.22
1000.22
999.78 999.781000.02
999.10
999.30
999.36 998.59
999.42
999.30 998.59 999.06
1000.001000.001000.00
999.13
999.83 999.83 999.83
1000.00
999.83
1000.00
999.83
1000.00
999.83
1000.00
999.28 999.29
1000.831000.831000.83
1001.00 1001.00 1001.00 1001.00
1001.00
1000.83
1001.00
1000.83
1001.00
1000.83
1001.00
1000.05
1000.05
1000.31
1000.27 1000.29
1000.33
1000.501000.50 999.02998.88 998.77
998.70998.42 998.53
999.50 999.50
999.50999.501000.501000.50
999.00
999.30
999.00
999.30
999.00
1000.12
1000.04
1000.12
1000.04
1000.00
999.92999.29
999.00 998.69 998.84
999.37 999.93
999.18 997.89
997.81 997.81
997.89
999.92999.92
999.00
998.59
998.85
998.54999.02
998.82
999.26
998.05
998.05
998.61
998.53 999.11
999.38
999.14
998.87 999.25
997.64
998.00
998.53 1000.341000.92
T/W: 996.67
B/W: 996.10
T/W: 996.77
B/W: 992.77
T/W: 997.34
B/W: 996.67
T/W: 991.45B/W: 987.45
T/W: 996.00
B/W: 992.00
T/W: 998.57
B/W: 994.59
T/W: 994.00B/W: 990.04
T/W: 998.00
B/W: 994.00
T/W: 993.50B/W: 989.50
T/W: 994.60B/W: 990.60
T/W: 999.15B/W: 995.15
T/W: 994.60B/W: 994.60
T/W: 999.15
B/W: 998.50
T
999.24 992.50PROPOSED FILTRATION BASIN100-YEAR HWL = 992.39BOTTOM POND = 989.00BOTTOM SAND = 986.50260 LF 6" DRAINTILE
PROPOSED SUBSURFACEFILTRATION SYSTEM100-YEAR HWL = 995.27BOTTOM ROCK = 992.00BOTTOM SAND = 989.50270 LF 6" DRAINTILE
PROTECT EXISTING TREE
PROTECTEXISTING TREES
PROTECTEXISTING TREES
IP1 IP3
SCALE IN FEET
0 4020
NORTH
Jul 27, 2021 - 2:27pm - User:mlong L:\PROJECTS\22471\CAD\Civil\Sheets\22471-C4-GRADE&EC.dwg
C4.01
GRADING &
EROSION
CONTROL PLAN
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issued:
Client
MEDINA
TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT,
LLC.
MEDINA
TOWNHOMES
MEDINA, MN
1432 COUNTY ROAD 29
JEB JGP
JEB
PRELIMINARY 06/30/2021
22471
PRELI
M
I
N
A
R
Y
6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF
DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL
7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
1.PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION. SPOT ELEVATIONS ALONG
PROPOSED CURB DENOTE GUTTER GRADE.
2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT “GUTTER OUT” WHERE
WATER DRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS “GUTTERIN” CURB.
3.ALL GRADIENT ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL
SLOPE OF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08%
(1:48). MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL
BE IN 2.08% (1:48). CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG
THE ADA ROUTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY
THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD
VERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PAVING CONTRACTOR.
4.CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TOADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. CONTRACTOR
WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES
OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.
5.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTIONPRACTICES, CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ONTHE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF
THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL
WORKING HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION
REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THEADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.
6.CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY
THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL
REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.
A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:
COMPANY: CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING, INC.ADDRESS: 414 37TH AVE N, ST. CLOUD, MN 56303
PHONE: 320-774-3500DATED: FEBRUARY 20, 2017
CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SOILS REPORT.
7.CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE DEWATERING AS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE SITE GRADINGCONSTRUCTION.
8.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL SHALL BE PERFORMED ON THE
STREET AND PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLETRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OFTHE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER.
CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEREQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER.
9.REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BECOMEUNSUITABLE AND WILL NOT PASS A TEST ROLL. REMOVE UNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THE SITE AND
IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.
10.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING VEHICULAR AND
PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONALSIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY.
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.
11.EXISTING TREES AND OTHER NATURAL VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AND/OR ADJACENT TO
THE PROJECT ARE OF PRIME CONCERN TO THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS AND SHALL BE ARESTRICTED AREA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT TREES TO REMAIN AT ALL TIMES. EQUIPMENT
SHALL NOT NEEDLESSLY BE OPERATED UNDER NEARBY TREES AND EXTREME CAUTION SHALL BE
EXERCISED WHEN WORKING ADJACENT TO TREES. SHOULD ANY PORTION OF THE TREE BRANCHESREQUIRE REMOVAL TO PERMIT OPERATION OF THE CONTRACTOR'S EQUIPMENT, CONTRACTOR
SHALL OBTAIN THE SERVICES OF A PROFESSIONAL TREE TRIMMING SERVICE TO TRIM THE TREESPRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF OPERATION. SHOULD CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS RESULT IN THE
BREAKING OF ANY LIMBS, THE BROKEN LIMBS SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AND CUTSSHALL BE PROPERLY PROTECTED TO MINIMIZE ANY LASTING DAMAGE TO THE TREE. NO TREES
SHALL BE REMOVED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION BY THE ENGINEER. COSTS FOR TRIMMING
SERVICES SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONSTRUCTION AND NO SPECIALPAYMENT WILL BE MADE.
12.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN
AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR
RESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENTAREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. CONTRACTOR SHALL
SUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREADTOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES.
13.TRENCH BORROW CONSTRUCTION: IF ALLOWED BY THE OWNER, CONTRACTOR SHALL
COMPLETE “TRENCH BORROW” EXCAVATION IN AREAS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER IN ORDER TOOBTAIN STRUCTURAL MATERIAL. TREES SHALL NOT BE REMOVED OR DAMAGED AS A RESULT OFTHE EXCAVATION, UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. THE EXCAVATION SHALL COMMENCE A
MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM THE LIMIT OF THE BUILDING PAD. THE EXCAVATION FROM THIS
LIMIT SHALL EXTEND AT A MINIMUM SLOPE OF 1 FOOT HORIZONTAL TO 1 FOOT VERTICAL (1:1)DOWNWARD AND OUTWARD FROM THE FINISHED SURFACE GRADE ELEVATION. THE TRENCH
BORROW EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED TO THE PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION,AND SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE QUALITY
COMPACTION METHOD AS OUTLINED IN MN/DOT SPECIFICATION 2105.3F2. SNOW FENCE SHALLBE FURNISHED AND PLACED ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE TRENCH BORROW AREA WHERE THE
SLOPES EXCEED 2 FOOT HORIZONTAL TO 1 FOOT VERTICAL (2:1).
14.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED, CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS
WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTHFINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEENPOINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES.
AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISHED GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENT
CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOME
RUTTED, ERODED OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THECONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO EQUAL OR BETTER THAN ORIGINAL
CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.
15.TOLERANCES
15.a.THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY
BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION ATANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.
15.b.THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY
BY MORE THAN 0.10 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION ATANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.
15.c.THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT
VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED
ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.
15.d.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVEOR BELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.
15.e.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.
16.AFTER THE SITE GRADING IS COMPLETED, IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS,
CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTEDBY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE.
17.CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE LOCATION OF ANY HAUL ROADS THAT MAY BE REQUIREDTO COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL INDICATE HAUL ROADS ON
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL “SITE MAP”. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY OF EACH ROADWAY. CONTRACTOR SHALL POSTWHATEVER SECURITY, AND COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS WHICH ARE REQUIRED BY EACHGOVERNING AUTHORITY OF EACH ROADWAY.
18.FILL PLACED WITHIN THE BUILDING PAD AREAS SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH HUD/FHA
PROCEDURES AND DATA SHEET 79G.
19.RETAINING WALL(S) SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF MODULAR BLOCK MATERIAL. CONTRACTOR
SHALL SUBMIT TO THE ENGINEER AND LOCAL AUTHORITY CERTIFIED ENGINEERING DRAWINGS,DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND SOIL BORINGS. THE CERTIFIED ENGINEER FOR THE RETAINING
WALL(S) SHALL PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL
IMPROVEMENT, AND A LETTER CERTIFYING THE INSTALLATION OF THE WALL(S) WAS
CONSTRUCTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
902.5X902
SPOT ELEVATION
CONTOUR
RIP RAP
OVERFLOW ELEV.
CURB & GUTTER
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
LEGEND
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
STORM SEWER
SOIL BORINGS
GRADING NOTES
DRAINTILE
EOF
902.5
D
THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED
ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING
SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING
UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THE
CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY
HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).
IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
SILT FENCE
INLET PROTECTION
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME6,080 S.F.FFE=1000.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1000.0TOTLOT
T
PROPOSED FILTRATION BASIN100-YEAR HWL = 992.39BOTTOM POND = 989.00BOTTOM SAND = 986.50260 LF 6" DRAINTILE
PROPOSED SUBSURFACEFILTRATION SYSTEM100-YEAR HWL = 995.27BOTTOM ROCK = 992.00BOTTOM SAND = 989.50270 LF 6" DRAINTILE
CBMH 101RE=998.00IE=991.50 (E)IE=993.63 (S)IE=993.95 (W)10 LF - 15"STM SWR @ 2.00%
CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SYSTEMMH 01RE=998.05IE=982.20 (FIELD VERIFY)
MH 03RE=998.84IE=987.06
MH 05RE=1000.48IE=990.00
211 LF - 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 2.00%
32 LF - 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 2.00%
39 LF - 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 2.00%
108 LF - 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 2.00%
62 LF - 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 2.00%
24 LF - 8" PVCSCH 40 @ 2.00%
23 LF - 8" PVCSCH 40 @ 2.00%
8" PVC STUBIE=987.66
SANITARY SEWERSERVICEIE=990.48
SANITARY SEWERSERVICEIE=990.46
SANITARY SEWERSERVICEIE=988.68
SANITARY SEWERSERVICEIE=988.30
42 LF - 8" PVCSCH 40 @ 2.00%23 LF - 8" PVCSCH 40 @ 2.00%
WATERMAIN SERVICE CONNECTION WATERMAIN SERVICE CONNECTION
WATERMAIN SERVICE CONNECTION WATERMAIN SERVICE CONNECTION
CONNECT TO EXISTING 8"WATERMAIN WITH 8"TEE & GATE VALVE (FIELD VERIFY)
98 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 0.75%115 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 0.75%
CB 104RE=999.45IE=994.45
CBMH 103RE=999.45IE=993.72
FES 100IE=991.00
CBMH 101ARE=998.32IE=994.43
CBMH 101BRE=998.75IE=994.14
MH 04RE=999.05IE=987.84
HYDRANT6" GATE VALVE
HYDRANT6" GATE VALVE
15 LF - 15"STM SWR @ 2.00%
24 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 2.00%
51 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 1.00%
8" WATERMAIN TEEAND PLUG
HYDRANT6" GATE VALVE
CBMH 106RE=998.49IE=994.49
CBMH 105RE=998.49IE=992.86
CBMH 101CRE=998.72IE=994.72 58 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 1.00%
YD 501RE=999.00IE=995.51
YD 500RE=999.00IE=996.11
YD 502RE=999.00IE=996.11
53 LF - 8"STM SWR @ 2.00%HYDRANT6" GATE VALVE
30 LF - 8"STM SWR @ 2.00%
30 LF - 8"STM SWR @ 2.00%
MH 02RE=999.15IE=986.42
CBMH 201RE=992.00IE = 986.50 (E)DRAINTILE IE = 986.50
20 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 0.50%
FES 202IE=986.40
STMH 100AWITH SUMP AND SAFL BAFFLERE=995.50IE=991.30
25 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 0.75%OCS 107IE=999.00IE = 995.00 (W)IE = 988.90 (E)DRAINTILE IE = 989.50
20 LF - 12"STM SWR @ 0.50%
FES 202IE=988.50
SCALE IN FEET
0 4020
NORTH
Jul 27, 2021 - 2:27pm - User:mlong L:\PROJECTS\22471\CAD\Civil\Sheets\22471-C5-UTIL.dwg
C5.01
UTILITY PLAN
1.THE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS" AS PUBLISHED BY THE CITY
ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS.
1.1.ALL UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS.
1.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPEN, TURN OFF, INTERFERE WITH, OR ATTACH ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO OR TAP WATERMAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY
AUTHORIZED TO DO SO BY THE CITY. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE THELIABILITY OF CONTRACTOR.
1.3.A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18 INCHES AND HORIZONTAL SEPARATION OF 10-FEET BETWEEN OUTSIDE PIPE DIAMETERS IS REQUIRED AT ALL WATERMAIN
AND SEWER MAIN (BUILDING, STORM AND SANITARY) CROSSINGS.
2.ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN CEAM SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN.
2.1.ALL MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.
2.2.ALL SANITARY SEWER TO BE PVC SDR-35, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
2.2.1.ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40 CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.
2.3.ALL WATERMAIN TO BE DUCTILE IRON - CLASS 52, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
2.3.1.ALL WATERMAIN TO HAVE 7.5-FEET OF COVER OVER TOP OF WATERMAIN.
2.3.2.PROVIDE THRUST BLOCKING AND MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTS ON ALL WATERMAIN JOINTS PER CITY STANDARDS.
2.4.ALL STORM SEWER PIPE TO BE SMOOTH INTERIOR DUAL WALL HDPE PIPE WITH WATER TIGHT GASKETS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
2.4.1.ALL STORM SEWER PIPE FOR ROOF DRAIN SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40 CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.
2.5.RIP RAP SHALL BE Mn/DOT CLASS 3.
3.COORDINATE ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTION LOCATIONS AND INVERT ELEVATIONS WITH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
4.ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTIONS (STORM, SANITARY, WATER) WITH FIVE FEET OR LESS COVER ARE TO BE INSULATED FROM BUILDING TO POINT WHERE 5-FEET OF
COVER IS ACHIEVED.
5.CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.
CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.
6.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLEFOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY
CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OFCONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.
7.ALL AREAS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES THAT ARE DISTURBED BY UTILITY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTORED IN KIND. SODDED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED WITH 6
INCHES OF TOPSOIL PLACED BENEATH THE SOD.
8.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS,
FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.
9.ALL SOILS TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY AN INDEPENDENT SOILS ENGINEER. EXCAVATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMOVING UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE
COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE UTILITY BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR
SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOILS TESTS AND SOIL INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.
A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:
COMPANY: CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING, INC.ADDRESS: 414 37TH AVE N, ST. CLOUD, MN 56303PHONE: 320-774-3500
DATED: FEBRUARY 20, 2017
CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS SOILS REPORT.
10.CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT 2 COPIES OF SHOP DRAWINGS FOR MANHOLE AND CATCH BASIN STRUCTURES TO ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALLOW 5 WORKING DAYS
FOR SHOP DRAWING REVIEW.
11.CONTRACTOR AND MATERIAL SUPPLIER SHALL DETERMINE THE MINIMUM DIAMETER REQUIRED FOR EACH STORM SEWER STRUCTURE.
TELEPHONE
ELECTRIC
GAS LINE
FORCEMAIN (SAN.)
EASEMENT
WATERMAIN
SANITARY SEWER
EXISTINGPROPOSED
STORM SEWER
CURB & GUTTER
DRAINTILE
D
S S
SLS
LEGEND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION NOTES
THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED
ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING
SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING
UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THE
CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY
HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).
IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,
INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issued:
Client
MEDINA
TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT,
LLC.
MEDINA
TOWNHOMES
MEDINA, MN
1432 COUNTY ROAD 29
JEB JGP
JEB
PRELIMINARY 06/30/2021
22471
PRELI
M
I
N
A
R
Y
6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF
DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL
7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1001.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME6,080 S.F.FFE=1000.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME7,300 S.F.FFE=1000.0TOTLOT
T
KFG10
RSH6
KFG10
RSH6
KFG5
RSH12
SMA10
KFG8
WHL6
RSH12
KFG10
RSH6
KFG10
RSH6
RSH10
BIG15
KFG7
RSH9
CD1KFG3LRS6BIG10CD2
KFG3
LRS5LRS5LRS5LRS5
KFG10
BES5
RSH5
KFG10
BES9
RSH6
KFG10
BES10
RSH9
SMA5
KFG9
LRS16
BES11
SMA8
RSH6
KFG11
KFG10
BES5
RSH5
KFG10
BES9
RSH6
LRS5
SMA7RSH9
WHL4CD2LRS8LRS10
CD4
KFG5
LRS11
WHL3
LRS8LRS10CD2BIG10
LRS5
1JL
1JLBES6
WHL7
3DP
2BF
1AB
BH3
WHL6 CD2 LRS6 CD2 WHL3 LRS2 CD4
RSH5 SSH6 BIG10BIG10 RSH10 BIG5 SSH6 RSH3
1RB
4DPDW51AB
1CM
3DP
1AB
BH6
2BF1CM
1CM
BIG5
BIG10 BIG10
BIG5
1TH
LRS5
LRS2
SNOW STORAGESNOW STORAGE
1
1
1
1
5SMA
9BES
5SMA
9BES 6WHL
8KFG
10SMA 5KFG
5SMA
9BES
5SMA
9BES
3WHL
2LRS
6WHL
2CD
5BIG10BIG
6WHL6LRS3WHL
5BIG2LRS4CD
5LRS 5SMA
5LRS 7SMA
11LRS
5WHL
2DW
3KFG
6RSH
8SMA
5BES
10LRS
5WHL
2DW
5LRS
5SMA
1CD
2CD
3KFG8LRS
12BIG
10LRS5KFG
3KFG
12BIG4WHL
5KFG
4LRS4CD4LRS10BIG
3KFG
2CD
4BIG
4WHL
5KFG8LRS3KFG
11LRS
5KFG
4CD
7WHL
9SMA
2DW
5KFG
6BES
6RSH
5KFG
6RSH
9SMA
2DW
6LH
4CD
3WHL 6LRS3KFG 3KFG 6WHL
4LRS
5BIG
TT9 3BH TT9 3BH TT9 3BH TT9
SB9
RB2
BF2
AB1
DP3
6LH
3WHL
5BIG
10BIG
10BIG
JL1
4BES
4BESTH1
SCALE IN FEET
0 4020
NORTH
Jul 27, 2021 - 2:28pm - User:mlong L:\PROJECTS\22471\CAD\Civil\Sheets\22471-L1-LSCP.dwg
L1.01
LANDSCAPE
PLAN
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issued:
Client
MEDINA
TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT,
LLC.
MEDINA
TOWNHOMES
MEDINA, MN
1432 COUNTY ROAD 29
JEB JGP
JEB
PRELIMINARY 06/30/2021
22471
PRELI
M
I
N
A
R
Y
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 LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
This certification is not valid unless wet signed in blue
ink. If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of
this survey which is available upon request at
Sambatek, Minnetonka, MN office.
Registration No.Date:MM/DD/YYYY59119JOHN R. WORKMAN
6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF
DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL
7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
1.DECIDUOUS AND CONIFEROUS TRESS:ONE TREE PER 60 FEET OF LOT PERIMETER SHALL BE REQUIRED.
2.ORNAMENTAL TREES:ONE TREE PER 120 FEET OF LOT PERIMETER SHALL BE REQUIRED.
3.SHRUBS:
ON SHRUB PER 40 FEET OF LOT PERIMETER.
4.A MINIMUM OF 8 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ARE WITHIN
PARKING AREA SHALL BE LANDSCAPED
LEGEND
EASEMENT
CURB & GUTTER
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
SIGN
PIPE BOLLARD
STANDARD DUTY
ASPHALT PAVING
CONCRETE PAVING
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
MEDINA LANDSCAPE CODE
PLANT SCHEDULE
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
PROPOSED
29
14
121
14%
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
S
S
SANITARY SEWER
LANDSCAPE EDING
STORM SEWER
WATERMAIN
FORCEMAIN (SAN.)
YARDDRAIN
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
D
S
LS
RIPRAP
REQUIRED
24
12
36
8%
TREES CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE QTY
AB Acer freemanii `Autumn Blaze` / Autumn Blaze Maple B & B 2.5"Cal 4
CM Acer x freemanii `Armstrong` / Armstrong Freeman Maple B & B 2.5"Cal 3
RB Betula nigra `Cully` TM / Heritage Birch B & B 2.5"Cal 3
DP Betula platyphylla `Fargo` TM / Dakota Pinnacle Birch B & B 2"Cal 13
CONIFERS CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE QTY
BF Abies balsamea / Balsam Fir B & B 6`6
TT Thuja occidentalis `Techny` / Techny Arborvitae B & B 8`36
ORN. TREES CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE QTY
SB Amelanchier canadensis `Autumn Brilliance` / Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry B & B 2"Cal 9
TH Hydrangea paniculata `Tardiva` / Tardiva Hydrangea B & B 1.25"2
JL Syringa reticulata / Japanese Tree Lilac B & B 2"Cal 3
SHRUBS CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT
CD Cornus sericea `Alleman`s Compact` / Dwarf Red Twig Dogwood 5 gal 42
BH Diervilla lonicera / Dwarf Bush Honeysuckle 5 gal 18
LH Hydrangea paniculata `Jane` / Little Lime Hydrangea 5 gal 12
DW Salix purpurea `Nana` / Dwarf Arctic Willow 5 gal 13
GRASSES CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT
KFG Calamagrostis x acutiflora `Karl Foerster` / Feather Reed Grass 1 gal 205
PERENNIALS CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT
SMA Artemisia schmidtiana `Silver Mound` / Silver Mound Artemisia 1 gal 103
BIG Geranium x cantabrigiense `Biokovo` / Biokovo Cranesbill 1 gal 178
RSH Hosta x `Regal Splendor` / Plantain Lily 1 gal 149
SSH Hosta x `Sum and Substance` / Plantain Lily 1 gal 12
WHL Liatris spicata `Floristan White` / Floristan White Spike Gayfeather 1 gal 90
LRS Perovskia atriplicifolia `Little Spire` TM / Little Spire Russian Sage 1 gal 215
BES Rudbeckia fulgida `Goldstrum` / Black Eyed Susan 1 gal 110
GROUND COVERS CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT
25-131 MNDOT Seed Mix 25-131 / Low Maintenance Fescue mix Seed
33-261 MNDOT Seed Mix 33-261 / Ponds and Wet Areas Seed
TUR HIG Turf Sod Highland Sod / Sod Sod
PLANT SCHEDULE
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
ROCK MULCH - 2" LIMESTONE ROCK, COLOR: BUFF W/ FABRIC. 4"
DEPTH BETWEEN WALLS.1
REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
TREE TO BE REMOVED
5 Townhomes
6 Townhomes
6 Townhomes
6 Townhomes
50'-0"
20
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
24
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
16
'
-
1
0
"
24
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
0
"
BA
K
E
R
P
A
R
K
R
O
A
D
SITE PLAN KEY
1" = 40'-0"1 SITE PLAN
6.1
1
6.1
2
6.1 3
6.14
UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0
3/32" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 1
6.1
1
6.1
2
6.1 3
6.14
UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0
3/32" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 2
Material Mark Description
4.1 CULTURED STONE
Area Percentage
3,983 ft2 20%
7.1 HORIZONTAL CFB LAP - LINEN OR SIM 7,676 ft2 38%
7.2 VERTICAL CFB BOARD & BATTEN - 8,118 ft2 40%
WHITE
8.1 WINDOW GLAZING 341 ft2 2%
20,119 ft2
Image
EXTERIOR MATERIALS Medina Townhome Development
kaas wilson architects
6.0
06/30/2021
7.27.2 7.1 7.2 7.2 7.1
4.14.1
7.2
7.1
7.1 7.2
7.1
7.2
4.1
7.1 4.1 7.2 7.1
4.1
7.2
4.1 7.2 7.1
7.1 7.2
7.1
4.1
4.1
7.27.1
7.2 7.1
7.1
4.1
4.1
1/16" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION
1/16" = 1'-0"2 NORTH ELEVATION
1/16" = 1'-0"3 WEST ELEVATION
1/16" = 1'-0"4 EAST ELEVATION