Planning Commission Agenda 05-06-2014
AGENDA
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, May 6th, 2014 - 6:00 PM
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Commissioners: Chairman Brad Fyle, Sam Burvee, Charlotte Gabler, Alan
Heidemann, Grant Sala
Council Liaison: Lloyd Hilgart
Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman - NAC, Ron Hackenmueller
1. Call to order.
2. Citizen Comments.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes.
a. Special Meeting – March 4th, 2014
b. Regular Meeting – March 4th, 2014
c. Regular Meeting – April 1st, 2014
5. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for conditional use permit for cross-access
and Preliminary and Final Plat for the Cedar Street Retail Addition, a commercial
subdivision in a B-3 (Highway Business) and B-4 (Regional Business) District.
Applicant: Oppidan
6. Public Hearing - Consideration of amendment to Title 10, Monticello Zoning Ordinance,
Chapter 2.4(P) – Specific Review Requirements, Planned Unit Developments
Applicant: City of Monticello
7. Public Hearing – Consideration of adoption of the Official Zoning Map for the City of
Monticello.
Applicant: City of Monticello
8. Adjourn.
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, March 4th, 2014 - 4:30 PM - Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Brad Fyle, Sam Burvee, Grant Sala, Alan Heidemann
Absent: Charlotte Gabler
Others: Angela Schumann, Tom Pawelk, Larry Nolan, Tim Stolpes
1. Call to Order
Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. (Although noticed as a joint meeting of
the Planning and Parks Commissions, there was not a quorum of the Parks Commission
in attendance. The meeting was conducted as a special Planning Commission meeting.)
2. Purpose
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss options for the Monte Club Hill park use
planning.
3. Consideration of Monte Club Hill Park Use Planning
Community Development Director Angela Schumann summarized that the City Council
had directed the Parks and Planning Commissions to consider potential uses for the 24
acre Monte Club Hill property as follow up to the site tour in August of 2013. The
consensus of the Council was that any redevelopment other than recreation or parkland
be focused within the footprint of the old Monte Club building, access and parking areas,
and that redevelopment complement recreational uses.
Parks Superintendent Tom Pawelk indicated that trail systems and biking had been cited
as top recreational priorities in park survey findings. He emphasized that any plans for
use would focus on minimally impacting the natural topography.
Schumann noted that the pathway proposed along Fenning Avenue would address
recreational use and pedestrian safety on a major collector route. The path that winds
through the site between the Spirit Hills and Wildwood developments would be
formalized and connected to the trail system. The path through Spirit Hills into Hillside
Farms, (“Safe Routes to School”), is also a priority connection in that it provides a
regional link to the county trail system.
Special Planning Commission Minutes: 03/04/14
2
There was general discussion about creating a trailhead at the footprint of the Monte Club
Hill site which will provide connection points to additional amenities such as an
information kiosk, an interpretive center (and associated signage), picnic facilities, a
scenic overlook (including a view shed of Pelican Lake), and parking to accommodate
large groups and events on site.
Pawelk pointed out that Minnesota Off-Road Cyclists (MORC) had recently constructed
a single-track mountain bike course, in cooperation with Wright County at Bertram Chain
of Lakes Regional Park. The varied terrain of the Monte Club Hill site could
accommodate a single-track mountain bike course and a competition level challenge
course. This could potentially establish Monticello as an off-road cycling destination and
tournament host and boost the local economy.
Pawelk indicated that the Parks budget currently includes $17,000 for planning costs
related to Monte Club Hill. Staff will continue to research grant opportunities and ask for
volunteer assistance within the cycling community in an effort to lower project cost.
Pawelk indicated that the Parks Commission would establish a Monte Club Hill park use
subcommittee and appoint a representative at its next meeting. The subcommittee would
include representation from the Parks and Planning Commissions, the two local bike
shops and two at-large community members and work with MORC to outline plans and a
budget to present for City Council consideration this fall.
ALAN HEIDEMANN MOVED TO APPOINT GRANT SALA TO REPRESENT THE
PLANNING COMMISSION ON A SUBCOMMITTEE TO BE ESTABLISHED BY
THE PARKS COMMISSION WHICH WILL PROVIDE FOR CONTINUITY IN SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND FINAL LAND USE ACTIONS RELATED TO
MONTE CLUB HILL. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 4-0.
4. Adjournment
SAM BURVEE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE SPECIAL MEETING AT 5:29 P.M.
ALAN HEIDEMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
Recorder: Kerry Burri ___
Approved:
Attest: ____________________________________________
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
MINUTES
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, March 4, 2014 - 6:00 PM - Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Brad Fyle, Sam Burvee, Alan Heidemann, Grant Sala
Absent: Charlotte Gabler
Staff: Angela Schumann, Ron Hackenmueller, Steve Grittman
Others: Eric Miller, Jeff Gardner, Wayne Elam, Rosie Peters, Marty Kjellberg, Tara
Thurber, John Thurber, Troy Vrieze, Steve Johnson, Don Tomann, Mary Barger,
Edward Solberg
1. Call to Order
Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Citizen Comments None
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda
Code clarification (Angela Schumann)
4. Accept Planning Commission minutes
a. Regular Meeting – January 7th, 2014
GRANT SALA MOVED TO ACCEPT THE JANUARY 7TH, 2014 PLANNING
COMMISSON MINUTES AS PRESENTED. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 3-0. (Alan Heidemann did not vote.)
b. Special Meeting – February 4th, 2014
BRAD FYLE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE FEBRUARY 4TH, 2014 SPECIAL
PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES. GRANT SALA SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED 3-0. (Alan Heidemann did not vote.)
c. Special Meeting (Rescheduled Regular Meeting) – February 11th, 2014
SAM BURVEE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE FEBRUARY 11TH, 2014 SPECIAL
PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES AS PRESENTED. GRANT SALA SECONDED
THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
5. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Concept and Development Stage
Planned Unit Development and Rezoning to Planned Unit Development for a K-12
Educational Institution in an R-3 (Medium Density Residence) District and CCD
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
2
(Central Community District) Applicant: Miller, Eric, Planning Case Number:
2014-012
Steve Grittman summarized that the City Council had, on January 27th, adopted a Public
Values Statement for Collaborative Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a K-12
Educational Use in the CCD (Central Community District) and R-3 (Medium Density
Residence) District in response to a request to expand the campus of the Swan River
Charter School. This step established ground rules for the creation of a new PUD District
and parameters for considering development proposals.
Grittman explained that the purpose of the current public hearing is to consider rezoning
the parcels at 500 Maple Street (Lots 8, 9, 10, Block 11, Original Plat) and 503 Maple
Street (Lots 6 and 7, Block 10, Original Plat) to PUD and review the Concept and
Development Stage plans for the proposed expansion.
The new facility, which is designed to provide additional classroom and activity space, is
to be built directly across the street from the existing school and connected by a
pedestrian crossing with a covered walkway. Rezoning to PUD would provide
flexibility in terms of access, parking supply, building architecture, setbacks, and
landscaping at both sites. Grittman outlined the scope of the site plan and specified
additional conditions required for PUD approval.
Brad Fyle questioned the safety of a mid-block crossing. Grittman stated that, although
crossing at an intersection had been considered, it was determined to be safer for the
children to cross mid-block with signage to protect the crossing.
Grant Sala shared a concern that shrubs won’t keep children in and dogs out.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
Applicant Eric Miller, of 717 Willow Glen in Buffalo, provided some background
information about the school, shared his perspective and responded to questions. He
confirmed that there are no plans to increase the student population or change the drop
off and pick up location. He doesn’t expect traffic to increase. The new facility will
include a classroom for special needs students and a large group activity room. He has
spoken with many of his neighbors about the project. He confirmed that the school
would comply with conditions in Exhibit Z.
Jeff Gardner, of 500 West 4th Street, indicated that, although not against the project, he
is concerned about encroachment within the residential area. He wondered specifically
if the lot next to his, currently owned by the school but likely no longer needed for
expansion, might be sold to Cargill. He also shared concerns about shrub choice, safety
lighting and suggested that blinking lights be added at the crosswalk.
Miller noted that the school had no plans for the additional lot at this time but would not
rule out selling it.
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
3
As there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Sam Burvee pointed out that any proposed change in use for that lot would come before
the commission for consideration. He also said that, although the project is a good use
of vacant land, it concerns him to encroach on residential zoning.
Fyle and Sala asked that blinking lights be required at the crosswalk if it is determined
to be an additional safety measure. Miller indicated that the school intended to do so.
SAM BURVEE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2014-016 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED CONCEPT AND DEVELOPMENT STAGE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND THE PUD REZONING, BASED ON THE
FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION, AND THAT THE SUBJECT PARCELS CAN
MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PUD APPROVAL, AND THAT THE
FLEXIBILITY PROVIDED WITH THE PUD DESIGNATION WILL ENCOURAGE
SITE AND BUILDING DESIGN FEATURES BENEFICIAL TO BOTH THE SWAN
RIVER MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND THE COMMUNITY, CONTINGENT ON
COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN EXHIBIT Z, AND THE
ADDITION OF SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE CROSSWALK IF DETERMINED TO
BE AN ADDITIONAL SAFETY MEASURE. ALAN HEIDEMANN SECONDED
THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
Exhibit Z
Conditions of Approval
Swan River Montessori School PUD, 500 and 503 Maple Street
1. The addition of dormers or decorative features (e.g. cupolas and skylight, etc.) to the
roof of the new school building to add interest to the upper portion of the building.
Increase pitch of roof, or mirror features from existing building.
2. The school should consider how the PUD design might cater to bicycle or
pedestrian access from a trail to the north (along the rail ROW), and given the
accessibility of bicycles to the site, how bicycle parking facilities can be
provided.
3. Proposed dogwood shrubs should be coupled with additional shrubs or small
trees throughout the PUD site. Along the rail road additional shrubs/small trees
should be used to create a more opaque screening affect, and along the south and
west property lines additional shrubs/small trees should be added to create a more
continuous buffer through winter months. Recommended species include
viburnums, ninebarks, American elder, tall American arborvitae varieties (or other
evergreens adapted to the region), etc.
4. The applicants should consider implementing additional areas of shrubs or small trees
in association with woodland/shade tolerant seed mixes along north and east portions
of the site. There are numerous low maintenance native or non-native cultivars that
can serve these functions (e.g. compact viburnum species, ninebarks, dwarf bush
honeysuckles, chokeberries, white cedars, serviceberries or other small fruiting
trees, fragrant sumac, etc.).
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
4
5. The applicant shall adhere to tree protections standards provided in Chapter 4
Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance (no tree protection currently provided).
6. Provide a maintenance plan for of seed mixes & shrub/tree plantings (removal of
invasives or weeds, and replacement of any dead specimens).
7. The applicants shall provide a lighting plan for review, and address any deviation from
standards.
8. The applicants shall provide a signage plan (if any), and should address any deviation
from standards.
9. Implementation of (colored stamped) pervious pavers in the landscaping design, as
opposed to a plain concrete walk.
10. The proposed grading, drainage, and erosion control measures are subject to review
and approval by the City Engineer. The applicants are required to adhere to any
recommendations from the City Engineer as a condition of PUD approval.
11. The applicants will be responsible for pedestrian crossing improvements,
including signage, and long-term maintenance.
12. Provide details of the proposed gazebo, including materials and dimensions.
Upon installation, accessory structures may not exceed 15 feet.
13. Complete and submit Final Stage PUD documents consistent with the required
conditions of approval for inclusion in the final PUD ordinance and development
contract.
14. Execution of a development contract securing the required improvements.
6. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit for an
Industrial Services use in an I-1 (Light Industrial) District, a request for Variance to
Monticello Zoning Ordinance section 4.3, Fences and Walls as related to fence
appearance, and a request for Variance to Monticello Zoning Ordinance section 5.3,
Accessory Uses as related to area and extent of outdoor storage. Applicant: All
Elements, Inc., Planning Case Number: 2014-011
Steve Grittman reported that All Elements, Inc., had outgrown its previous site and
proposed to relocate to a nearby existing office/warehouse building at 301 Chelsea Road
(Lot 1, Block 1, Barger Addition). This request requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
for Industrial Services (Contractor) in the I-1 (Light Industrial) District, a Variance for
size and extent of the outdoor storage area and a Variance for a non-permitted fence
material.
The request meets the criteria required for approval of a CUP in that the proposed use
would not impair property values and is similar to those of surrounding uses and
consistent with other office/warehouse uses in the area.
The request meets the criteria required for variance for size and extent in that the site plan
layout is affected by the unique condition of the slope easement which impedes
reasonable use of the property. The site plan shows drive aisle within the enclosed area,
which leaves less than 20,000 square feet of actual storage net area. The eligible area for
storage meets the specific language of the accessory use language.
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
5
The request meets the criteria required for variance in non-permitted fence materials in
that the use of white steel panel fencing is expected to meet the ordinance intent for
attractive, durable fence construction. The additional evergreen landscape screening
proposed along the public right of way would further enhance the site and buffer the area.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
Wayne Elam, of Commercial Realty Solutions, introduced applicants John and Tara
Thurber, of All Elements, and current property owner Mary Barger. Elam explained that
increasing the size of the outdoor storage yard would allow for enough space to store
heavy equipment and to drive in and out safely. The 8 foot tall fence enclosure would
have a clean site line and not be visible due to its location and landscape plan.
John Thurber, of 1347 Dundas Road, provided additional details about the proposed
fence material and offered a sample for commission review.
As there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Decision 1: Conditional Use Permit
SAM BURVEE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-017 APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN INDUSTRIAL SERVICE BUSINESS IN AN
I-1 DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO VARIANCE DECISIONS ON EXTENT OF THE
STORAGE AREA, AND FENCING MATERIALS, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID
RESOLUTION AND CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS IN
EXHIBIT Z. ALAN HEIDEMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
4-0.
Exhibit Z
Conditions of Approval
Conditional Use Permit for Industrial Services (Contractor) at 301 Chelsea Road
1. Outdoor storage must be configured and screened on the site in compliance with
ordinance requirements, or subject to variance approval.
2. The applicant must identify the existing storage area surface, and comply with
stormwater management requirements, along with any applicable trunk fees, as
recommended by the City Engineer.
3. The applicant must obtain a sign permit for new business signage per ordinance
requirements.
4. If lighting is proposed in the outdoor storage yard, a lighting plan must be submitted
and approved.
5. A building permit must be obtained for the outdoor storage yard fence.
6. The storage yard shall maintain 20 foot wide drive aisles consistent with the approved
site plan, dated 02/27/2014.
Decision 2. Variance for Size of Accessory Outdoor Storage Yard
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
6
GRANT SALA MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-019 APPROVING A
VARIANCE FOR AN ACCESSORY OUTDOOR STORAGE YARD EXCEEDING
THE SIZE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID
RESOLUTION. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4-
0.
Decision 3. Variance from Prohibition on Metal Fencing Materials
ALAN HEIDEMANN MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION NO. 2014-018
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR ALTERNATIVE FENCING MATERIALS, BASED
ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
7. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for an amendment to the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance, Sections 5.1, Use Table, and 5.2, Use Standards, and related
administrative amendments, to allow Temporary Public Infrastructure
Construction Facilities by Interim Use Permit; and a request for an Interim Use
Permit for Temporary Public Infrastructure Construction Facilities. Applicant:
Shafer Contracting Co., Planning Case Number: 2014-007
Steve Grittman reported that Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. will be reconstructing a section
of I-94 from County Road 39 to County Road 18 as part of the MnDOT I-94
reconstruction project and proposed to utilize approximately five acres south of I-94 and
one-half mile west of the interchange at County Road 18 for construction staging for the
project. The principal use of the site will be the temporary operation of a portable
concrete batch plant.
This proposal requires both a zoning ordinance amendment to allow a temporary
contractor’s yard, storage of base materials and concrete mixing as an interim use in the
IBC (Industrial and Business Campus) District, and an interim use permit to allow for
operations for the duration of the 2014 construction season.
The request meets criteria for approval of an Interim Use Permit in that the use is allowed
on a limited basis, is sited to minimize negative impacts on adjacent properties, and will
not affect future use. Staff recommended the approval of the ordinance amendment and
the interim use permit. Grittman noted that the IEDC had also supported the request.
Grittman pointed out that the applicant had looked at locating elsewhere but this site was
determined to be the most practical in that it would involve the least amount of hauling
on local streets. Haul routes are appropriate given the collector status of Chelsea Road.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
Troy Vrieze, of 30403 Regal Ave., Shafer, Minnesota, representing Shafer Contracting
Company, offered to respond to questions, and indicated intent to comply with Exhibit Z.
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
7
Don Tomann, owner of UMC, Inc., of 500 Chelsea Road, which is located directly across
from the proposed project entrance, said that he is not opposed to the project but has
concerns about the vibrational effects of crushing, traffic congestion on Chelsea Road
and the cost of future road improvements.
Vrieze indicated that there would be no crushing at the proposed site. He also suggested
that creating a roadway along the property would be costly and unnecessary as Shafer
trucks would account for only 8-10% of all traffic on Chelsea Road. Vrieze also noted
that MnDOT would be working with the city to monitor the roadways to minimize
deterioration. He agreed to be flexible with driveway entrance locations.
As there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Fyle asked that driveway entrances be reassessed. Grittman noted that entrance curb cuts
had been designed to line up with those of the proposed future Mills Fleet Farm site but
could be reassessed to ensure that they are as safe and well located as possible. Angela
Schumann noted that the contractor and the state are responsible for the maintenance of
Chelsea Road during the project as per the detour agreement and that compensation for
any damage is based on a prescribed formula.
Fyle asked that no crushing be included as a condition in Exhibit Z.
SAM BURVEE MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 591
ESTABLISHING A TEMPORARY CONTRACTORS YARD RELATING TO THE
CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE IBC DISTRICT BY
INTERIM USE PERMIT, AND RESOLUTION NO. 2014-020, APPROVING AN
INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY CONTRACTORS YARD ON THE
PROPERTY IDENTIFIED IN THIS REPORT, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID
RESOLUTION AND CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS
OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT Z, AND A CONDITION THAT PROHIBITS CRUSHING
MATERIALS ON SITE. ALAN HEIDEMANN SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
Exhibit Z
Conditions of Approval
Interim Use Permit to allow a Contractor’s Yard and Portable Concrete Batch Plant
1. All proposed haul routes must be submitted by the applicant to MnDOT for
approval.
2. The applicant must sweep Chelsea Road near the site entrance as needed during the
duration of operations and hauling.
3. A water truck must be on-site at all times for dust control. The site must be
maintained so as to minimize dust and particulate matter in accordance with MPCA
requirements.
4. The applicant must comply with proposed hours of operation from 7:00 am to 8:00
pm, Monday through Saturday.
5. Noise levels shall be controlled in accordance with Section 5.2(A)(2)(e).
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
8
6. The applicant must submit an approved stormwater pollution prevention plan.
7. The applicant must comply with all requirements and recommendations of the city
engineer.
8. The applicant agrees not to occupy the site prior to the final approval of applicable
permits, and agrees to terminate operations and restore the site to original
conditions by a date no later than November1, 2014, weather permitting.
9. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the City Engineer as
provided in the comment letter dated February 26th, 2014.
10. The applicant executes a consent agreement with the City specifying the dates of
operation and termination, and other conditions as adopted by City Council.
8. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Preliminary Plat for Pine View 2nd
Addition, a 3 unit residential plat in an R-1 (Single-Family Residence) District
Applicant: Kjellberg, Kent, Planning Case Number: 2014-008
Steve Grittman reported that the request for Preliminary Plat combines an outlot and
three vacant parcels into three new parcels to be used for single family residential
development in an R-1 District. The property is located at 1123, 1127 and 1131
Broadway West and an adjacent outlot (Lots 1, 2, & 3 Block 1, Pine View). The applicant
is also purchasing right of way from the city to accommodate the final lot.
Driveways are proposed from Otter Creek Road for Lot 1 and from County Road 75 for
Lot 2. Shared driveway access already exists for Lot 3 along County Road 75 with the
adjacent property to the east. Reorienting the third lot to access on to the sidestreet would
also improve traffic flow onto County Road 75. Driveway locations and design meet off-
street parking and drive requirements provided in the Ordinance.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
Applicant Marty Kjellberg, of 2424 Briar Oakes Blvd., noted that the lots were better
suited for residential development and indicated an intent to comply with Exhibit Z.
Edward Solberg, of 1204 Sandy Lane, asked which street the house on the corner of Otter
Creek would face. Grittman stated that buildings must fit within setbacks but there is no
zoning standard related to how a structure must be situated on a parcel. Kjellberg said
that the garage and driveway would face Otter Creek Road but that could change.
As there were no other comments, the public hearing was closed.
ALAN HEIDEMANN MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION
NO. 2014-021, APPROVING THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PINE
VIEW SECOND ADDITION, COMBINING ONE OUTLOT AND THREE R-1
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT PARCELS (PID 155204000010, PID
155204001010, PID 155204001020, AND PID 155204001030) INTO THREE R-1
DISTRICT PARCELS, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION AND
CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN EXHIBIT Z.
GRANT SALA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
Planning Commission Minutes: 3/04/14
9
Exhibit Z
Conditions of Approval
Preliminary Plat of Pine View Second Addition
1. The applicant shall provide drainage, erosion control, and stormwater management
plans for review and approval by the City Engineer, and will need to address any
recommendations the engineer makes in this regards. Further, development of the
proposed lots will need to adhere to erosion control and drainage requirements
provided in Sec. 11-5-5 and 11-5-6 of the Subdivision Ordinance, in addition to
meeting related standards provided in Zoning Ordinance Section 4.10.
2. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the City Engineer as
provided in the comment letter dated February 26th, 2014.
3. Future dwellings on subdivided parcels are required to meet the minimum width,
depth, and floor area standards provided in Chapter 5, Section 5.2(C) of the Zoning
Ordinance, and the minimum garage area standards for accessory garages in the R-1
District.
9. Community Development Director’s Report
I-94 Reconstruction Project – Detailed project information and signup for
email updates is available on the MnDOT website.
EDA Hospitality Study – A draft of the study to determine if the downtown
could support a hotel along the riverfront is expected to be available in April.
Code Tracking – Staff suggested that the commission once again consider the
Conditional Use Permit extension policy.
10. Items added to the agenda
Code Clarification – Staff explained that the area of garage doors is subtracted
from the building front façade when calculating the amount of brick and stone
required on residential dwellings. The commission had no concerns with this
interpretation of the code as long as it continues to be applied consistently.
11. Adjournment
GRANT SALA MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:05 PM. SAM BURVEE
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
Recorder: Kerry Burri __
Approved:
Attest: ____________________________
Community Development Director
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
1
5. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for conditional use permit for cross-
access and Preliminary and Final Plat for the Cedar Street Retail Addition, a
commercial subdivision in a B-3 (Highway Business) and B-4 (Regional Business)
District. Applicant: Oppidan (NAC)
Property: Legal: PID 155500142400
Address: Unassigned
Planning Case Number: 2014-017
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s): Preliminary Plat Approval
Conditional Use Permit for Cross Access/Parking
Deadline for Decision: June 6th, 2014 – Conditional Use Permit
August 5th, 2014 – Preliminary Plat and Final Plat
Land Use Designation: Places to Shop
Zoning Designation: Development site is zoned B-3, Highway Business
District
The purpose of the “B-3” (Highway Business) District
is to provide for limited commercial and service
activities and provide for and limit the establishment of
motor vehicle oriented or dependent commercial and
service activities.
Overlays/Environmental
Regulations Applicable: None
Current Site Use: Vacant/undeveloped
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Vacant/undeveloped commercial land
East: Vacant/undeveloped commercial land
South: Commercial/retail
West: Highway 25; Commercial/retail west of Hwy 25
Project Description: Oppidan Inc. has submitted plans to create a 2.64 acre
lot to provide for construction of a 17,636 square foot
retail facility with a drive-through drop-off/donation
center to be leased to Goodwill Easter Seals of
Minnesota. The parcel will lie to the west of Cedar
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
2
Street, with the remaining portion of the property to be
platted as an outlot for development at some future
undetermined date. Two curb cut access drives are
proposed on Cedar Street to facilitate vehicular
circulation through the site and drop-off area. The
access drive at the northern end of the parcel will be
shared with future commercial development on the
adjoining parcel to the north.
ANALYSIS
Concurrent with the preliminary and final plat and conditional use permit review,
staff have completed a site plan review for this application and comments related to
that review are incorporated in both the plat and CUP review.
Preliminary Plat.
Lots. The preliminary plat involves the combination of two remnant parcels with an
existing 38.11 acre parcel and subsequent subdivision to create one 2.64 acre parcel
for the purposes of development of a Goodwill retail facility with the remainder
(35.64 acres) platted as an outlot.
PID 155500142302 0.05 Acres
PID 155500142314 0.33 Acres
PID 155500142400 38.11 Acres
There is no minimum lot area for parcels in the B-3 Highway Business District. The
proposed lot exceeds the 100 foot minimum lot width standard (Title XI, Chapter 5,
Sec. 11-5-2).
It should be noted that portions of the remaining outlot are currently zoned both B-3
and B-4, however no development is planned for those areas at this time.
Zoning. The majority of the site is zoned B-3, Highway Business District except for
an approximately 15 acre area south of Dundas Road and west of Edmonson Avenue
NE. Underlying zoning will remain; no requests for rezoning have been submitted.
The area where the 2.64 acre lot is being subdivided for the Goodwill retail facility is
zoned B-3 Highway Business District and Commercial Retail is a permitted use.
Streets. Cedar Street currently runs along an easement through the 38.11 acre parcel.
The city is requesting that the applicant plat the full Cedar Street right-of-way for
final plat approval (Title XI, Chapter 5, Sec. 11-5-3). Dundas Road will be shown as
an easement through Outlot A. Right-of-way dedication will be required for Dundas
Road and Edmonson Avenue NE when Outlot A is developed.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
3
Easements. The preliminary plat shows an existing drainage and utility easement on
the south and southwest portions of the property. An existing 150 foot wide overhead
electrical utility easement also crosses the northern third of the parcel.
The preliminary plat and final plats show drainage and utility easements around the
entire perimeter of the Lot 1, Block 1 development parcel. The plans shall be revised
to show the required 6 and 12 foot wide drainage and utility easements along plat
perimeter.
The site plan indicates driveway areas encroaching on drainage and utility easements
along the west and south boundaries; an encroachment agreement with the city will
be needed.
Erosion Control and Drainage. The applicant has submitted site grading, erosion
control, and stormwater drainage plans. Said plans are subject to review and approval
by the city engineer.
Utilities. The applicant has submitted site utility plans. Said plans are subject to
review and approval by the city engineer.
Additional Site Development Features. Submitted landscaping, lighting, and
building plans generally meet the performance standards as outlined in the zoning
ordinance subject to comments and conditions noted below.
The tenant will be required to obtain a sign permit for site signage per Title X,
Chapter 4, Section 4-5. Site signage must include directional signs for the drop-off
facility. The applicants are proposing wall signage only for the facility, with the
exception that some directional signage will provide traffic control on the property, in
accordance with sign ordinance requirements.
Park Dedication. No park dedication is required from commercial property.
Additional Review. The preliminary and final plats are subject to review and
comment by the Minnesota Department of Transportation due to Highway 25
adjacency and Wright County in its plat and recording role.
Conditional Use Permit.
The applicant is seeking approval of a conditional use permit to allow for future cross
parking/access between the site and the parcel to the north. Permitting cross access
between the properties will reduce the number of curb cuts on the west side of Cedar
Street and enhance safety and traffic circulation in the area.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
4
Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Criteria.
Approval of a conditional use permit application requires that the city find that
conditions can be established to ensure that all of the following criteria will always be
met (Section 2.4(D)(4)(a)):
(i) The conditional use will not substantially diminish or impair property values
within the immediate vicinity of the subject property;
Comment: The proposed cross access will provide enhanced site circulation and
reduce the number of curb cuts along the west side of Cedar Street, improving safety
along this commercial arterial. This condition is met.
(ii) The conditional use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, or
welfare of persons residing or working near the use;
Comment: The proposed use is consistent with other cross access arrangements in
the adjacent commercial areas and is not anticipated to have a detrimental affect on
persons in the surrounding area. This condition is met.
(iii) The conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of
surrounding property for permitted uses predominant in the area;
Comment: The proposed cross access will require a shared access and maintenance
agreement between property owners. The installation of the access drive prior to the
development of the parcel to the north may facilitate future development of that
parcel. In the alternative, the applicants may provide for an acceptable agreement
that defers access construction until the parcel to the north is developed. Access
drives on the east side of Cedar Street are typically required to be aligned with the
proposed access drives on the west side of Cedar Street. A sidewalk connection to the
north must be installed between the northeast drive access and north property line in
anticipation of a future connection when the adjoining parcel is developed.
This condition is met.
(iv) The conditional use will not pose an undue burden on public utilities or roads,
and adequate sanitary facilities are provided;
Comment: The cross access will reduce the number of curb cuts along Cedar Street
enhancing vehicular circulation and safety. Both the parcel in question and the
parcel to the north are currently served by water, storm sewer and sanitary services
with sufficient capacity in anticipation of commercial development. Utility plans are
subject to review and approval by the city engineer. This condition is met.
(v) The conditional use can provide adequate parking and loading spaces, and all
storage on the site can be done in conformance with City code requirements;
Comment: The parcel in question provides sufficient parking and loading per city
code requirements. Future development of the parcel to the north served by the cross
access will be subject to performance standards related to parking, loading, and
storage.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
5
Site Parking Requirements:
Use: Ratio: Square Feet:
Retail 1:200 17,636 sf
Total required: 89 spaces
Total provided: 90 spaces
The site provides parking in excess of ordinance requirements. The site has
compliant off-street loading facilities and all storage will be provided within the
retail building. A connection to the trail along Highway 25 must be provided for
bicycle and pedestrian access to the site from the west. This condition is met.
(vi) The conditional use will not result in any nuisance including but not limited to
odor, noise, or sight pollution;
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to generate any nuisance. The drop-
off structure is screened to reduce visual impacts; additional screening of the loading
area in the southeast corner of the property will be required. The area designated as
“snow storage” must be utilized to incorporate additional tree and shrub plantings
for a more robust landscape buffer.
Site lighting exceeds ordinance standards in two measurements at the southeast
entrance to the site. Photometric readings slightly exceed 1.0 footcandles in a couple
of locations along the south and east property lines. It is the opinion of staff that this
condition is acceptable given the minor degree of discrepancy and the location at the
drive entrance and along sidewalks where additional visibility is preferred. This
condition is met.
(vii) The conditional use will not unnecessarily impact natural features such as
woodlands, wetlands, and shorelines; and all erosion will be properly controlled;
Comment: The proposed use will not impact any natural features; there are no
significant existing natural features on the site. Submitted erosion control and site
landscape plans show required controls to reduce erosion during and after
construction. This condition is met.
(viii) The conditional use will adhere to any applicable additional criteria outlined in
Chapter 5 for the proposed use.
Comment: The proposed retail development is a permitted use in the B-3 Highway
Business District; no additional criteria apply. This condition is met.
Additional Cross Parking/Access Conditions.
Chapter 4, Section 4.8, Subsection G.(2)(iv.) provides for cross access/parking
between adjoining business properties subject to the following conditions:
1. The required island and landscaping requirements in Section 4.1 are met.
Comment: Submitted landscape plans meet the requirements of Section 4.1; all
landscaped areas must be irrigated. The applicant must obtain approval from the
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
6
easement holder for all trees and shrubs planted within drainage and utility
easements. This condition is met.
2. The vehicular use area meets the required setback at the perimeter of the parcels in
question.
Comment: The parking and vehicular circulation areas meet the required setback on
the parcel proposed for development. It is recommended that the easterly drive aisle
along Cedar Street be realigned to run parallel with the street. If a few parking stalls
are lost to this re-design, the applicant may identify “proof of parking” locations to
mitigate any loss. Vehicular use areas on the northern parcel must meet setback
requirements at such time development is proposed. This condition is met.
3. The curb cut access locations to the parking lot(s) are approved by the City.
Comment: The curb cut access to the parcel in question is subject to comment and
approval by the city engineer; if realignment of drive aisles or curb cut access
locations result in the elimination of parking, the city may accept such changes if a
proof-of-parking area is designated on the site.
The applicant must agree to permit curb cut access from the proposed parking lot to
the parcel to the north at such time as the northern parcel is developed. Future
parking lot access and circulation between the parcel in question and the northern
parcel shall be subject to review and approval by the city engineer. This condition is
met.
4. A shared parking/access and maintenance agreement is provided by the parking
owners and recorded against all subject properties.
Comment: Said parking/access and maintenance agreement shall be provided by the
adjoining property owners at such time as the northern parcel is developed. This
condition is met.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2014-048 to approve the preliminary plat and
conditional use permit for cross access between adjoining business properties
subject to conditions outlined in the resolution.
2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution 2014-048 based on findings to be made by
the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
7
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to revisions delineating
required perimeter drainage and utility easements, platting of the Cedar Street right-
of-way and Dundas Road easement, and other comments and conditions as
recommended by the city engineer, MnDOT, and Wright County.
Staff also recommends approval of a conditional use permit for cross parking/access
between the subject property and the adjoining parcel to the north. Providing for
cross access in this location will facilitate vehicle circulation on the Goodwill site and
reduce the number of needed access drives on the west side of Cedar Street when the
parcel to the north is developed. The property owners must file a joint maintenance
and access agreement and access and circulation between the properties shall be
subject to review and approval by the city at such time as the northern parcel is
developed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Resolution 2014-048
B. Site Location Map
C. Land Use Application
D. Applicant Narrative
E. Site Development Plans, including:
a. Title Page
b. Existing Conditions
c. Site Plan
d. Truck Turn Plan
e. Grading Plan
f. Erosion Control Plan
g. Utility Plan
h. Lighting Plan and Detail
i. Landscaping Plan and Detail
j. Floor Plan
k. Elevations
l. Colored Elevation Perspective
m. Colored Elevations
F. Preliminary Plat
G. Final Plat
H. Engineer’s Comment Letter, dated 05/01/14
Z. Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
8
EXHIBIT Z
Conditions for Approval
Cedar Street Addition
.
Conditional Use Permit for Cross Parking/Access &
Preliminary Plat
1. The final plat must show required drainage and utility easements around the perimeter
of the parcel and such easements shall be dedicated to the city.
2. Encroachment agreements must be filed with the city for all areas where drive aisles
encroach on drainage and utility easements.
3. The final plat shall include the platting of the full right-of-way for Cedar Street.
4. The final plat shall include an easement through Outlot A for Dundas Road.
5. A sidewalk connection must be installed between the northeast drive access and north
property line.
6. A trail connection must be provided from the parking lot to the trail along Highway
25.
7. Additional landscaping must be provided at the southeast corner of the property to
ensure sufficient screening of the loading area.
8. All landscaped areas must be irrigated.
9. The northeast driveway must be realigned per engineer’s requirements; if parking
spaces are removed as a result, a proof of parking area should be designated on the
site.
10. The applicant must obtain approval from easement holders for all proposed tree and
shrub plantings in easement areas.
11. Vehicular use areas on the parcel to the north must meet all required setbacks and
landscaping requirements at such time that development is proposed.
12. Future curb cut access locations between the parcel in question and the adjoining
property to the north shall be subject to review and approval by the city.
13. The proposed utility, grading, drainage, and erosion control plans are subject to
review and comment by the City Engineer. The applicant shall comply with all
recommendations of the City Engineer as provided in the comment letter dated May
1st, 2014.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
9
14. A shared access and maintenance agreement shall be filed by the adjoining property
owners at such time that the parcel to the north is developed.
15. The applicant shall execute a development agreement covering the terms of the City’s
Plat and CUP approval.
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION
RESOLUTIONNO.2014-048
1
MotionBy:SecondedBy:
ARESOLUTIONRECOMMENDINGAPPROVALOFTHEPRELIMINARYPLAT
FORCEDARSTREETADDITIONANDCONDITIONALUSEPERMITFORCROSS
PARKING/ACCESSBETWEENTWOADJOININGBUSINESSPARCELSINAB-3
HIGHWAYBUSINESSDISTRICT
WHEREAS,OppidanInc.,onbehalfofGoodwillEasterSealsofMinnesotahassubmittedan
applicationforpreliminaryandfinalplatapprovalandaconditionalusepermitforcrossaccess/
parkingbetweenadjoiningbusinessproperties;and
WHEREAS,thepreliminaryandfinalplatwillmeetdesignstandardsandotherprovisions
outlinedinTitleXI,theMonticelloSubdivisionOrdinancesubjecttoconditionsenumerated
below;and
WHEREAS,RetailCommercialUsesarepermittedintheB-3HighwayBusinessDistrict,the
underlyingzoningoftheparcel;and
WHEREAS,Chapter4,Section4.8,SubsectionG.(2)(iv.)providesforcrossaccess/parking
betweenadjoiningbusinesspropertiesandtheproposalmeetsthecriteriaoutlinedinthecity
codetoprovideforsuchusesubjecttotheconditionsenumeratedbelow;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionheldapublichearingonMay6,2014ontheapplication
andtheapplicantandmembersofthepublicwereprovidedtheopportunitytopresent
informationtothePlanningCommission;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasconsideredallofthecommentsandthestaffreport,
whichareincorporatedbyreferenceintotheresolution;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticellomakesthefollowingFindings
ofFactinrelationtotherecommendationofapproval:
1.Thepreliminaryandfinalplatcreatesaparcelsuitableforcommercialdevelopmentina
B-3HighwayBusinessdistrictinaccordancewithTitleIX,MonticelloSubdivision
Ordinance.
2.TheproposeduseofthesiteforRetailCommercialUsesisapermitteduseintheB-3
HighwayBusinessZoningDistrict.
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION
RESOLUTIONNO.2014-048
2
3.Thezoningordinanceprovidesforcrossaccess/parkingbetweenadjoiningbusiness
propertiesandsuchanarrangementinthislocationwillreducethenumberofaccess
drivesonCedarStreetenhancingtrafficsafetyandfacilitatevehicularcirculationonthe
commercialproperties.
4.Crossaccess/parkingatthislocationmeetsallrequiredconditionalusepermitevaluation
criteriaasoutlinedinSection2.4(D)(4)(a)suchthat:
a.Theproposeduseisconsistentwiththeexistingandfuturelandusesinthearea
andwillnotdiminishpropertyvaluesorbedetrimentaltothehealth,safetyand
welfareofpersonsinthearea.
b.Theproposeduseisconsistentwiththeimprovementsandrequirementsforsuch
usesintheapplicablezoningdistrictandsufficientinfrastructureexistsoris
proposedtoaccommodatetheusesuchasutilitiesandparkingandloading
facilities.
c.Theproposedusecanreasonablyoccupythesubjectpropertywithoutnegative
impactsonsurroundpropertiesorpublicfacilities.
5.Thecrossaccess/parkingproposalissubjecttoadditionalconditionsasoutlinedin
Chapter4,Section4.8,SubsectionG.(2)(iv.)andshallmeetthoseconditionsas
enumeratedbelow.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof
Monticello,Minnesota:
ThePlanningCommissionrecommendsthattheCityCouncilapprovethepreliminaryplatfor
thedevelopmentofaGoodwillretailfacilityandConditionalUsePermitforcross
access/parkingbetweenadjoiningbusinessproperties,subjecttothefollowingconditions:
1.Thefinalplatmustshowrequireddrainageandutilityeasementsaroundtheperimeterof
theparcelandsucheasementsshallbededicatedtothecity.
2.Encroachmentagreementsmustbefiledwiththecityforallareaswheredriveaisles
encroachondrainageandutilityeasements.
3.Thefinalplatshallincludetheplattingofthefullright-of-wayforCedarStreet.
4.ThefinalplatshallincludeaneasementthroughOutlotAforDundasRoad.
5.Asidewalkconnectionmustbeinstalledbetweenthenortheastdriveaccessandnorth
propertyline.
6.AtrailconnectionmustbeprovidedfromtheparkinglottothetrailalongHighway25.
7.Additionallandscapingmustbeprovidedatthesoutheastcornerofthepropertytoensure
sufficientscreeningoftheloadingarea.
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION
RESOLUTIONNO.2014-048
3
8.Alllandscapedareasmustbeirrigated.
9.Thenortheastdrivewaymustberealignedperengineer’srequirements;ifparkingspaces
areremovedasaresult,aproofofparkingareashouldbedesignatedonthesite.
10.Theapplicantmustobtainapprovalfromeasementholdersforallproposedtreeand
shrubplantingsineasementareas.
11.Vehicularuseareasontheparceltothenorthmustmeetallrequiredsetbacksand
landscapingrequirementsatsuchtimethatdevelopmentisproposed.
12.Futurecurbcutaccesslocationsbetweentheparcelinquestionandtheadjoining
propertytothenorthshallbesubjecttoreviewandapprovalbythecity.
13.Theproposedutility,grading,drainage,anderosioncontrolplansaresubjecttoreview
andcommentbytheCityEngineer.Theapplicantshallcomplywithall
recommendationsoftheCityEngineerasprovidedinthecommentletterdatedMay1st,
2014.
14.Asharedaccessandmaintenanceagreementshallbefiledbytheadjoiningproperty
ownersatsuchtimethattheparceltothenorthisdeveloped.
15.TheapplicantshallexecuteadevelopmentagreementcoveringthetermsoftheCity’s
PlatandCUPapproval.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED,thatthePlanningCommissionoftheCityof
Monticello,Minnesota,approvestherequestbasedontheconditionsprovidedinExhibitZofthe
referencedstaffplanningreport.
ADOPTEDBY thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticello,Minnesotathis6thdayofMay,
2014.
MONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION
By:_______________________________
BradFyle,Chair
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION
RESOLUTIONNO.2014-048
4
ATTEST:
____________________________________________
AngelaSchumann,CommunityDevelopmentDirector
Conditional Use Permit for Cross-Access and Preliminary and Final Plat for the Cedar Street Retail Addition,
a commercial subdivision in a B-3 (Highway Business) and B-4 (Regional Business) District
Project Narrative Goodwill, Monticello, MN April 4, 2014
Page 1 of 4
Project Narrative
Goodwill
2.64 Acre Site
Monticello, Minnesota
Land Use Application, Conditional Use Permit, Preliminary and Final Plat
April 4, 2014
____________
Introduction
On behalf of Goodwill Easter Seals of Minnesota, Oppidan, Inc. is submitting a Land Use
Application, Conditional Use Permit, Preliminary and Final Platfor the proposed project.
Goodwill has 30 locations around the Twin Cities such as, Woodbury, Maple Grove, Champlin,
Minnetonka, St. Louis Park, Rogers, Lakeville, and Eagan to name a few. Goodwill has elected
to pursue a location within the City of Monticello.
Goodwill / Easter Seals Minnesota have been a strong contributor to the development of
Minnesota’s workforce for more than 90 years. Goodwill / Easter Seals assist people with barriers
to education, employment and independence in achieving their goals.
Our comprehensive workforce development model helps clients:
-Prepare for work -Maintain employment
-Train for Employment -Advance in careers
-Obtain Jobs -Connect to other community resources
From 30 locations, Goodwill / Easter Seals 880 employees provide statewide services to
Minnesotans with disabilities and disadvantages. We provide paid work experience in our retail
stores and corporate headquarters. In addition to our career workforce development model, we
Project Narrative Goodwill, Monticello, MN April 4, 2014
Page 2 of 4
offer English Language Learning, mathematics, parenting and life skills classes. We also host
discussion groups devoted to the specific needs of the individuals we serve.
Goodwill / Easter Seals industry skills training programs, developed in partnership with
Minnesota businesses, provide curriculum-based, hands-on training. Current programs serve the
automotive, banking / finance, call center, construction and retail industries. Participants acquire
soft and technical skills to get jobs and advance in their careers.
Goodwill / Easter Seals long-term follow-up and support services help both participants and
employers. Our community resources staff provides housing resources, retail vouchers for
clothing, medical equipment loans and one-on-one assistance.
In 2013, Goodwill / Easter Seals served 22,165 individuals, provided 35,891 services, made 880
job placements with 113 individuals advancing in their careers and generated over 17 million in
taxable income by participants who gained employment.
Use
The tenant will utilize the facility for retailing purposes typically within the hours of operation
being Monday-Friday from 7:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturday from 8:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and
Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. These are standard hours of operation and do not take into
account various holiday hours which most retailers adjust slightly to better serve the community.
The proposed tenant would employ up to 30 employees along with 8-12 participants which are
engaging in career training programs. In addition this use works in conjunction with the retailers
that exist in the area. Each user will compliment each others product thus assisting in the success
of each others interest.
The donation Center will allow patrons to donate goods to the store by entering an enclosed are
on the west side of the building. Adequate staking for the vehicles is provided along the west
side of the building for waiting customers, along with a reliever route in case someone needs to
exit prior to making a donation. The donation process is handled within the structure, and in the
event any articles are left on the premises after hours they will be removed in the morning.
Site
The proposed project consists of constructing a 17,636 square foot retail facility on a 2.64 acre
site that is being platted. The property is currently zoned Commercial. The property is bordered
by Hwy 25 on the west and commercial parcels exist on the north and south sides. The site will
have parking on the north and east side of the store. A donation drop off will area located along
the west side of the building that will be fully enclosed with garage doors and be part of the main
structure.. A loading dock and trash compactor are located in the rear of the building.
Project Narrative Goodwill, Monticello, MN April 4, 2014
Page 3 of 4
Parking requirements for this facility are within the City Code. Parking is provided in the front,
rear and to the east of the store and consists of 89 stalls.
Stormwater is collected and sent to two different storm sewer lines in the street and the rear of the
store. Both of these lines collect the stormwater from the area and convey it to the west to a
regional treatment pond.
Water is looped through around the building from two existing stubs from Cedar Ave. The main
line is an 8 inch line with a 6 inch service to the building for fire and domestic service. A stub
was extended to the north for the future property to connect to for a looped connection. While
Sanitary will be connected to the existing stub to the property from Cedar.
Landscaping
Chapter 4.1 of the city code describes the landscaping requirements for the project. The
landscape plan provides 10 deciduous trees, 4evergreen trees, and 116 shrubs to meet the planting
requirements. This meets or exceeds the city requirement of 14 trees and 116 shrubs. The drop
off area is screened from Hwy 25 with a berm and shrubs as required by code, and the loading
dock is screened with evergreen trees in the SE corner of the site from Cedar.
Lighting
Site lighting is in accordance with Chapter 4.4 of the City Code. LED fixtures are proposed on
the building and metal haloid fixtures in the parking lot. All pole mounted lights are on 22 ft.
pole with three foot bases to for a maximum height of 25 ft., and all fixtures are full cutoff in
accordance with the lighting code. The photometric plan shows the public row does not have
more than 0.5 ft. candle in accordance with the lighting ordinance.
Architecture
The proposed design for the Goodwill Store incorporates architectural elements and finishes from
the typical Goodwill prototype building. The new building’s exterior is proposed to be a
combination of a face brick, EIFS (Exterior Insulation Finish System), and colored single score
CMU fields and accent elements. Columns with decorative EIFS cornices are used to define the
main entry to the facility. The proposed finishes are believed to meet the Standards Applicable to
All Commercial / Business Districts within the City of Monticello.
All HVAC units on the facility are proposed to be screened from the structures parapets. They are
designed high enough to screen all equipment.
Signage
Project Narrative Goodwill, Monticello, MN April 4, 2014
Page 4 of 4
Under the current terms of the proposed lease, signage is the responsibility of the Tenant. With
that said, typically the Tenant will locate signage over the front entry to the facility and on any
face of the building facing major roadways allowed by code. In addition, various directional
signage will be proposed around the development as found on most retail projects.
The Tenant is aware that a separate signage permit must be applied for and they are prepared to
do so per the requirements of the City of Monticello.
Closure
The applicant respectfully requests the City of Monticello to support the request for the proposed
Goodwill Project. We look forward to joining your community with a Goodwill store and
assisting residents with our mission.
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
GEOTECHNICAL
BRAUN INTERTEC
11001 HAMPSHIRE AVE. S
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55438
TEL 952-995-2000
FAX 952-995-2020
CONTACT: JOSH VAN ABEL
DEVELOPER/OWNER
OPPIDAN
5125 COUNTY ROAD 101, SUITE 100
MINNETONKA, MN 55345
TEL 952-294-0353
FAX 952-294-0151
CONTACT: PAT BARRETT
ARCHITECT
DJR ARCHITECTURE INC.
333 WASHINGTON AVE. N SUITE 210
UNION PLAZA, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401
TEL 612-676-2736
FAX 612-676-2796
CONTACT: SCOTT NELSON
CIVIL ENGINEER
MFRA INC.
14800 28TH AVENUE, SUITE 140
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
TEL 763-476-6010
FAX 763-476-8532
CONTACT: MICHAEL C. BRANDT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
MFRA INC.
14800 28TH AVENUE, SUITE 140
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
TEL 763-476-6010
FAX 763-476-8532
CONTACT: JIM KALKES
SURVEYOR
MFRA INC.
14800 28TH AVENUE, SUITE 140
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
TEL 763-476-6010
FAX 763-476-8532
CONTACT: MARCUS HAMPTON
SHEET INDEX
SHEET DESCRIPTION
C1.01 TITLE SHEET
C2.01 EXISTING CONDITIONS
C3.01 SITE PLAN
C4.01 GRADING PLAN
C5.01 EROSION CONTROL PHASE I
C5.02 EROSION CONTROL PHASE II
C5.03 EROSION CONTROL DETAIL
C6.01 UTILITY PLAN
C8.01 LIGHTING PLAN
C8.02 LIGHTING PLAN
C8.03 LIGHTING DETAILS
C9.01 DETAIL SHEET
C9.02 DETAIL SHEET
L1.01 LANDSCAPE PLAN
L1.02 SITE LANDSCAPE DETAILS
PRELIMINARY PLAT
for
Site Development Plans
Goodwill
Oppidan Investment Company, LLC.
Monticello, Minnesota
Presented by:
NO SCALE
VICINITY MAP
CONSULTANT CONTACT LIST:
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:55pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C1-TITLE.dwg
C1.01
TITLE SHEETSITE
ST
R
E
E
T
P A R C E L A
PA
R
C
E
L
B
C
E
D
A
R
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
Oppidan
Goodwill
Monticello
Monticello, MN
JRH
MFH 1201/19-21
4/3/14
OPP19940
FOUND MONUMENT
SET MONUMENT
MARKED LS 47481
ELECTRIC METER
LIGHT
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
WATERMAIN
FLARED END SECTION
ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER
AIR CONDITIONER
GUY ANCHOR
HANDICAP STALL
UTILITY POLE
POST
SIGN
TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
GAS METER
EASEMENT LINE
SETBACK LINE
RESTRICTED ACCESS
BUILDING LINE
BUILDING CANOPY
CONCRETE CURB
BITUMINOUS SURFACE
CONCRETE SURFACE
LANDSCAPE SURFACE
DECIDUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
OVERHEAD WIRE
CHAIN LINK FENCE
IRON FENCE
WIRE FENCE
WOOD FENCE
0
SCALE IN FEET
40 80
1. Subject property's address is unassigned, and the subject property is a portion of property with
property identification number 155500142400.
2. The gross area of the subject property is 2.64 Acres or 115,136 Square Feet.
3. The subject property is zoned B-3 Business District, per City of Monticello zoning map dated 3/1/13.
4. There are no buildings on the subject property.
PROPERTY SUMMARY
1.The property boundary and easements shown on this survey are per the "Certificate of Survey For
John Lundsten", prepared by Meyer-Rohlin, Inc., as file no. 06168 and dated 5/9/06.
2.Field work was completed on 3/20/2014.
SURVEY NOTES
LEGEND
VICINITY MAP
ED
M
O
N
S
O
N
A
V
E
DUNDAS RD
SCHOOL BLVD
CHELSEA RD
CE
D
A
R
S
T
SITE*
94
25
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:55pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Survey\19940-EX COND.dwg
C2.01
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:56pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C3-SITE.dwg
C3.01
SITE PLAN
AREA
GROSS SITE AREA
BUILDING AREA
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA
PROPOSED PERVIOUS AREA
PROPOSED PERCENT IMPERVIOUS
SETBACKS
FRONT YARD
REAR YARD
SIDE YARD
PARKING
ZONING
EXISTING ZONING
PROPOSED ZONING
PARKING SUMMARY
PARKING REQUIRED (1/200SF)
PARKING PROVIDED
PARKING STALL LENGTH
PARKING STALL WIDTH
PARKING ISLE WIDTH MINIMUM
EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY
PROJECTED NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
ADDITIONAL CAREER TRAINING PARTICIPANTS
A.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT.
B.ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. BACK OF CURB IS
SHOWN GRAPHICALLY ONLY.
C.ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT.
D.ALL PARKING STALLS TO BE 9' IN WIDTH AND 18' IN LENGTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
E.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE
LOCATIONS.
F.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR PYLON SIGN DETAILS
G.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL AND FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF LIGHT
POLE.
H.REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, LOT NUMBERS, LOT AREAS, AND LOT DIMENSIONS.
I.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 ISLE SHALL BE 2.08% (1:48).
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTES
PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER
IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN
GRADIENT.
J."NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL DRIVEWAYS AS REQUIRED BY CITY.
K.STREET NAMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY.
L.DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENTS WILL BE PROVIDED OVER ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES AND UP TO THE HIGH WATER LEVEL OF ALL
PONDS.
LEGEND
EASEMENT
CURB & GUTTER
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
SAWCUT LINE
NUMBER OF PARKING
STALLS PER ROW
SIGN
PIPE BOLLARD
STANDARD DUTY
ASPHALT PAVING
HEAVY DUTY
ASPHALT PAVING
CONCRETE PAVING
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
KEY NOTE
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
DEVELOPMENT NOTES
KEY NOTES
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
A.BUILDING, STOOPS, STAIRS - SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.
B.B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER.
C.INTEGRAL SIDEWALK AND CURB.
D.TAPER CURB TO MATCH EXISTING.
E.CONCRETE APRON.
F.TAPERED CURB TRANSITION.
G.FLAT CURB SECTION.
H.POURED DOCK WALL - SEE ARCHITECTS PLANS.
I.ACCESSIBLE RAMP.
J.PIPE BOLLARD.
K."ONE WAY, DO NOT ENTER" SIGN
L."STOP" SIGN
M."ACCESSIBLE PARKING" SIGN
N.LOADING DOCK - SEE ARCHITECTS PLANS
O."ONE WAY" AND DONATION DROP-OFF SIGN.
P.SAWCUT AND REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT AS NEEDED FOR PROPOSED
DRIVE. MATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH NEW BITUMINOUS PAVING.
115,077 SF 2.64 AC
17,665 SF 0.41 AC
82,405 SF 1.89 AC
32,672 SF 0.75 AC
72%
30 FEET
30 FEET
20 FEET
6 FEET
B-3
B-3
89 STALLS
90 STALLS
18 FEET
9 FEET
26 FEET
30
8-12
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:56pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C3-SITE.dwg
C3.02
TRUCK TURN
PLAN
LEGEND
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
STORM SEWER
902
SOIL BORINGS
1042.56
ST 5
GRADING NOTES
DRAINTILE
THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. 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 ACTIVE DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
D
A.PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION. SPOT ELEVATIONS ALONG PROPOSED CURB DENOTE
GUTTER GRADE.
B.KEdZdKZ^,>>Z s/ tWs D Ed'Z/ EdEKE^dZhd͞'hdd ZKhd͟t, Z td ZZ/E^tz&ZKD
hZ͘>>Kd, ZZ ^^,>> KE^dZhd ^͞'hdd Z/E͟hZ͘
C.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 ISLE SHALL BE 2.08% (1:48). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND
VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE
FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT.
D.d, KEdZdKZ/^hd/KE d,d͞d, ^h^hZ& hd/>/dz/E&KZDd/KE^,KtEKEd, ^ W>E^/^hd/>/dz
QUALITY LEVEL ____________. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02
d/d> ͞^dEZ'h/ >/E ^&KZd, K>> d/KEE W/d/KEK& y/^d/E'^h^hZ& hd/>/dzd͘͟d,
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 AT
1-800-252-1166). THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREES 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).
IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
E.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES
DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY
DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.
F.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE
CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR 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 OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE
ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.
G.THE 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. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS
ENGINEER.
H.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND PARKING AREA
SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE
TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY
THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICH SECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE
UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
THE SOILS ENGINEER.
I.REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BECOME UNSUITABLE AND WILL NOT
PASS A TEST ROLL. REMOVE UNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THE SITE AND IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO
THE OWNER.
J.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN 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 (MN/DOT) STANDARDS.
962.5
X
962.5
X
902
SPOT ELEVATION
CONTOUR
RIP RAP
OVERFLOW ELEV.
CURB & GUTTER
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:56pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C4-GRDE.dwg
C4.01
GRADING PLAN
LEGEND
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:56pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C5-EROS.dwg
C5.01
EROSION
CONTROL
PHASE I
* REFER TO SHEET C5.03 FOR GENERAL NOTES, MAINTENANCE
NOTES, LOCATION MAPS, AND STANDARD DETAILS
TEMPORARY STABILIZATION MEASURES
(SEED, MULCH, MATS OR BLANKETS AS
OUTLINED IN THE SWPPP)
TEMPORARY STORAGE AND PARKING AREA
DIRECTION OF
OVERLAND FLOW
TEMPORARY DIVERSION
DITCH
LIMITS OF DRAINAGE
SUB-BASIN
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE 1
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE 2
TEMPORARY STONE
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
OVERFLOW ELEV.
902902CONTOUR
RIP RAP
CHECK DAM
PA-10
SILT FENCE
SOIL BORINGS ST-9
EXISTINGPROPOSED
STORM SEWER
CURB & GUTTER
DRAINTILE
PHASE I:
1.INSTALL STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES.
2.PREPARE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA.
3.CONSTRUCT THE SILT FENCES ON THE SITE.
4. CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENTATION AND SEDIMENT TRAP BASINS.
5. HALT ALL ACTIVITIES AND CONTACT THE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT TO PERFORM
INSPECTION OF BMPs. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE AND CONDUCT STORM WATER
PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH ENGINEER AND ALL GROUND DISTURBING CONTRACTORS
BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION.
6. CLEAR AND GRUB THE SITE.
7. BEGIN GRADING THE SITE.
8. START CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING PAD AND STRUCTURES.
PHASE II:
1.TEMPORARILY SEED DENUDED AREAS.
2.INSTALL UTILITIES, UNDERDRAINS, STORM SEWERS, CURBS AND GUTTERS.
3.INSTALL RIP RAP AROUND OUTLET STRUCTURES.
4.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AROUND ALL STORM SEWER STRUCTURES.
5.PREPARE SITE FOR PAVING.
6.PAVE SITE.
7.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION DEVICES.
8.COMPLETE GRADING AND INSTALL PERMANENT SEEDING AND PLANTING.
9.REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES (ONLY IF SITE IS
STABILIZED), IF REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT
SOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OPERATION TIME SCHEDULE
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
TEMPORARY CONTROL MEASURES
STRIP & STOCKPILE TOPSOIL
ROUGH GRADE / SEDIMENT CONTROL
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ROADS
FOUNDATION / BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONSTRUCTION
PERMANENT CONTROL STRUCTURES
FINISH GRADING
LANDSCAPING / SEED / FINAL STABILIZATION
STORM FACILITIES
NOTE: CONTRACTOR OR GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE TABLE WITH THEIR SPECIFIC PROJECT SCHEDULE
THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE SWPPP MUST BE KEPT ONSITE UNTIL
THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION IS FILED WITH THE MPCA, THE CONTRACTOR MUST UPDATE THE SWPPP,
INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS,
SUCH AS ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS DESIGNED TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED. AFTER FILING THE
NOTICE OF TERMINATION, THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS, AND ALL
REVISIONS TO IT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER, TO BE KEPT ON FILE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN THE SWPPP NARRATIVE.
TSM
TS
SB
EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS
QUANTITIES
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY
SILT FENCE LINEAR FEET 1,300
SILT DIKE LINEAR FEET X
BIO-ROLL LINEAR FEET X
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE UNIT 1
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-1)UNIT X
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-2)UNIT 1
SILT DIKE
BIO-ROLL
LEGEND
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
NOTE TO CONTRACTOR
D
AREA SUMMARY IN ACRES
PAVEMENT AREA ϭ͘ϰϬц
BUILDING AREA Ϭ͘ϰϭц
SEEDED AREA yy͘yyц
TOTAL DISTURBED Ϯ͘ϯϱц
PRE - CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS Ϭ͘ϬϬц
POST - CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS ϭ͘ϴϭц
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:56pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C5-EROS.dwg
C5.02
EROSION
CONTROL
PHASE II
* REFER TO SHEET C5.03 FOR GENERAL NOTES, MAINTENANCE
NOTES, LOCATION MAPS, AND STANDARD DETAILS
TEMPORARY STABILIZATION MEASURES
(SEED, MULCH, MATS OR BLANKETS AS
OUTLINED IN THE SWPPP)
TEMPORARY STORAGE AND PARKING AREA
DIRECTION OF
OVERLAND FLOW
TEMPORARY DIVERSION
DITCH
LIMITS OF DRAINAGE
SUB-BASIN
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE 1
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE 2
TEMPORARY STONE
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
OVERFLOW ELEV.
902902CONTOUR
RIP RAP
CHECK DAM
PA-10
SILT FENCE
SOIL BORINGS ST-9
EXISTINGPROPOSED
STORM SEWER
CURB & GUTTER
DRAINTILE
PHASE I:
1.INSTALL STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES.
2.PREPARE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA.
3.CONSTRUCT THE SILT FENCES ON THE SITE.
4. CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENTATION AND SEDIMENT TRAP BASINS.
5. HALT ALL ACTIVITIES AND CONTACT THE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT TO PERFORM
INSPECTION OF BMPs. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE AND CONDUCT STORM WATER
PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH ENGINEER AND ALL GROUND DISTURBING CONTRACTORS
BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION.
6. CLEAR AND GRUB THE SITE.
7. BEGIN GRADING THE SITE.
8. START CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING PAD AND STRUCTURES.
PHASE II:
1.TEMPORARILY SEED DENUDED AREAS.
2.INSTALL UTILITIES, UNDERDRAINS, STORM SEWERS, CURBS AND GUTTERS.
3.INSTALL RIP RAP AROUND OUTLET STRUCTURES.
4.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AROUND ALL STORM SEWER STRUCTURES.
5.PREPARE SITE FOR PAVING.
6.PAVE SITE.
7.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION DEVICES.
8.COMPLETE GRADING AND INSTALL PERMANENT SEEDING AND PLANTING.
9.REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES (ONLY IF SITE IS
STABILIZED), IF REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT
SOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OPERATION TIME SCHEDULE
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
TEMPORARY CONTROL MEASURES
STRIP & STOCKPILE TOPSOIL
ROUGH GRADE / SEDIMENT CONTROL
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ROADS
FOUNDATION / BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONSTRUCTION
PERMANENT CONTROL STRUCTURES
FINISH GRADING
LANDSCAPING / SEED / FINAL STABILIZATION
STORM FACILITIES
NOTE: CONTRACTOR OR GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE TABLE WITH THEIR SPECIFIC PROJECT SCHEDULE
THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE SWPPP MUST BE KEPT ONSITE UNTIL
THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION IS FILED WITH THE MPCA, THE CONTRACTOR MUST UPDATE THE SWPPP,
INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS,
SUCH AS ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS DESIGNED TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED. AFTER FILING THE
NOTICE OF TERMINATION, THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS, AND ALL
REVISIONS TO IT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER, TO BE KEPT ON FILE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN THE SWPPP NARRATIVE.
TSM
TS
SB
EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS
QUANTITIES
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY
SILT FENCE LINEAR FEET 1,260
SILT DIKE LINEAR FEET X
BIO-ROLL LINEAR FEET X
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE UNIT 1
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-1)UNIT X
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-2)UNIT 5
SILT DIKE
AREA SUMMARY IN ACRES
PAVEMENT AREA ϭ͘ϰϬц
BUILDING AREA Ϭ͘ϰϭц
SEEDED AREA yy͘yyц
TOTAL DISTURBED Ϯ͘ϯϱц
PRE - CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS Ϭ͘ϬϬц
POST - CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS ϭ͘ϴϭц
BIO-ROLL
LEGEND
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
NOTE TO CONTRACTOR
D
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:56pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C5-EROS.dwg
C5.03
EROSION
CONTROL
DETAIL
ALL MEASURES STATED ON THIS EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN, AND IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN FULLY FUNCTIONAL
CONDITION UNTIL NO LONGER REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETED PHASE OF WORK OR FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE. THE DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON NOTED ON THIS PLAN MUST
ROUTINELY INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTION ON SITE ONCE EVERY SEVEN DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5
INCHES IN 24 HOURS. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE CLEANED AND REPAIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING:
1.ALL SILT FENCES MUST BE REPAIRED, REPLACED, OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/3 OF THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE.
THESE REPAIRS MUST BE MADE WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW ACCESS.
2.TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS MUST BE DRAINED AND THE SEDIMENT REMOVED WHEN THE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT COLLECTED IN THE BASIN REACHES
1/2 THE STORAGE VOLUME. DRAINAGE AND REMOVAL MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 72 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW ACCESS (SEE PART
IV.D. OF THE GENERAL PERMIT).
3.SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE DITCHES AND CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS, MUST BE INSPECTED FOR EVIDENCE OF SEDIMENT BEING DEPOSITED BY EROSION. THE
CONTRACTOR MUST REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS, CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, AND
RESTABILIZE THE AREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS IN EXPOSED SOIL. THE REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS OF DISCOVERY
UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL, REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE ALL REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS. IF PRECLUDED,
REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OF OBTAINING ACCESS. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL LOCAL,
REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES AND RECEIVING ANY APPLICABLE PERMITS, PRIOR TO CONDUCTING ANY WORK.
4.CONSTRUCTION SITE VEHICLE EXIT LOCATIONS MUST BE INSPECTED FOR EVIDENCE OF OFF-SITE SEDIMENT TRACKING ONTO PAVED SURFACES. TRACKED SEDIMENT MUST BE
REMOVED FROM ALL OFF-SITE PAVED SURFACES, WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR IF APPLICABLE, WITHIN A SHORTER TIME TO COMPLY WITH PART IV.C.6 OF THE GENERAL
PERMIT.
5.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BMPS, AS WELL AS ALL EROSION
PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS, FOR THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION WORK AT THE SITE. THE PERMITTEE(S) ARE RESPONSIBLE UNTIL ANOTHER PERMITTEE
HAS ASSUMED CONTROL ACCORDING TO PART II.B.5 OVER ALL AREAS OF THE SITE THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FINALLY STABILIZED OR THE SITE HAS UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION,
AND A NOT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA.
6.IF SEDIMENT ESCAPES THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, OFF-SITE ACCUMULATIONS OF SEDIMENT MUST BE REMOVED IN A MANNER AND AT A FREQUENCY SUFFICIENT TO MINIMIZE
OFF-SITE IMPACTS (E.G., FUGITIVE SEDIMENT IN STREETS COULD BE WASHED INTO STORM SEWERS BY THE NEXT RAIN AND/OR POSE A SAFETY HAZARD TO USERS OF PUBLIC
STREETS).
7.ALL INFILTRATION AREAS MUST BE INSPECTED TO ENSURE THAT NO SEDIMENT FROM ONGOING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS REACHING THE INFILTRATION AREA AND THESE
AREAS ARE PROTECTED FROM COMPACTION DUE TO CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT DRIVING ACROSS THE INFILTRATION AREA.
1.CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE GOVERNING CODES AND BE CONSTRUCTED TO SAME. WHERE A CONFLICT EXISTS BETWEEN LOCAL JURISDICTIONAL
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND MFRA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, THE MORE STRINGENT SPECIFICATION SHALL APPLY.
2.THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATIONS AND/OR ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED ON RECORDS OF THE
VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES AND, WHERE POSSIBLE, MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY
QUALITY LEVEL X. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02, ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND
DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CONTACT ALL THE
APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES AT LEAST 48 HOURS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATION OF UTILITIES. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. THE LOCATIONS OF SMALL UTILITIES SHALL BE
OBTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR BY CALLING MINNESOTA GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 800-252-1166 OR 651-454-0002
3.THE DESIGN SHOWN IS BASED UPON THE ENGINEER'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE BASED UPON AN
ALTA OR TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PREPARED BY ____ DATED XX-XX-XXXX. IF CONTRACTOR DOES NOT ACCEPT EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS WITHOUT
EXCEPTION, THEY SHALL HAVE MADE, AT THEIR EXPENSE, A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR AND SUBMIT IT TO THE OWNER FOR REVIEW. SEE ATTACHED
SURVEY SHEETS.
4.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS
PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES OCCURRING TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS
PROJECT.
5.THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) IS COMPRISED OF THIS DRAWING (EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN-ESC PLAN), THE STANDARD DETAILS,
THE PLAN NARRATIVE, AND ITS APPENDICES, PLUS THE PERMIT AND ALL SUBSEQUENT REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS.
6.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETING & SUBMITTING THE APPLICATION FOR THE MPCA GENERAL STORMWATER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. ALL
CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SWPPP AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM GENERAL PERMIT (NPDES PERMIT) AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THEIR CONTENTS. THE SWPPP AND ALL OTHER RELATED
DOCUMENTS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION. (NOTE TO THE PREPARER: EDIT APPLICATION PROCESS PER PROJECT REQUIREMENTS)
7.CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) AS REQUIRED BY THE SWPPP & PERMITS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OVERSEE THE INSPECTION &
MAINTENANCE OF THE BMP'S AND EROSION PREVENTION FROM BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, IS APPROVED BY ALL AUTHORITIES,
THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION (NOT) HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE MPCA BY EITHER THE OWNER OR OPERATOR AS APPROVED ON PERMIT. ADDITIONAL BMP'S SHALL BE
IMPLEMENTED AS DICTATED BY CONDITIONS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO OWNER THROUGHOUT ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION. (NOTE TO THE PREPARER: REVISE INSPECTION
RESPONSIBILITY PER OPTIONS IN SWPPP NARRATIVE (SECTION 02370))
8.CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH TRAINING REQUIREMENTS IN PART III.A.2 OF THE GENERAL PERMIT.
9.BMP'S AND CONTROLS SHALL CONFORM TO FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS OR MANUAL OF PRACTICE, AS APPLICABLE. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL
CONTROLS AS DIRECTED BY PERMITTING AGENCY OR OWNER.
10.ESC PLAN MUST CLEARLY DELINEATE ALL STATE WATERS. PERMITS FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IMPACTING STATE WATERS OR REGULATED WETLANDS MUST BE
MAINTAINED ON SITE AT ALL TIMES.
11.CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE CLEARING TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICAL OR AS REQUIRED BY THE GENERAL PERMIT. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN
ON THE ESC PLANS SHALL BE CLEARLY DELINEATED (E.G. WITH FLAGS, STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC.) ON THE DEVELOPMENT SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS. GROUND DISTURBING
ACTIVITIES MUST NOT OCCUR OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
12.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL DENOTE ON PLAN THE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA WHICH SHALL ALSO BE USED AS THE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND CLEANING
AREA, EMPLOYEE PARKING AREA, AND AREA FOR LOCATING PORTABLE FACILITIES, OFFICE TRAILERS, AND TOILET FACILITIES.
13.ALL WASH WATER (CONCRETE TRUCKS, VEHICLE CLEANING, EQUIPMENT CLEANING, ETC.) MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE AND SHALL BE CONTAINED AND
PROPERLY TREATED OR DISPOSED. NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE.
14.ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS MUST BE CONTAINED IN A LEAK-PROOF CONTAINMENT FACILITY OR IMPERMEABLE LINER. A
COMPACTED CLAY LINER THAT DOES NOT ALLOW WASHOUT LIQUIDS TO ENTER GROUND WATER IS CONSIDERED AN IMPERMEABLE LINER. THE LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MUST
NOT CONTACT THE GROUND, AND THERE MUST NOT BE RUNOFF FROM THE CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS. LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OF
PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS. A SIGN MUST BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH WASHOUT FACILITY TO INFORM CONCRETE EQUIPMENT OPERATORS
TO UTILIZE THE PROPER FACILITIES.
15.SUFFICIENT OIL AND GREASE ABSORBING MATERIALS AND FLOTATION BOOMS SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON SITE OR READILY AVAILABLE TO CONTAIN AND CLEAN-UP FUEL OR
CHEMICAL SPILLS AND LEAKS.
16.DUST ON THE SITE SHALL BE CONTROLLED. THE USE OF MOTOR OILS AND OTHER PETROLEUM BASED OR TOXIC LIQUIDS FOR DUST SUPPRESSION OPERATIONS IS PROHIBITED.
17.SOLID WASTE: COLLECTED SEDIMENT, ASPHALT & CONCRETE MILLINGS, FLOATING DEBRIS, PAPER, PLASTIC, FABRIC, CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION DEBRIS & OTHER WASTES
MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY & MUST COMPLY WITH MPCA DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS.
18.HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: OIL, GASOLINE, PAINT & ANY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES MUST BE PROPERLY STORED, INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS
OR OTHER DISCHARGE. RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM. STORAGE & DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST BE IN
COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS.
19.ALL STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES PRESENTED ON THIS PLAN, AND IN THE SWPPP, SHALL BE INITIATED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE AND PRIOR TO SOIL
DISTURBING ACTIVITIES UPSLOPE.
20.DISTURBED PORTIONS OF THE SITE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS STOPPED SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED, WITHIN 14 DAYS OF INACTIVITY. SEEDING SHALL BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SEED MIXTURE NUMBER 100 OR 110 DEPENDING ON THE SEASON OF PLANTING ( SEE MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2575.3) SEEDING METHOD
AND APPLICATION RATE SHALL CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2575.3. TEMPORARY MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPECIFICATION
SECTION 2575.3F1 AND 2575.3G. ALTERNATIVELY, HYDRAULIC SOIL STABILIZER IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2575.3H MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF
TEMPORARY MULCH.
21.DISTURBED PORTIONS OF THE SITE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS PERMANENTLY STOPPED SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. THESE AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE TIME TABLE DESCRIBED ABOVE. REFER TO THE GRADING PLAN AND/OR LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR VEGETATIVE COVER. (NOTE TO THE PREPARER: WHERE
PERMANENT SEEDING IS NOT CALLED OUT IN THE GRADING AND/ OR LANDSCAPE PLAN, REPLACE THE LAST SENTENCE IN THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING: SEED WET PONDS
WITH MN/DOT SEED MIXTURE 310 "NATIVE WET TALL" BELOW THE HWL. SEED ALL OTHER AREAS WITH SEED MIXTURE 260 "COMMERCIAL TURF". SEEDING METHOD AND
APPLICATION RATE SHALL CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2573.3.)
22.CONTRACTORS OR SUBCONTRACTORS WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCES & FROM TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS THAT ARE TO BE
USED AS PERMANENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BASINS. SEDIMENT MUST BE STABILIZED TO PREVENT IT FROM BEING WASHED BACK INTO THE BASIN, CONVEYANCES, OR
DRAINAGEWAYS DISCHARGING OFF-SITE OR TO SURFACE WATERS. THE CLEANOUT OF PERMANENT BASINS MUST BE SUFFICIENT TO RETURN THE BASIN TO DESIGN CAPACITY.
23.ON-SITE & OFF-SITE SOIL STOCKPILE AND BORROW AREAS SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF BMP'S. STOCKPILE AND
BORROW AREA LOCATIONS SHALL BE NOTED ON THE SITE MAP AND PERMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.
24.TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS & CANNOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING STORMWATER
CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB & GUTTER SYSTEMS OR CONDUITS & DITCHES.
25.SLOPES SHALL BE LEFT IN A ROUGHENED CONDITION DURING THE GRADING PHASE TO REDUCE RUNOFF VELOCITIES AND EROSION.
26.DUE TO THE GRADE CHANGES DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ADJUSTING THE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES (SILT
FENCES, CHECK DAMS, INLET PROTECTION DEVICES, ETC.) TO PREVENT EROSION.
27.ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY, THIS INCLUDES BACKFILLING OF TRENCHES FOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION AND PLACEMENT OF
GRAVEL OR BITUMINOUS PAVING FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION.
DEVELOPER/OWNER:
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXX-XXX-XXXX
SITE OPERATOR / GENERAL CONTRACTOR
SUPERINTENDENT:
CROSS BRACE
MI
N
.
15
"
18
"
MA
X
.
2" X 4" STAKE
3'
M
I
N
.
DROP INLET
WITH GRATE
2" X 4" WOOD FRAME
(TYP.)
5' MIN.
SECURELY FASTEN OVERLAPPING
ENDS OF SILT FENCE MATERIAL
TO ADJACENT STAKES WITH
THREE WIRE TIES OR OTHER
FASTENERS
ATTACH THE WOVEN WIRE
FENCE TO EACH POST WITH
THREE WIRE TIES OR OTHER
FASTENERS (SEE NOTE 1)
1. ATTACH THE WOVEN WIRE FENCE TO EACH POST AND THE GEOTEXTILE TO THE WOVEN WIRE FENCE
(SPACED EVERY 30") WITH THREE WIRE TIES OR OTHER FASTENERS, ALL SPACED WITHIN THE TOP 8" OF
THE FABRIC. ATTACH EACH TIE DIAGONALLY 45 DEGREES THROUGH THE FABRIC, WITH EACH PUNCTURE
AT LEAST 1" VERTICALLY APART.
2. WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF SILT FENCE MATERIAL ADJOIN EACH OTHER, THEY SHALL BE OVERLAPPED
ACROSS TWO POSTS.
3. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NOTED IN THE SWPPP. DEPTH OF ACCUMULATED SEDIMENTS
MAY NOT EXCEED ONE-HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE FABRIC. MAINTENANCE CLEANOUT MUST BE
CONDUCTED REGULARLY TO PREVENT ACCUMULATED SEDIMENTS FROM REACHING ONE-HALF THE
HEIGHT OF THE SILT FENCE MATERIAL ABOVE GRADE.
4. ALL SILT FENCE INLETS SHALL INCLUDE WIRE SUPPORT.
OVERLAP
5' MIN.
SILT FENCE MATERIAL TO BE
FASTENED SECURELY TO WOVEN
WIRE FENCE WITH THREE TIES
SPACED AT 30" ON CENTER (SEE
NOTE 1)
DEFLECTOR PLATE
OVERFLOW 2 - TOP OF CURB BOX
OVERFLOW 1 - CENTER OF FILTER ASSEMBLY
10" FILTER ASSEMBLY
CURB
CG 3067
HIGH-FLOW FABRIC
MIRAFI FF101
ROAD DRAIN CASTING APPLICABILTY
x NEENAH R-3067
x NEENAH R-3512
NOT TO SCALE
CONSTRUCT 2' HIGH BERM WITH
MAXIMUM SIDE SLOPE OF 4:1
2" TO 3" GRAVEL
NOTE: THE ROCK ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED
PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY SITE WORK THE ROCK
ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSPECTED FOLLOWING EACH
RAINFALL. MAINTENANCE OF THE ROCK ENTRANCES
SHALL INCLUDE A TOP DRESSING OF NEW GRAVEL, OR
REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE GRAVEL AS
NEEDED, TO KEEP THE ENTRANCE FREE FROM
COLLECTED MUD.
AS
REQU
I
R
E
D
UNDISTURBED SOIL
BACKFILL 6" X 6"
TRENCH
WOVEN MONOFILAMENT
GEOTEXTILE MATERIAL
DIRECTION OF
DRAINAGE
2" X 2" WOOD OR
STEEL T-POSTS
12
"
M
I
N
.
8' X 8' MIN OR AS
REQUIRED TO
CONTAIN WASTE
CONCRETE
SIGN TO INDICATE THE
LOCATION OF THE CONCRETE
WASHOUT AREA
2'-0" MIN
BERM AROUND PERIMETER
GROUND SURFACE
12" MIN
12" MIN
COMPACTED EMBANKMENT
MATERIAL (TYP.)3:1 OR FLATTER
SIDE SLOPES
NOTES:
1.CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY CONCRETE PLACEMENT
ON SITE.
2.CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SHALL BE LINED WITH MINIMUM 10 MIL THICK PLASTIC
LINER.
3.VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL IS REQUIRED IF ACCESS TO CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA IS
OFF PAVEMENT.
4.SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED AT THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, AT THE WASHOUT AREA,
AND ELSEWHERE AS NECESSARY TO CLEARLY INDICATE THE LOCATION OF THE
CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA TO OPERATORS OF CONCRETE TRUCKS AND PUMP RIGS.
5.THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SHALL BE REPAIRED AND ENLARGED OR CLEANED OUT
AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN CAPACITY FOR WASTED CONCRETE.
6.AT THE END OF CONSTRUCTION, ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE
AND DISPOSED OF AT AN ACCEPTED WASTE SITE.
7.WHEN THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA IS REMOVED, THE DISTURBED AREA SHALL BE
SEEDED AND MULCHED OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED IN A MANNER ACCEPTED BY THE
CITY.
WOVEN WIRE
FENCE WITH SILT
FENCE MATERIAL
COVER
EXTEND WIRE FENCE
A MIN. OF 3" INTO
GROUND
EXTEND SILT FENCE
MATERIAL A MIN. OF
1'-0" INTO GROUND
EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES & DETAILS / "SITE MAP"
SITE LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCALE
USGS MAP
GENERAL EROSION NOTES:
MAINTENANCE NOTES:
NOT TO SCALE
ROCK ENTRANCE DRIVE
NOT TO SCALE
SILT FENCE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA
ROAD DRAIN INLET PROTECTION (IP-2)SILT FENCE INLET PROTECTION (IP-1)
NOT TO SCALE
POSTS: 2 X 4 WOODEN STAKE FENCE:
WOVEN WIRE, 14-1/2 GA., 6" MAX. MESH
OPENING FABRIC: IN ACCORDANCE WITH
ASTM D 6461 LATEST EDITION.
NOT TO SCALE
SITE
SITE
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
A.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
VESTIBULE, EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, TRUCK DOCKS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT
BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS.
B.THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTING
UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES
AND, WHERE POSSIBLE, MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED
ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CALL THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY
AT LEAST 48 HOURS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATION OF UTILITIES. IT
SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH
CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. THE LOCATIONS OF SMALL
UTILITIES SHALL BE OBTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR, BY CALLING GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT
(651)454-0002.
C.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO
ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL
BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING
THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.
D.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION
PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR 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 OF THE
CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE
CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.
E.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.
F.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO
CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL
CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.
G.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND
PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A
GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER
AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL
DETERMINE WHICH SECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE
SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS
ENGINEER.
(OPTIONAL)
H.THE TREES AND OTHER NATURAL VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AND/OR ADJACENT TO THE
PROJECT ARE OF PRIME CONCERN TO THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS. HE WILL BE REQUIRED TO
PROTECT THE TREES WHICH ARE TO BE SAVED TO BE SURE THAT EQUIPMENT IS NOT NEEDLESSLY
OPERATED UNDER NEARBY TREES AND SHALL EXERCISE EXTREME CAUTION IN WORKING ADJACENT TO
TREES. SHOULD ANY PORTION OF THE TREE BRANCHES REQUIRE REMOVAL TO PERMIT OPERATION OF
THE CONTRACTOR'S EQUIPMENT, HE SHALL OBTAIN THE SERVICES OF A PROFESSIONAL TREE TRIMMING
SERVICE TO TRIM THE TREES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE OPERATION. SHOULD THE
CONTRACTORS' OPERATIONS RESULT IN THE BREAKING OF ANY LIMBS, THE BROKEN LIMBS SHOULD BE
REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AND CUTS SHALL BE PROPERLY PROTECTED TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE. COSTS FOR
TRIMMING SERVICES SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONSTRUCTION AND NO
SPECIAL PAYMENT WILL BE MADE.
I.THE CONTRACTOR AND THEIR 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 XX. 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 ACTIVE DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:56pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C6-UTIL.dwg
C6.01
UTILITY PLAN
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:57pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C8-LGT.dwg
C8.01
LIGHTING PLAN
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:57pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C8-LGT.dwg
C8.02
LIGHTING PLAN
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:57pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C8-LGT.dwg
C8.03
LIGHTING
DETAILS
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:57pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C9-DETL.dwg
C9.01
DETAIL SHEET
N.T.S.
SLOPE 3/4" PER FT.
1
3
13
-
1
/
2
"
6"
6"
6"8"12"
3" R
7"
2"2"
2"
1/2" R
1/2" R
2 - #4 REINFORCING RODS AT CATCH BASINS
20 FEET IN LENGTH, CENTERED ON THE STRUCTURE
01 B612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
PAVEMENT EDGE
CONTRACTION JOINT
2'-0"
3'-0"
M
I
N
N.T.S.
08 END SECTION CURB & GUTTER
A
PLAN VIEW OF RAMP
A
ELEVATION OF RAMP
SECTION A-A
0.08 FT. PER FT. S
L
O
P
E
O
R
F
L
A
T
T
E
R
2
CONCRETE WALK
DOME (TYP)
2'
-
0
"
5/8" MIN5/8" MIN
1-5/8" - 2-3/8"1-5/8" - 2-3/8"
7/8" - 1-7/16"
1/
5
"
50% - 65% OF
BASE DIAMETER
CONCRETE WALK
5'-4"CURB OR CURB
AND GUTTER
16'-6"
6'-3"4'6'-3"2 6 2
BACK OF CURB
FRONT FACE OF CURB
6'-3"4'-0"6'-3"
6 22
6"
5'
-
4
"
2
4'
-
0
"
4'-0"
4'
-
0
"
M
I
N
4'-0
"
M
I
N
5'-8"5'-8"
3'-8"3'-8"
C
U
R
B
R
A
D
I
U
S
N.T.S.
03 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP
8"
16
"
ϰϱ
Σ
Ζ
*6
"
2"VARIES
SLOPE @ 2.00%
4"
4"
N.T.S.
02 INTEGRAL SIDEWALK CURB
CONCRETE
GRANULAR BASE
PAVING
ONE WRAP OF #30
ROOFING FELT
ϲΗT^,͘ϰϬ^d >
PIPE-FILL WITH CONC.
4" x 4" STEEL TUBE
(SEE SIGN DETAILS
THIS SHEET)
STANDARD MNDOT
SIGN NO. R7.8A
1.5'
PROVIDE VAN
ACCESSIBLE SIGN AT
RIGHT HAND
DISCHARGE PARKING
SPACES
N.T.S.
05
STANDARD
STALL ADA STALL
ACCESS
ISLE ADA STALL
STANDARD
STALL
6"
2'
PLAN VIEW OF ADA PARKING
SECTION A-A
SECTION B-B
B
B
AA
N.T.S.
06
C L
6" SCH. 40 STEEL PIPE
FILLED W/ CONC. WITH
TOP ROUNDED.
PAVEMENT OR
FINISHED GRADE
4'
-
0
"
3" COVER
OVER FOOTING
FILL POST w/
CONCRETE
3500 PSI P.C. CONCRETE
MINIMUM (TYP.)
2'-0"
3"
M
I
N
.
ALL PIPES SHALL BE
PAINTED TRAFFIC
YELLOW
1'-6"
SY
M
.
A
B
O
U
T
C L
WH
E
N
I
N
G
R
O
U
P
S
8'
-
0
"
N.T.S.
07
2.0"-MNDOT 2360 MVNW35035B*
8"-CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE, 100% CRUSHED
2.0"-MNDOT 2360 MVWE35035B*
TACK COAT - 2357
7" CONCRETE, 4000 PSI 28 DAY STRENGTH
12"-CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE, 100% CRUSHED
1.5"-MNDOT 2360 MVNW35035B*
8"-CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE, 100% CRUSHED
1.5"-MNDOT 2360 MVWE35035B*
Tack Coat - 2357
12"-COMPACTED APPROVED SUBGRADE
12"-COMPACTED APPROVED SUBGRADE
12"-COMPACTED APPROVED SUBGRADE
N.T.S.
04
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
Registration No.Date:
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
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Inc.,
Plymouth, MN office.
MM/DD/YYYY42661
Michael C. Brandt
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:57pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-C9-DETL.dwg
C9.02
DETAIL SHEET
6" GATE VALVE-
RESILIENT WEDGE TYPE
OR APPROVED EQUAL.
MEGALUG
UNDISTURBED
SOIL CONCRETE BLOCK
CONCRETE
BLOCK
MEGALUG
1 CUBIC YARD
GRAVEL OR CRUSHED
ROCK WITH 2 LAYERS
4 MIL.
POLYETHYLENE.
FINISHED BOULEVARD GRADE
2-1/2" HOSE CONNECTION
(NATIONAL STANDARD THREAD)
CAPS TO BE CHAINED (PENTAGON
NUT ON CAPS)
4-1/2" PUMPER CONNECTION
(NATIONAL STANDARD THREAD)
NATIONAL STANDARD OPERATING NUT
"HYDRAFINDER"
PROPERTY
LINE
N.T.S.
01 TYPICAL FIRE HYDRANT AND
GATE VALVE INSTALLATION
CONCRETE BLOCKING CONCRETE BLOCKING
MJ TEE
CONCRETE
BLOCKING AS
PER SPECS.
UNDISTURBED
SOIL
UNDISTURBED SOIL
CONCRETE BLOCKING
MJ BEND
N.T.S.
03 TYPICAL WATERMAIN BLOCKING N.T.S.
02 GATE VALVE & BOX INSTALLATION
XX" (DIP OR PVC)
WYE
ϰϱΣ>KE'Z/h^
BEND
CONCRETE
6" D.I.P. CLEANOUT STACK
FEMALE ADAPTOR
DUCTILE IRON
THREADED PLUG
PLACE CASTING R-1976 OR
APPROVED EQUAL ON CLEANOUTS
IN PAVED AREAS
FINISHED GRADE
N.T.S.
06 TYPICAL CLEANOUT
SLOPE TRENCH
SIDES PER OSHA
REQUIREMENTS
SLOPE TRENCH
SIDES PER OSHA
REQUIREMENTS
N.T.S.
05 SANITARY SEWER BEDDING
BASE: PRECAST CONCRETE
FLOW
STEPS 16" O.C. ON
DOWNSTREAM SIDE
27"
*
N.T.S.
07 STORM SEWER MANHOLE
4' DIA. M.H.-9" IN FROM BACK OF CURB
6' DIA. M.H.-3" BEHIND BACK OF CURB
8' DIA. M.H.-15" BEHIND BACK OF CURB
DIMENSION FROM BACK OF CURB
TO CENTER OF PIPE. FOR A 24"
GRATE OPENING.
24"X 36" SLAB OPENING
PROVIDE 27" DIAMETER OPENING IF ROUND
CASTING TO BE PROVIDED. SEE STORM
SEWER STRUCTURE SCHEDULE FOR
DIMENSIONS FROM BACK OF CURB TO
CENTER OF STRUCTURE.
NOTE: SEE STORM SEWER STRUCTURE
SCHEDULE FOR CASTING TYPE.
ALL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE
"O" RING RUBBER GASKETS.
DOGHOUSES SHALL BE GROUTED ON
BOTH THE OUTSIDE AND THE INSIDE.
PIPE
D
I
A
M
E
T
E
R
VA
R
I
A
B
L
E
6"
6"
VARIABLE
5"
1'
-
4
"
9"
N.T.S.
04 CATCH BASIN MANHOLE
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
Registration No.Date:
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 MFRA,
Inc., Plymouth, MN office.
2014/04/0245071
James A. Kalkes
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:57pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-L1-LAND.dwg
L1.01
LANDSCAPE
PLAN
QUANTITIES SHOWN IN THE PLANTING SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S CONVENIENCE.
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN.
x OVERSTORY TREES
xx 10.0 ACI OF CANOPY TREES (INCLUDING 1 EVERGREEN TREE) PER ACRE
xxx 2.64 ACRES X 10 =26.4 (/2.0aci) = 13.2 OVERSTORY TREES
x UNDERSTORY SHRUBS
xx 2 SHRUBS FOR EVERY 10FT OF BUILDING PERIMITER
xxx ((580LF / 10)*2)=116 UNDERSTORY SHRUBS
=116 UNDERSTORY SHRUBS
CITY LANDSCAPE CODE
BOTANICAL NAME
DECIDUOUS TREES
KEY COMMON NAME
2"BB 3
SIZE ROOT QTY.
Gleditsia triacanthos
SHADEMASTER HONEYLOCUST
2"BB 2Celtis occidentalis HACKBERRY
var. inermis 'Shademaster'HL
HB
ORNAMENTAL TREES
SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE 1.5"BB 2Malus x 'Spring Snow'SS
EVERGREEN TREES
BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 6'BB 3Picea glauca var. DensataBH
FU
L
L
F
O
R
M
TO
G
R
A
D
E
1COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE 6'BBPicea pungensCB
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
ST
R
A
I
T
L
E
A
D
E
R
N
O
"
V
"
C
R
O
T
C
H
2"BB 3Acer saccharum SUGAR MAPLESM
INSTALL
HEIGHT
MATURE
HEIGHT
10'50'
15'50'
14'50'
6'40'
6'55'
8'25'
COMMERCIAL TURF - SOD HIGHLAND SOD
COMMERCIAL TURF - SEED MN SEED MIX 25-131 (OLD MNDOT 260)
W/ "NO MOW FESCUE MIX"
HARDWOOD MULCH (NATURAL COLOR)
SHREADED HARDWOOD MULCH
1/2" CRUSHED GRANITE CRUSHED QUARRY GRANITE
MNDOT 260 MNDOT 260 &
ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY W/ "NO MOW FESCUE MIX
CONSTRUCTION NOT INTENDED (USE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
SODDED, OR RETENTION BASINS FOR SLOPES OVER 3:1)
** NO MOW SEED FORMULA FROM SPECIALTY TURF & AG INC, FREEDOM MIX, AT 200LB/ACRE OR
APPROVED EQUAL. - WWW.SPECIALTYTURFAG.COM - 188-685-4521
SEED MIX LEGEND
(FOR ALL SHEETS)
SEED MIXTYPESYM.
HB
2
964
DONATION
CENTER
96
5
9
6
5
BH
9
6
5
96
5
96
6
9
6
7
9
6
8
Client
Project
Location
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issue:
GOODWILL
MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
MCB JTA
MCB
PRELIMINARY 04/07/2014
A
OPP19940
PREL
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
Registration No.Date:
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 MFRA,
Inc., Plymouth, MN office.
2014/04/0245071
James A. Kalkes
A 04/09/14 EAV ADDITIONAL INFO
Apr 09, 2014 - 2:57pm - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\OPP19940\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\19940-L1-LAND.dwg
L1.02
SITE
LANDSCAPE
DETAILS
Euonymus alatus 'Compactus'DWARF BURNING BUSH #5 CONT.DBB 26
SHRUBS
BOTANICAL NAMEKEY COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT QTY.REMARKS
Rhus aromatica 'Gro-Low'GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SUMAC #5 CONT.GLS 17
#5 CONT.SVJ 8
#5 CONT.SMS 3
Spiraea x bumalda 'Anthony Waterer'ANTHONY WATERER SPIREA #5 CONT.15AWS
Juniperious Horizoantalis 'Savin'SAVIN JUNIPER
Spiraea nipponica 'Snowmound'SNOWMOUND SPIREA
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
Syringa x "Bailsugar'SUGAR PLUM LILAC #5 CONT.SPF 13
#5 CONT.12GOLD FLAME SPIREASpiraea x bumalda 'Gold Flame'
1.5'4'x4'
INSTALL
HEIGHT
MATURE
HEIGHT
1'3'x4'
1'2.5'x5'
1.5'3'x4'
1.5'3'x4'
1.5'3'x4'
1.5'4'x4'
GFS
4
NE PARKING ISLAND1
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
QUANTITIES SHOWN IN THE PLANTING SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S CONVENIENCE.
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN.
#5 CONT.ALPINE CURRANTRibes alpinum 1.5'3'x4'ALP
NW PARKING ISLAND2
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
SE PARKING ISLAND3
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
SW PARKING ISLAND4
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
NW BUILDING CORNER6
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
NE BUILDING CORNER7
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
EAST OF BUILDING8
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
W OF BUILDING5
L1.02 SCALE 1" = 10'
FRONT BERM9
L1.02
NORTHSCALE 1" = 10'
#5 CONT.9 1'3'x4'MYS Spiraea thunbergii 'Ogon'MELLOW YELLOW SPIREA
Lonicera x xylosteoides 'Miniglobe'MINIGLOBE HONEYSUCKLE #5 CONT.MGH 1.5'4'x4'9
GO
O
D
W
I
L
L
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
Exterior Perspective
4-
1
-
2
0
1
4
114-0021
GO
O
D
W
I
L
L
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
Exterior Elevations
4-
1
-
2
0
1
4
EIFS COLOR 2 EIFS COLOR 1 UTILITY FACE BRICK COLOR 2 114-0021PREFINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING
PR
E
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
D
F
L
U
S
H
S
E
A
M
ME
T
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
C
A
N
O
P
Y
SI
G
N
A
G
E
B
Y
T
E
N
A
N
T
SI
G
N
A
G
E
B
Y
T
E
N
A
N
T
SI
G
N
A
G
E
B
Y
T
E
N
A
N
T
EIFS COLOR 1 PREFINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING EIFS COLOR 1 UTILITY FACE BRICK COLOR 2 SINGLE SCORED BURNISHED BLOCK COLOR 1 SINGLE SCORED BURNISHED BLOCK COLOR 1 SINGLE SCORED BURNISHED BLOCK COLOR 1 SINGLE SCORED BURNISHED BLOCK COLOR 1 UTILITY FACE BRICK COLOR 2 UTILITY FACE BRICK COLOR 2 PREFINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING EIFS COLOR 1 PREFINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING OVERHEAD DOORS
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
B
A
S
E
OV
E
R
H
E
A
D
D
O
O
R
1” INSULATED ALUMINUM GLAZING 1” INSULATED ALUMINUM GLAZING EIFS COLOR 2 EIFS COLOR 2
F:\CommunityDevelopmentDirector\Boards&Commissions\PlanningCommission\2014\Agenda\May\Item5.Goodwill\LTR-aschumann-Goodwill050114.doc
Infrastructure Engineering Planning Construction701XeniaAvenueSouth
Suite300
Minneapolis,MN55416
Tel:763541-4800
Fax:763541-1700
May1,2014
Ms.AngelaSchumann
CommunityDevelopmentDirector
CityofMonticello
505WalnutStreet,Suite1
Monticello,MN55362
Re:Oppidan(Goodwill-PlanReview
WSBProjectNo.1494-890
DearMs.Schumann:
Wehavereviewedthesitedevelopmentplans,datedApril9,2014,aspreparedbyMFRA,Inc,
andofferthefollowingcomments.
ExistingConditions
1.Theexistingstormsewerpipelocatedinthesouthwestcornerofthesiteshouldbeshown
ontheplans.
SitePlan
1.Thenortheastdriveaisleshouldbeshiftedtothewesttoprovidealongerentrance
approachtoCedarStreetforcirculationpurposes.Theapproachlengthshouldmatchthe
southerlydrivewayentrance.
2.Sidewalkshouldextendtothenortherlypropertyline.ADApedestrianrampsshouldbe
installedwherethesidewalkintersectsbothdrivewayentrances.
3.TheCity’ssidewalkdetailplateshallbeincludedintheplans.
4.Provideestimatedtrafficprojectionsofvehicleandtrucktripsanticipatedtoaccessthe
site.
GradingPlan
1.Labeltheproposedstormsewerpipesizesandcatchbasintopandinvertelevationson
thegradingplan.
2.Identifyallemergencyoverflowroutesandelevationsforeachcatchbasinonthegrading
plan.TheEOFshouldbeaminimumof1.5’belowthelowbuildingopening.
Ms.AngelaSchumann
April30,2014
Page2
F:\CommunityDevelopmentDirector\Boards&Commissions\PlanningCommission\2014\Agenda\May\Item5.Goodwill\LTR-aschumann-Goodwill050114.doc
3.IdentifyboulevardgradesbetweentheproposedsidewalkandexistingCedarStreet
curbline.
4.Labelthe%gradeswithdrainagearrowsatthetwoaccesspointsfromCedarStreet.
UtilityPlan
1.EliminateconstructingMH01overtheexistingstormsewerandextendstormsewer
fromCB02toCB06instead.
2.Labeltheproposedinvertelevationwherethestormsewerconnectstotheexisting
manholeatthesouthwestcornerofthesite.Theas-builtinvertelevationis947.25.
3.Loopingofthewatermainwithinthesiteisnotneededaslongastheapplicant
determinesthatexistingwaterpressuresandfireflowsarenotadequatetoservethesite.
4.Thewatermainstubtothepropertytothenorthisnotrequired.
5.Labeltheexistinggatevalvelocationontheexistingwatermainstub.Verifyitwillbe
containedwithinthedrainageandutilityeasement.
6.Thereisnotanexistingwatermainstubasidentifiedontheplansadjacenttothe
proposednortherlydrivewayaccess.
7.Showtheirrigationconnectiontothewatermainandirrigationlayoutontheplans.
8.Theproposedwaterserviceshallbeinstalledwithaminimum7.5feetofcover.
9.Sanitarysewercleanoutsarerequiredatamaximum70-footinterval,thereforean
additionalcleanoutshouldbeaddedalongtheserviceline.
10.AutilityexcavationpermitmustbeobtainedfromthePublicWorksdepartmentpriorto
commencementofutilityconnections.
11.Provideanas-builtutilityplanonceconstructioniscomplete.
StormwaterCalculations
1.Provideproposedcatchbasininletcapacitycalculations.Catchbasinsshouldbe
designedwithsufficientcapacitytolimitpondingtomaximumdepthof0.3feetfora10-
yearrainfallevent.
2.Provideadrainageareamap.
Ms.AngelaSchumann
April30,2014
Page3
F:\CommunityDevelopmentDirector\Boards&Commissions\PlanningCommission\2014\Agenda\May\Item5.Goodwill\LTR-aschumann-Goodwill050114.doc
PreliminaryPlat
1.Providean80-footwideroadway,drainageandutilityeasementforDundasRoadwithin
OutlotA.
2.ProviderequiredperimeterdrainageandutilityeasementsforLot1,Block1.
3.ItshouldbenotedthatafuturesidewalkextensionalongtheeastsideofCedarStreetis
plannedwiththedevelopmentofOutlotA.Theapplicantcanopttoprovideadditional
rightofwaytoaccommodatethisfuturesidewalknoworprovideitinthefutureasright
ofwayoreasementwiththedevelopmentofOutlotA.
Pleasehavetheapplicantprovideawrittenresponseaddressingthecommentsabove.Final
constructionplanswillneedtobesubmitted,reviewed,andapprovedpriortobuildingpermit
approval.Pleasegivemeacallat763-271-3236ifyouhaveanyquestionsorcomments
regardingthisletter.Thankyou.
Sincerely,
WSB&Associates,Inc.
ShibaniK.Bisson,PE
CityEngineer
cc:SteveGrittman,NAC
skb
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/2014
1
6. Public Hearing – Consideration of amendment to Title 10, Monticello Zoning
Ordinance, Chapter 2.4(P) – Specific Review Requirements, Planned Unit
Developments and Section 2.3 (I) relating to written notification for Planned Unit
Development applications (NAC)
Planning Case Number: 2014-023
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s): Amendments to the regulations governing the review
and approval of Planned Unit Development
applications.
Deadline for Decision: NA
Land Use Designation: NA
Zoning Designation: NA .
ANALYSIS
The material attached to this report proposes changes to the City’s Planned Unit
Development regulations to help streamline and clarify the application and review
process for such PUD project proposals. The general structure would remain the
same, but some adjustments are proposed based on recent project experience and a
review of the current ordinance language. The proposed changes are highlighted in
the attached PUD section text, and are summarized (more or less in order of
amendment) as follows:
Table 2-2
Application Type: Written Notice Provided To:
Planned Unit Development All property owners within 350 feet
The above change is provided for consistency with statutory notification requirements
and as also consistent with all other City land use application notification
requirements.
Other proposed amendments to the text of 2.4(P) are listed below.
P (1) The collaborative process is replaced as moved to the Concept Stage
review – more about this change below.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/2014
2
P (3) Notation related to existing PUDs
P (4) Clarify that PUD may be used in any zoning district.
P (7) Reword the public values discussion as a more generalized example,
and restate the purpose of PUD design.
P (7)(e)/(g)/(j) Clearer wording
P (7)(l) Added item to specify that PUD development intensity is intended to
reflect the capacity of the land and services – possibly more, possibly
less.
P (8)(b) Deletes the reference to road width as a specific PUD flexibility option
– the City has standard road width requirements based on public
safety. Road width may become an element qualifying for flexibility,
but the applicant should prove it in the design.
P (8)(b) (New) Adds some examples of flexibility by PUD, and makes the
consideration of flexibility discretionary (“may”), rather than
mandatory (“shall”).
P (9)(a) Eliminates this section on Collaborative process, moving the process
and requirements to the Concept Stage (and partially into the
Development Stage).
P (9)(a) PUD Concept Plan. This text incorporates a role for the collaborative
process at Concept Plan stage, and adds the public values requirements
here. In addition, the neighborhood meeting is specifically made
optional. Further creates a list of requirements or objectives for the
Concept Plan, which includes public hearing and comment. One of
the issues raised by the current code is the creation of a set of
objectives for the PUD prior to public hearing and comment – a
potential skirting of zoning requirements which require public
comment opportunity.
P (9)(a)(iii) 4. Adds a requirement that the applicant identify development
objectives (a part of the collaborative process).
P (9)(a)(iii) 9. Adds a requirement that the applicant identify the areas in which
he/she proposes to vary from the standard zoning requirements as a
part of the application submission.
P (9)(a)(iv) 3. Adds a requirement for a public hearing at the Concept Stage
review. This hearing incorporates public notice into the early stages of
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/2014
3
the process, and avoids later claims that the project has been too
extensively developed to change after public comment.
P (9)(b) Renames the Preliminary Plat stage as PUD Development Stage,
Preliminary Plat, and Rezoning. These are three applications being
considered after Concept review has occurred, and establish the
working development rights for the project. Staff had considered
removing the plat language from the code, but instead it is left here,
essentially requiring that PUD projects occur on platted land. The
Development Stage PUD plans, the Preliminary Plat, and the Rezoning
to PUD would occur concurrently at this stage.
P (9)(b)(iv) 3. Incorporates a requirement that staff generates a Public Values
Statement from the Concept Stage discussions, and it is then to be
considered by the Planning Commission (and then City Council) as an
initial part of the Development Stage review.
P (9)(b)(iv) 5. Rewords the findings criteria for internal consistency.
P (9)(b)(iv) 6. Adds note to this process section that directs the staff to prepare a
rezoning ordinance for review, but specifies that rezoning adoption
would be subsequent to Final Stage PUD approval.
P (9)(c) Final Stage PUD and Final Plat – requires conformance with the
Development Stage PUD and Preliminary Plat approvals, and deletes
the repealer provision on the zoning (since the zoning will not have
happened unless all other approvals are granted).
P (9)(c)(iii) Various clarifications on consistency and requirements.
P (9)(c)(iv) Adds clarification that the Final Stage PUD and Final Plat will be
reviewed and approved by the City Council, rather than the implied
staff review only. Provides that the Council may refer the Final Stage
back to the Planning Commission if appropriate.
P (10)(b) Specifies that a “PUD Adjustment” shall be treated as a change to the
Final PUD and will follow that process.
P (11) Cancellation would occur upon specific findings, including those
identified in this new language.
As noted above, these changes are intended to refine the PUD zoning process and tie
up a few existing loose ends, based on the City’s experiences with the new ordinance.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/2014
4
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2014 – 049 recommending approval of the
amendments to Section 2.3 and 2.4, revising the process and requirements for
PUD in the Monticello Zoning Ordinance and directing staff to prepare an
Ordinance for adoption, based on finding in said resolution.
2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution 2014 – 049, based on findings to be made
by the Planning Commission.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the amendments. The process as currently written
does not provide for public hearing input until the developer has expended
considerable sums on the project, and still may not have anything concrete. At the
same time, the current collaborative process raises concerns about circumventing
required public process.
Finally, there are some inconsistencies in the language as to how the zoning and
platting requirements interact – the intent of these changes is to require platting where
needed, but specify that there are both PUD zoning and subdivision processes which
may be occurring concurrently.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Resolution 2014 - 049
B. Draft Ordinance language
C. Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 2, excerpt
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION
RESOLUTIONNO.2014-049
1
MotionBy:SecondedBy:
ARESOLUTIONRECOMMEDINGAPPROVALOFAMENDMENTS
TOSECTION2.3AND2.4OFTHEMONTICELLOZONINGORDINANCE
RELATINGTOREVISIONSTOREGULATIONSGOVERNING
PROCESSANDREQUIREMENTSFORPLANNEDUNITDEVELOPMENT.
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasrevieweddraftamendmentstotheCity’szoning
regulationsgoverningPlannedUnitDevelopmentprocess;and
WHEREAS,theproposedchangesareconsistentwiththeintentoftheCity’sComprehensive
Planinpromotinghighqualitydevelopment,whilestreamliningdevelopmentprocesseswhen
possible;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionheldapublichearingonMay6th,2014ontheapplication
andmembersofthepublicwereprovidedtheopportunitytopresentinformationtothePlanning
Commission;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasconsideredallofthecommentsandthestaffreport,
whichareincorporatedbyreferenceintotheresolution;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticellomakesthefollowingFindings
ofFactinrelationtotheapprovalofthezoningamendments:
1.Theproposedamendmentsshouldleadtoimplementationofpoliciesofthe
ComprehensivePlan.
2.TheproposedamendmentswillsupporttheuseofPlannedUnitDevelopment
designandCityreviewofsaidprojects.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED,thatthePlanningCommissionoftheCityof
Monticello,Minnesota,approvestheproposedamendmentsasspecifiedinthereferencedstaff
planningreport.
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION
RESOLUTIONNO.2014-049
2
ADOPTEDBY thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticello,Minnesotathis6thdayofMay,
2014.
MONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION
By:_______________________________
BradFyle,Chair
ATTEST:
____________________________________________
AngelaSchumann,CommunityDevelopmentDirector
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
(P)Planned Unit Developments
PUD Concept Plan
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
APPLICATION
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
(1) Purpose and Intent
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide
greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non-residential areas
in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development
PUD Concept Plan
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
REVIEW
outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
(Staff, applicable
by undertaking a collaborative process that results in a development outcome
Commissions &
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Council)
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
exceeding that which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
district. The City reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the
developer to re-apply under the standard applicable zoning district.
(2) Initiation of Proceedings
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
PUD Development
Stage, Preliminary
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Applications for a PUD shall be initiated by application of the property owner or
Plat and Rezoning
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
APPLICATION
other person having authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B),
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Authority to File Applications.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
(3) Reflection on the Official Zoning Map
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
PUD Development
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
(a) PUD provisions provide an optional method of regulating land use which
Stage, Preliminary
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Plat & Rezoning
permits flexibility in allowed uses and other regulating provisions. In some
REVIEW
circumstances, however, rules and regulations governing the original zoning
(Staff, applicable
Commissions &
district, or other zoning regulations found elsewh
Council)
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz may be appropriate to apply within the PUD. As such, approval of a Planned
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Unit Development and execution of a PUD agreement shall require the
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
property in question be rezoned to PUD. For each PUD District, a specific
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
ordinance shall be adopted, along with a tracking designation for use on the
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
official zoning map to distinguish it from other PUD districts and identify the
adopted ordinance in the City Code. Once a PUD has been granted and is in
PUD Final Stage
and Final Plat effect for a parcel, no building permit shall be issued for that parcel which is
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
APPLICATION
not in conformance with the approved PUD Plan, the current Minnesota State
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Building Code and all associated documents, and with all other applicable
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
City Code provisions.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
(b) All PUD rezonings approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall
retain their zoning classifications of R-PUD, and shall continue to be
PUD Development
governed by the ordinance and resolutions which created these areas.
Stage, Preliminary
Plat & Rezoning
REVIEW
(b)(c) All PUDs previously granted by Conditional Use Permit shall
(Staff, applicable
continue to be regulated under the terms of the CUP.
Commissions &
Council)
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 1
(4) Permitted Locations for PUD rezoning
A rezoning to PUD may be requested for any residential, commercial, or
industrial zoned area, regardless of current zoning.
(5) PUD Qualifications
Rezonings to PUD will be considered only for areas of land in single ownership or
control, except in the following circumstances:
(a) Natural features of the land are such that development under standard zoning
regulations would not be appropriate in order to conserve such features;
(b) The land is intended to be developed in accordance with a prior PUD adjacent
to or across the street from the subject property;
(c) The PUD process is desirable to ensure compatibility and careful
consideration of the effect of a development on surrounding land uses.
(d) Multiple party ownership is adequately secured through a corporation,
partnership, or other legal entity that will ensure the ability to fulfill all of the
obligations of the PUD process, including approvals, development, and
securities.
(6) Permitted Uses Within PUDs
Uses within a PUD shall be governed by the ordinance establishing the PUD and
by the conditions, if any, imposed by the City in the approval process and PUD
documents.
(7) Expectations of a Development Seeking a Rezoning to PUD
The provisions of this section are intended to achieve the following public values
within a PUD zoning district and associated subdivisionPlanned Unit
Development is designed to allow flexibility from the application of standard
zoning regulations to achieve a variety of public values that will be identified for
each specific PUD project. The following list represents examples of public
values that may be applicable to any individual PUD project, but is not necessarily
inclusive, nor are all examples applicable to all projects:
(a) Ensure high quality construction standards and the use of high quality
construction materials;
(b) Promote a variety of housing styles which include features such as side or rear
loaded garages, front porches, varying roof pitches, and four sided
architecture/articulation;
Page 2 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
(c) Eliminate repetition of similar housing types by encouraging a housing
mixture that diversifies the architectural qualities of a neighborhood;
(d) Promote aesthetically-pleasing design within the neighborhood and appears
attractive and inviting from surrounding parcels;
(e) Incorporate extensive landscaping and site amenities in excess of what is
required by code;
(f) Provide high-quality park, open space, and trail opportunities that exceed the
expectations established in the Comprehensive Plan;
(g) Provide access to a convenient and efficient multi-modal transportation
system to service the daily needs of residents at peak and non-peak use levels,
with high connectivity to the larger community.
(h) Promote development that is designed to reduce initial infrastructure costs and
long-term maintenance and operational costs;
(i) Where applicable, maximize the use of ecologically-based approaches to
stormwater management, restore or enhance on-site ecological systems, and
protect off-site ecological systems including the application of Low Impact
Development (LID) practices;
(j) Foster in inclusive community by providingFacilitate a complementary mix of
lifecycle housing;
(k)
natural resource inventory (NRI);
(k)(l) Accommodate higher development intensity in areas where
infrastructure and other systems are capable of providing appropriate levels of
public services, and require lower intensity in areas where such services are
inadequate, or where natural features require protection and/or preservation.
(8) Areas of Flexibility
(a) The City shall consider an increase in the density or intensity of the project,
along with related reductions in lot width and size if the PUD provides
substantially more site amenities and public values, as outlined in Section
2.4(P)(7), than could be achieved in a conventional development for the
applicable land use zone.
(b) The City mayconsider a decrease in the amount of road width required or
right-of-way requirements if the PUD provides substantially more site
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 3
amenities, as outlined in Section 2.4(P)(7)and particularly those amenities
that would mitigate traffic concernsthan are found in a conventional
development for the applicable zoning district. Specifications and standards
for streets, utilities, and other public facilities shall be at the discretion of City
Council and must protect the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic
viability, and general welfare of the city.
(c)(b) The City shall may consider flexibility with regard to land uses,
setbacks, lot size, width, and depth, among other zoning standards when
reviewing a PUD rezoning request. Specifications and standards for lots shall
be at the discretion of City Council, and shall encourage a desirable living or
working environment which assists in achieving the goals set out for PUDs.
(d)(c) The City shall consider flexibility in the phasing of a PUD
development. Changes to the proposed staging or timing of a PUD may be
approved by the City Council when necessary or on the showing of good
cause by the developer.
(9) PUD Procedure
All requests for rezoning to Planned Unit Development shall follow the steps
outlined below.
(a) Collaborative process and project goal setting
The collaborative process and project goal setting step is intended to allow the
applicant to meet with members of the Community Development Department
and appointed and elected officials to gain an understanding of the public
values related to development of the subject site. The feedback received
during this step will provide guidance to the applicant on elements and
objectives to incorporate into a future concept plan.
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
A request for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be initiated by
application of the property owner or other person having authority to file
an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for a PUD Collaborative process and project goal
setting session shall be in accordance with Section 2.3, Common
Review Requirements.
2. In addition to common review requirements, a site analysis shall be
submitted in anticipation ofthe pre-application activitieswhich
includes the following information:
Page 4 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
a. Location of wooded areas or significant features (environmental,
historical, cultural) of the parcel;
b. Indicate the base flood elevation level (if applicable) and show
the general location of floodways and/or flood fringe areas;
c. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies;
d. Delineation of the shoreland district boundary (if applicable);
e. General locations of wetlands (if applicable);
f. Calculation of gross acres on the site proposed for development;
g. Calculation of net acres on the site proposed for development,
including a calculation of, and deduction from the gross acreage
of, all wetlands, floodplains, slopes of more than 18%, significant
wo
Inventory, and any other unbuildable areas of the project site.
h. Indication of neighboring land uses surrounding the proposed
development site.
(iii) Collaborative Process and Project Goal Setting Process
1. The applicant shall meet with the city staff for a pre-application
conference prior to submittal of a concept plan application to the city.
The primary purpose of the conference is to allow the applicant and
staff an opportunity to review the comprehensive plan and to make a
preliminary determination if the proposal is conducive to a PUD
rezoning.
2. City staff and the applicant shall work together to schedule a
concurrent worksession with policymakers of the city (applicable
commissions and City Council) to discuss the public values on the
site using the established public values in Section 2.4(P)(7) as a
guideline. The result of this meeting will be a public values
statement.
3. As part of the collaborative work session, the Planning Commission
and City Council will direct whether the applicant shall hold a
neighborhood meeting. The city and all owners of property within
1,000 feet of the proposed PUD (or a larger area as determined by the
Community Development Department) shall be given notice of the
meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to inform the neighborhood
of the proposed PUD, discuss the concepts and basis for the plan
being developed and to obtain information and suggestions from the
neighborhood.
4. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs incurred by the city
for attorney, engineering, planning, or other City-incurred costs
during these pre-concept plan activities.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 5
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0"
(b)(a) PUD Concept Plan
Prior to submitting formal preliminary plat and rezoning applications for the
proposed development, the applicant shall prepare an informala concept plan
and present it to the appropriate Planning cCommissions and City Council at a
concurrent worksession, as scheduled by the Community Development
Department. The applicant may decide to hold one or more neighborhood
meetings, but such meeting(s) shall not be a requirement of a PUD
application. The purpose of this meetingthe Concept Plan is to: determine if
all parties are on a common track and if the development reflects the stated
public values.
Formatted: Don't add space between paragraphs ofthe samestyle,
Develop a list of public values, in collaboration between the
Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 1.25" + Indent at: 1.5"
applicant, Planning Commission , and City Council;
Provide an opportunity to identify elements of a Public Values
Statement that will govern and direct the design and elements of the
succeeding PUD plan stages (to be reviewed and adopted as a
prerequisite of Development Stage PUD approval;
Provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a
requirement for extensive engineering and other plans;
Provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the
proposed PUD which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD
design and review;
The applicant may request that the Concept and Development Stage PUD
applications be considered concurrently. Allowance for concurrent review
shall be at the sole discretion of the City, and the applicant assumes any risk,
financial or otherwise, of proceeding with plan development beyond the stage
at which the City has identified PUD review is officially under consideration.
Without specific written authorization from the Community Development
Department, no application for Development Stage PUD shall be considered
complete prior to City Council action on the Concept Stage PUD.
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
A request for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be initiated by
application of the property owner or other person having authority to file
an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be in
accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements.
Page 6 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
2. In addition to common review requirements, applications for a PUD
Concept Plan Review shall also include at least the information in
Section 2.4(P)(9)(b)(iii) below to be considered complete (except as
exempted by the Community Development Department).
(iii) Specific PUD Concept Plan Submittal Requirements
An applicant shall provide the following information unless waived by
staff:
1. A listing of contact information including name(s), address(es) and
phone number(s) of: the owner of record, authorized agents or
representatives, engineer, surveyor, and any other relevant associates;
2. A listing of the following site data: Address, current zoning, parcel
size in acres and square feet and current legal description(s);
3. An updated site analysis incorporating any additional features or
requested changes identified during the collaborative process and
project goal setting session;
4. A narrative explaining
PUD, and public values that the applicant believes may be achieved
by the project;how the identified public values for the site are
addressed by the concept plan;
5. A listing of general information including the number of proposed
residential units, commercial and industrial land uses by category of
use, public use areas including a description of proposed use, and any
other land use proposed as part of the PUD;
6. Calculation of the proposed density of the project and the potential
density under standard zoning regulations, including both gross
density and net density, accounting for developable and
undevelopable land. Undevelopable land shall include all wetlands,
floodplains, sensitive ecological areas identified in the Natural
Resource Inventory, slopes greater than 18%, poor soils and areas of
concentrated woodlands.
7. Outline a development schedule indicating the approximate date
when construction of the project, or stages of the same, can be
expected to begin and be completed (including the proposed phasing
of construction of public improvements and recreational and common
space areas).
8. A Concept PUD Plan illustrating the nature and type of proposed
development. At a minimum, the plan should show
a. Area calculations for gross land area
b. Existing zoning district(s)
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 7
c. Layout of proposed lots and proposed uses. Denote outlots
planned for public dedication and/or open space (schools, parks,
etc.)
d. Area calculations for each parcel
e. General location of wetlands and/or watercourses over the
property and within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision
parcel
f. Location of existing and proposed streets within and immediately
adjacent to the subdivision parcel
g. Proposed sidewalks and trails
h. Proposed parking areas
i. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements
(indicate public vs. private if applicable)
j. General location of wooded areas or significant features
(environmental, historical, cultural) of the parcel
k. Location of utility systems that will serve the property
l. Other: An applicant may submit any additional information that
may explain the proposed PUD.
Formatted: List Paragraph, Don't add space between paragraphs of the
9. A listing of the areas of flexibility from the standard zoning that
same style, Line spacing: Exactly 15 pt,No widow/orphan control, Tab
the applicant is seeking through the use of PUD design.
stops: 1.75", List tab
(iv)PUD Concept Plan Review
1. Upon receiving a complete PUD concept plan application, the
Community Development Department, along with other designated
staff, shall review the proposal and generate a staff report analyzing
the proposal against the expectations for PUDs. The report shall be
forwarded to the appropriate commissionsas determined by the
Community Development Director.
2. Commissions receiving the report shall review the PUD rezoning
request, and make a recommendation to the City Council with regard
to the plat layout, design, density, uses, deviations, and achieved
public values of the concept plan. The Planning Commission shall be
responsible for the formal comments to the City Council. Other staff
and commission reports shall be provided to the Planning
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
3. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing and consider
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
and comprehensive plan goals. The planning commission shall make
recommendations to the City Council on the merit, needed changes,
and potential public values, as well as suggested conditions of the
Page 8 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
proposed rezoning and PUD development plan.
3.4. The Council shall consider the recommendations of the commissions
that have conducted a review, and provide feedback to the applicant
on the proposed public values, proposed deviations, and any other
aspect of the application. The Council shall either make a motion that
the applicantif they choose to proceedmove forward with the
PUD preliminary plat and rezoning requests, or direct the applicant to
submit a development application using conventional zoning district
standards. The Council shall make its finding within the time allotted
by Minn. Stat. Section 15.99, and may take up the application without
Planning Commission action if the Planning Commission has not
acted within sixty (60) days of its original public hearing date. The
and are intended to represent the compliance of the proposed project
with the Public Values Statement, the applicable zoning regulations,
and the Comprehensive Plan.
4.5. After the City policymakers have reviewed and commented on the
Concept PUD plan, city staff shall meet with any other responsible
agencies, as applicable, to explore opportunities of partnership to
enhance the stated public values.
(c)(b) PUD Development Stage, Preliminary Plat and Rezoning
Development Stage PUD
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
1. Concurrent applications for PUD Development Stage, rezoning to
PUD, and a Preliminary Plat shall be submitted to the City within one
year of the findings on the PUD Concept Plan. Failure
to submit applications for PUD Development Stage, rezoning to PUD
and a Preliminary Plat within one year
will require the applicant to begin the process with a new Concept
Stage applicationwith the Collaborative PUD meeting.
2. The requestsfor PUD Development Stage, rezoning to PUD and
Preliminary Platshall be initiated by application of the property
owner or other person having authority to file an application pursuant
to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications. The Development
Stage PUD request constitutes a separate application and shall be
subject to new timelines for the purposes of Minn. Stat. Section
15.99.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for rezoning to PUD and Preliminary Plat shall be in
accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 9
2. The application for rezoning to PUD shall be in accordance with
Section 2.4(B), Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map
Amendments.
3. The application for Preliminary Plat shall be in accordance with City
Code Title 11, Chapter 4, Data Required for Preliminary and Final
Plats; and shall include the additional information requirements listed
in Section 2.4(P)(9)(c)(iii) below to be considered complete (except
as exempted by the Community Development Department).
4. If the PUD is proposed to develop over a timeframe exceeding two
years, a PUD Phasing Plan for the entire project (to be completed in
phases) may be submitted. Subsequent PUD Final Plan applications
would only grant approval for an individual phase.
(iii) Specific PUD Development Stage/ Preliminary Plat Submittal
Requirements
An applicant shall provide a separate PUD Development Stage Plan
clearly delineating the proposed development and all features not
consistent with underlying zoning regulations (e.g. setback deviations).
At a minimum, the plan should show:
1. Administrative information (including identification of the drawing as
Preliminary PUD Development Stage
the subdivisionproject, contact information for the developer and
individual preparing the plan, signature of the surveyor and civil
engineer certifying the document, date of plan preparation orrevision,
and a graphic scale and true north arrow);
2. Area calculations for gross land area, wetland areas, wetland buffers,
right-of-way dedications, conservation areas, and proposed public and
private parks;
3. Existing zoning district(s);
4. Layout of proposed lots with future lot and block numbers. The
perimeter boundary line of the subdivision should be distinguishable
from the other property lines. Denote outlots planned for public
dedication and/or open space (schools, parks, etc.);
5. Area calculations for each parcel;
6. Proposed setbacks on each lot (forming the building pad) and
calculated buildable area;
7. Proposed gross hardcover allowance per lot (if applicable);
8. Existing contours at intervals of two feet. Contours must extend a
minimum of 200 feet beyond the boundary of the parcel(s) in
question;
Page 10 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
9. Delineation of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property and
within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision parcel;
10. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies;
11. Grading drainage and erosion control plan prepared by a registered
professional engineer, providing all information outlined in
Monticello Zoning Code, Chapter 4, Section 10(C);
12. Location, width, and names of existing and proposed streets within
and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel;
13. Easements and rights-of-way within or adjacent to the subdivision
parcel(s);
14. The location and orientation of proposed buildings;
15. Colored building elevations which detail the materials being used;
16. Proposed sidewalks and trails;
17. Vehicular circulation system showing location and dimension for all
driveways, parking spaces, parking lot aisles, service roads, loading
areas, fire lanes, emergency access, if necessary, public and private
streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike paths, direction of traffic flow and
traffic control devices;
18. Lighting location, style and mounting and light distribution plan.
19. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements (indicate
public vs. private if applicable);
20. Landscape plan prepared by a qualified professional providing all
information outlined in Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 4.1(D)
including planting counts, sizes and species;
21.Location and detail of signage providing all pertinent information
outlined in Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 2.4(K)(3)(b).
22. Location, access and screening detail of large trash handling and
recycling collection areas in compliance with the requirements of
Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 5.3(D)(30).
23. Any other information as directed by the Community Development
Department.
(iv) PUD Development Stage, Preliminary Plat and Rezoning to PUD
Review
1. The application for rezoning to PUD shall be reviewed in accordance
with Section 2.4(B), Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map
Amendments.
2. The application for Preliminary Plat shall be reviewed in accordance
with City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 2, Preliminary Plat
Procedure.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 11
3. As part of the review process for both applications, the Community
Development Department shall generate a Public Values Statement
based on consideration raised at the Concept PUD reviews, an
analysis of the proposal against the expectations for PUDs and the
previously establisheddraft public values statement to formulate a
recommendation regarding the rezoning to the pPlanning
cCommission and City Council.
4. The Pplanning Ccommission shall hold a public hearing and consider
and comprehensive plan goals. The pPlanning cCommission shall
make recommendations to the City Council on the merit, needed
changes, and suggested conditions of the proposed rezoning,
preliminary plat and PUD development plan.
5. In approving or denying the PUD Development Stage application and
ordinance to rezone the subject property to PUD, the City Council
shall make findings on the following:
a. Whether theThe
comprehensive plan;
b. The Whether the PUD plan is tailored to the specific
characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site
planning and greater public benefits than would be achieved
under conventional provisions of the ordinance;
c. How Whether the the PUD plan addresses the purpose and intent
of the PUD rezoning laid out in Section 2.4(P)(1), and the public
values statement established at the beginning of the process;
d. The Whether the PUD plan addresses the expectations of a PUD
laid out in Section 2.4(P)(7);
e. The Whether the PUD plan maintains or improves the efficiency
of public streets, utilities, and other public services;
f. The Whether the PUD plan results in development compatible
with existing adjacent and future guided land uses;
g. Whether the PUD can be accommodated by existing public
services, such as parks, police, fire, administration, and utilities,
or the developer has provided for the growth and extension of
such services as a component of the PUD.
h. Whether the PUD is designed to take advantage of, and preserve,
the natural features of the subject property, including waterways,
forested areas, natural prairie, topography, views, etc.
Page 12 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
6. An ordinance rezoning the property shall be prepared by the City
adopted , for review at the Development Stage PUD, but adoption of
such ordinance shall occur only upon approval of the Final Stage
PUD.that includes an effective date that coincides with the approval
and recording of the Final Plat for the property.
(d)(c) PUD Final Stage and Final Plat
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
1. A Final Stage PUD plan and final plat that conforms with the
approved Development Stage PUD and preliminary plat and
associated PUD rezoning ordinance shall be submitted within 180
days of approval of the preliminary plat approval, unless otherwise
extended by the City Council. If the applicant fails to submit a final
plat application or extension request within this time period, the PUD
application shall be considered void and the applicant shall be
required to begin the process with the Collaborative PUD meeting.
2. The request for PUD Final Stage and Final Plat shall be initiated by
application of the property owner or other person having authority to
file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File
Applications.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for PUD Final Stage and Final Plat shall be in
accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements.
2. The application for PUD Final Plat shall be in accordance with City
Code Title 11, Chapter 4, Data Required for Preliminary and Final
Plats.
3. In addition to general city code requirements, applications for a PUD
Final Stage and Final Plat shall also include at least the information in
Section 2.4(P)(9)(d)(iii) below to be considered complete (except as
exempted by the Community Development Department).
(iii) Specific PUD Final Stage and Final Plat Submittal Requirements
1. If a PUD Master Plan for the entire project was submitted and
approved as part of the PUD Development Stagepreliminary plat
review, an updated Master Plan shall be submitted incorporating all
changes required by the PUD Development Stage preliminary plat
approval.
2. The PUD Development Stage Plan shall be updated to incorporate all
changes required by the PUD, preliminary plat and rezoning
approvals. This document must clearly show all deviations from
standard zoning being approved as part of the PUD.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 13
3. The City shall prepare, and the applicant shall execute,
agreement which references all PUD plans, development phasing,
required improvements, completion dates for improvements, the
required letter of credit, all required development fees, escrows, and
warranties, and any other information deemed necessary by the City.
4. The City shall, upon approval of the PUD Final Stage, recording of
agreement,recording of the Final Plat, publish the PUD Ordinance
specifying land use, densities, performance standards, and ongoing
general obligations of occupants of the PUD. Such ordinance shall
create a zoning district that is specific to the property for which the
PUD was applied, and shall be designated in such a way as to be able
to mark the official zoning map to identify the PUD ordinance. The
PUD ordinance shall also designate that such property is thereby
rezoned to the PUD district as adopted.
5. Up-to-date title evidence for the subject property in a form acceptable
to the City shall be provided as part of the application for the PUD
Final Plat.
6. Developer shall provide warranty deeds for Property being dedicated
to the City for all parks, outlots, etc., free from all liens and
encumbrances except as otherwise waived by the City Council.
7. Developer shall provide all easement dedication documents for
easements not shown on the final plat including those for trails,
ingress/egress, etc., together with all necessary consents to the
easement by existing encumbrancers of the property.
(iv) PUD Final Stage and Final Plat Review
The application for PUD Final Stage and Final Plat shall be considered by
the City Council at a public meeting, following a review and report by the
Community Development Department. The City Council may refer the
Final Stage PUD and Final Plat to the Planning Commission, or other
applicable commissions, if desired. Approvalof the PUD Final Stage and
Final Plat shall be by simple majority vote of the City Council, except
where State law may specifically require a supermajority.reviewed in
accordance with City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3, Final Plat
Procedure..
(10) PUD Amendments
circumstances, overlooked opportunities, or requests from a developer. At such a
time, the applicant shall make an application to the city for a PUD amendment.
All such amendments will be processed as one of the following:
Page 14 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
(a) Administrative Amendment The Community Development Department may
approve minor changes in the location, placement, and height of buildings if
such changes are required by engineering or other circumstances, provided the
conform to the review criteria applied by the Planning Commission and City
Council, and are consistent with all requirements of the PUD ordinance.
Under no circumstances shall an administrative amendment allow additional
stories to buildings, additional lots, or changes to designated uses established
as part of the PUD.
(b) PUD Adjustment an adjustment to a PUD may be made through review and
approval by a simple majority vote of the City Council with or without
referral to the Planning Commission. For a PUD Adjustment, the applicant
shall follow the procedures and requirements of the PUD Final Stage as
identified in this Chapter. To qualify for this review, the minor adjustment
shall not:
(i) Eliminate, diminish or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of
sensitive site features.
(ii) Eliminate, diminish or compromise the high quality of site planning,
design, landscaping or building materials.
(iii) Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas or roads.
(iv) Increase or decrease the number of residential dwelling units by more
than five percent.
(v) Increase the gross floor area of non-residential buildings by more than
three percent or increase the gross floor area of any individual building by
more than five percent (residential lots not guided for specific structure
sizes are excluded from this requirement).
(vi) Increase the number of stories of any building.
(vii) Decrease the amount of open space or alter it in such a way as to change
its original design or intended function or use.
(viii) Create non-compliance with any condition attached to the approval of the
Final PUD Plan.
(c) PUD Amendment any change not qualifying for an administrative
amendment or a PUD adjustment shall require a PUD amendment. An
application to amend a PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that
required for an initial PUD beginning at PUD Preliminary Plat.
(11) PUD Cancellation
A PUD shall only be cancelled and revoked upon the City Council adopting an
ordinance rescinding the ordinance approving the PUD. Cancellation of a PUD
shall include findings that demonstrate that the PUD is inconsistent with the
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 15
Comprehensive Plan or other application land use regulations, threatens public
safety, health, or welfare, or other applicable findings in accordance with law.In
any event, it shall not be necessary for the council to find the creation of a PUD
district was in error. The ordinance revoking the PUD shall include a section
rezoning the property to agricultural use, or the City Council may determine that a
more appropriate base zoning district should be chosen to further the intent and
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
(12) Administration
In general, the following rules shall apply to all PUDs:
(a) Rules and regulations: No requirement outlined in the PUD process shall
restrict the City Council from taking action on an application if necessary to
meet state mandated time deadlines;
(b) Preconstruction: No building permit shall be granted for any building on land
for which a PUD plan is in the process of review, unless the proposed
building is allowed under the existing zoning and will not impact, influence,
or interfere with the proposed PUD plan.
(c) Effect on Conveyed Property. In the event any real property in the approved
PUD Agreement is conveyed in total, or in part, the buyers thereof shall be
bound by the provisions of the approved Final PUD Plan constituting a part
thereof as well as the PUD zoning ordinance; provided, however, that nothing
herein shall be construed to create non-conforming lots, building sites,
buildings or uses by virtue of any such conveyance of a lot, building site,
building or part of the development created pursuant to and in conformance
with the approved PUD.
Page 16 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.3 Common Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (I) Public Notification
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 17
(3) Responsibilities
(a) Published notice
When the provisions of this ordinance require that notice be published, the
Community Development Department shall be responsible for preparing the
content of the notice and publishing the notice in the City’s official
newspaper. The content and form of the published notice shall be consistent
with the requirements of Section 2.3(I)(1) and state law.
(b) Written (mailed) notice.
When the provisions of this ordinance require that written or mailed notice be
provided, the Community Development Department shall be responsible for
preparing and mailing the written notice per the requirements outlined in
Table 2-2.
TABLE 2-2: WRITTEN NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
Application Type: Written Notice Provided to:
Comprehensive Plan Amendment All property owners within 350 feet
Zoning Map Amendment All property owners within 350 feet
Variance All property owners within 350 feet
Conditional Use Permit All property owners within 350 feet
Interim Use Permit (new and renewal) All property owners within 350 feet
CUP/IUP Revocation Permittee/Landowner Only
Planned Unit Developments All property owners within 500 feet
(4) Notice Construction
(a) The Community Development Department may use property tax records to
determine the names and addresses of affected property owners. A copy of
the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent
must be attested to by the Community Development Department and must be
made a part of the records of the proceedings.
(b) Minor defects in any notice shall not impair the notice or invalidate
proceedings pursuant to the notice if a good faith attempt has been made to
comply with applicable notice requirements. Minor defects in notice are
errors that do not affect the substance of the notice (e.g., errors in a legal
description, typographical or grammatical errors, errors of actual acreage,
etc). Failure of a party to receive written notice shall not invalidate
subsequent action. In all cases, however, the notification requirements and
information specifying the time, date, and place of a hearing shall be strictly
construed.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
1
7. Public Hearing – Consideration to recommend for the adoption the 2014 City of
Monticello Official Zoning Map. (AS)
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission is asked to take action on adoption of an Official Zoning
Map at this time.
In January, staff requested that the Commission table action on the adoption of the
map until staff had an opportunity to review and define shoreland boundaries in order
to provide clarity along the Mississippi River and Otter Creek, as required by the text
of the zoning ordinance.
WSB & Associates consulted with NAC and the DNR to determine the appropriate
overlay boundary for the Shoreland District. Shoreland areas are regulated under
state statute and are defined as:
SHORELAND: Land located within the following distances from public water:
(A) 1,000 feet from the ordinary high water mark of a lake, pond, or flowages.
(B) Three hundred (300) feet from a river or stream, or the landward extent of a flood
plain designated by ordinance on such river or stream, whichever is greater. The
limits of shorelands may be reduced whenever the waters involved are bounded by
topographic divides that extend landward from the waters for lesser distances and
when approved by the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources or the
commissioner’s designated representative.
(C) The area included in the recreational land use districts for the Mississippi River as
defined in Minnesota Rules Chapter 6105.0800-0950.
The shoreland boundary along the Mississippi River and Otter Creek is set based on
whichever is greater in requirement (B) above: the 300’ extent or the floodplain
extent. WSB has prepared a map based on that information, which is attached for
reference. The map illustrates both the shoreland and flooplain boundaries based on
current regulations and FEMA/DNR mapping.
At this time, staff understands from conversations with the DNR that it is the line of
the shoreland boundary itself that determines regulation and application of the City’s
shoreland zoning regulations. In short, it is the line that determines regulation, not
the full parcel itself.
In adopting the Official zoning map, the Planning Commission will adopt this map
by reference in accordance with requirements of both State statute and the Zoning
Ordinance.
Planning Commission Agenda – 05/06/14
2
The Commission may also recall that the Mississippi River is also subject to the
Mississippi Wild Scenic and Recreational River District regulations, the boundary
for which has been set in statute and is shown on the Official Zoning Map.
The map included for review by the Planning Commission includes updating to
reflect rezoning actions since the adoption of the last official map in March of 2013,
including:
Ordinance #581 – Rezoning 108 Cedar Street from R-2 to CCD, F-2.
Ordinance #589 – Rezoning 101 Chelsea Road from B-2 to B-4
The map also includes the updated boundary for the Special Use Overlay District, as
presented by NAC in their April 1st, 2014 Planning Commission report analysis.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2014-047 recommending the adoption of the 2014
City of Monticello Official Zoning Map, including Shoreland/Floodplain
companion map.
2. Motion of other.
.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the City of Monticello Official Zoning Map as proposed.
This draft represents an accurate picture of Monticello’s zoning based on a review of
available records and ordinances. The City Attorney has advised that the City adopt an
official zoning map each year.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A: Resolution 2014-047
B: Ordinance #581
C: Ordinance #589
D: 2014 Official Zoning Map, Proposed
E: Shoreland and Floodplain Boundary, City of Monticello
F: Official Zoning Map, dated 3/1/13
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTIONNO.2014-047
MotionBy:SecondedBy:
ARESOLUTIONOFMONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION
RECOMMENDINGTHATTHECITYCOUNCILADOPTSANAMENDMENT
TOTHEZONINGMAPINITSENTIRETY
WHEREAS,theZoningMapoftheCityofMonticellorequiresamendment;and
WHEREAS,theproposedmapwouldaccommodateandfurthertheintentionsandpoliciesofthe
ComprehensivePlan;and
WHEREAS,theproposedzoningwouldbeconsistentwiththeCity’slanduseplan;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticellofindsthattheproposedzoningmap
willbeconsistentwiththeintentoftheComprehensivelanduseplanandproposedzoningdistrict;
and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasconductedapublichearingonMay6th,2014toreview
therequestsandreceivepubliccommentonthezoningmapamendment;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionfindsthattheproposedzoningmaphasmettherequirements
foradoptionasfoundinthezoningordinanceandstatelaw;
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof
Monticello,Minnesota:
ThePlanningCommissionrecommendsthattheCityCounciladoptthezoningmapamendmenttobe
identifiedasOrdinance#595.
ADOPTED this6th dayofMay,2014bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof
Monticello,Minnesota.
MONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION
By:_______________________________
,Chair
ATTEST:
___________________________________
,CityClerk
County Hwy 75
Chelsea Rd
State Hwy 25
85th St NE
90th St N E
Linn St
Pine St
7th St
School Blvd
Riverview Dr
Cedar St
W River St
M
a
r
v
in
R
d
Jason Ave
Dundas Rd
W Broadway St
Hart Blvd
Country La
Haug Ave NE
Elm St
W 4th St
Fenning Ave NE
Oakwook Dr
Mallard La
95th St NE
Fallon Ave NE
Edmonson Ave NE
Mississippi Dr
5th St
Country Club Rd
Sandberg Rd
Pe
l
ic
an
L
a
Fal c on D r
Fenning Ave
Walnut St
Oak Ridge Dr
Oriole La
Club View Rd
Broadway St
Hillcrest Rd
E River St
Headman La
M
ill Tr
a
i
l
L
a
Falcon Ave NE
Wright StBenton St
Elwo
od Rd
Ramsey St
6th St
River Mill Dr
Wildwood Way
Hilltop Dr
Mill Run Rd
O a k V ie w L a
Far
mstead Ave
Martin Dr
4th St E
3rd St E
Red Roc
k La
Gillard Ave NE
Maple St
Fallon Dr
Willow St
View La E
Grey Stone Ave
Marvin Elwood Rd
Fieldcrest Cir
Fairw
ay
Dr
Jason Ave NE
Vine St
M e a d o w L a
Jerry Liefert Dr
Praire Rd
Starling Dr
Palm St
Unknown o
r No
Streetname
Fallon Ave
Golf Course Rd
Falcon Ave
Kevin Longley Dr
Craig La
Re
d
O
a
k La
Front St
5th St W
Thomas Park Dr
Locust St
M ock i n gb i rd L a
W 3rd St
Ea
stw
ood
Cir
Briar O aks Blvd
F
a
r
m
s
t
e
a
d
D
r
Henipin St
Ei
d
e
r
L
a
Dayton St
Oak La
River Forest Dr
Meadow Oak Ave
Kampa Cir
O
a
k
R
i
d
g
e
C
i
r
M il l Ct
Rive r R idge La
Garrison Ave
Oakview Ct
Dundas
Cir
Kenneth La
Otter Creek Rd
Minnesota St
Eagle Cir
Crocus La
Meadow Oak La
Stone Ridge Dr
Chestnut St
1 2 0 t h St N E
Darrow Ave NE
Diamond Dr
Pebble Brook Dr
Widg
eo
n La
Washington St
Bunker Cir
Homestead Dr
Thomas Cir
E
n
d
i
c
o
tt
T
r
Center Cir
Oak View Cir
Sandtrap Cir
Country Cir
Cheyen Ct
Old Territoral Rd
Tanager Cir
Hillcrest Cir
Osprey C t
Acorn Cir
Balboul Cir
S
w
allo
w
C
ir
Riv e rsid e Cir
Meadow Oak Ct
Matthew Cir
E Oak Dr
St o n e R id g e C ir
Oakwood Dr
Meadow Oak Ave NE County Hwy 75
Hart Blvd
Marv
in Rd
Marvin Rd
Wright St
90th St NE
Cedar St
Minnesota St
City of MonticelloOfficial Zoning Map
:
1 inch = 2,500 feet
Date: 5/1/2014
Legend
BASE ZONING DISTRICTS
Residential Districts
-- Low Residential Densities
-- Medium Residential Densities
-- High Residential Densities
Business Districts
Industrial Districts
OTHER
Water
A-O
R-A
R-1
T-N
R-2
R-PUD
R-3
M-H
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
CCD
IBC
I-1
I-2
Mississippi Wild, Scenic & Rec Overlay District
OVERLAY DISTRICTS
Performance Based Overlay District
!
!!
!
!!
Special Use Overlay District
!
!!
!
!!
Freeway Bonus Sign District
!"b$
?¾A@
92 n d S t N e
9 1 s t S t N e
State Highway 25 S
Rive
r
F
orest D r Ne
F
e
n
n
i
n
g
A
v
e
N
e
G o l f C o u r s e R d
Matthew Cir
6th St W
Alpine
Dr
Heron Ct
Willow St
Elm St
Bu
n
ke
r
Cir
I
n
n
s
b
r
o
o
k
C
t
Chestnut St
S
w
a
l
l
o
w
C
i
r
99th S t N e
P
e
l
i
c
a
n
L
n
A l p i n e C t
B
is
on
AveFarmstead Ct
Deer Cir
T
a
n
a
g
e
r
C
i
r
Elk
A
v
e
F
o
x
S
t
Eakern A
ve
P
a
r
k
P
lace
Dr
Crocus
Cir
WoodcrestCt
Moun t Curv e Blvd
4th St W
M c k e n n a C t
G
a
tew a t erDr
Maple St
Oa k r i d g e D r
8 9 t h StNe
Gi
lla
rd
A
ve
M i l l C t N e
Vine St
C
o
u
nt
r
y
A
v
e
Otterc
r
e
e
k
R
d
Ba d g er C i r
Endic
o
t
t
T
r
l
R i v e r S t W
C o u n t r y C i r
Woodla
n
d
C
t
T
a
l
o
n
C
t
T
r
o
y
M
a
r
q
u
e
t
t
e
Dr
R edf o rd Ln
Field
c
r
e
s
tCir
H
a
u
g
A
veNe
8 6 t h S t N e
Eisele
Ave
Ne
E
i
d
e
r
L
n
Bakk en St
9 3 r d St N e
N
i
c
h
o
l
a
s
C
i
r
8 2 n d S t N e
Or
c
ha
r
d
C
i
r
E
H
a
w
t
h
o
r
n
e
P
l
S
D u n d a s R d
S
a
n
d
T
r
a
p
C
i
r
Chelsea Rd W
Deeg a n C t
M e a d o w Oak A v e N e
O r i o l e Ln
W
i
d
g
e
o
n
L
n
D e e r S t
W i n d e m e r e C t
O a k l e a f C t
Oakview
C
i
r
P r a i r i e R d
Harvest Ct
M
i
l
l
Trail L n N e
D i a m o n d D r
P a r k D r
Prescott Dr
Linn St
Sum
mit
Ct
B a d g e r S t
Walnut St
Hart Blvd
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
S
t
9 2 n d S t N e
StateHighway25Ne
Sandber
g
R
d
1 0 2 n d S t N e
5thStW
M
e
a
d
o
w
O
a
k
D
r
River St E
Walnut St S
3rd St E
Locust St
Hennepin St
Ramsey St
Wright St
River St W FrontSt
3rd St W
S c h o o l B l v d
C h e l s e a R d
Palm St
G
o
l
denP
on d Ln
New St
D
u
n
d
a
s
C
i
r
WashingtonSt
O v e rlo ok
Ln
Brentwood
Dr
83 r d St N e
I n n s b r o o k D r
7 t h S t E
T e r r i toria
l
R
d
9 0 t h S t N e
Gi
lla
rd
A
v
e
N
e
I
c
k
l
e
r
A
v
e
N
e
V
ineLn
OakviewCt
CraigLn
KennethLn
T
ro
y
Ma
rquett e L n
S a v a n n a h A v e
B
e
a
r
A
v
e
Brighton
Av
e
N
e
Oakwood Dr E
M e a d owOak
Ln
Ne
8 5 t h S t N e
EbersoleA
v
e
H
a
ls
e
y A
ve
N
e
S t a r l i n g D r
4th St E
K a mp
a
Cir
B r i a r O a kes
B
l
v
d
Halsey Ave Ne
GoodrichDrNe
PinehurstCt
CahillAveNe
Mallard L n
G
r
a
y
s
t
o
n
e
A
v
e
9 0 t h S t N e
7 7 t h S t N e
Ea
g
l
e
C
t
Id
e
Ave N
e
H o m estead D r
9
6thSt N e
OakRi
d
g
e
C
i
r
Dalton
W
ay
97th St Ne
J
erry L i e f e r t D r
OrchardLn
S
t
o
ne r idg e L
n
8 7 t h S t N e
G
a
rvey
C
t
Kevin Longley Dr
H
a
m
l
i
ne
A
ve
N
e
River vi e w D r N e
1 2 3 r d S t N e
Ibson
AveNe
AetnaAve
N
e
D
a
rlin
gto
n
A
v
e
Ne
Giffor
t
A
v
e
N
e
D
altonCt Dalto n A v e Ne
H i l l t op Dr
PrivateDr
Pine St
8 7 t h S t Ne
E
a
s
t
w
o
o
dCi r N e
R
e
d
Oa k Ln N e
A f ton
A
v
e
Ne
Hayw a r d CtS
MarvinElwood
R
d
Hay w a r d Ct N
Sandy Ln
M o c kin
g
b
i
r
d
L
n
F a l l on
D
r
Ha
rr
in
gt
on
A
ve
Ne
88 t h S t N e
CrocusLn
E a g l e R i d geLn
PrairieCreekLn
R e dR
o
c
k
L
n
Farmstea
d
A
ve
River Mill Dr N e
Edmonson Ave Ne
C l u b V i e w Dr
W o o d s i d e D r
Oa k v i e w L n
M
e
ri
dian
Ave
N
Daver
n
Av
e
N
e
Da
rr
ow
A
v
e
N
e
9 4 t h S t Ne
Hig hland W ay
W
i
l
dwoo
d
Wa y
7 9 t h S t N e
C o u n t y R o a d 3 7 N e
84t h S t Ne
Oakri
d
g
e
D
r
N
F
a
l
l
o
n
A
ve
Ne
W eston
D
r
M a r t i n Dr
97th St Ne
Fairhi
l
l
L
n
M
a
r
v
i
n
R
d
Hed
m
a
n
Ln
Spru
c
e
Dr
1 0 1 s t S t N e
T h o m a s P a r k D r
E a s t O a k D
r
107th St Ne
F a l c o n A v e
DeeganAve
119th St Ne
H illcr e s t Rd
C o u n t y R o a d 3 9 NeA
b
e
r
t
A
v
e
N
e
CedarSt
8 4 t h S t N e
Gilbert
A
v
e
N
e
80 t h S t N e
WbI94ToPineSt
C a m e r o n A v e N e
1 0 2nd S t Ne
Dalton A v e N e
1
1
0th S t Ne
E
a
k
e
r
n
Cir Ne
9 5 t h S t N e
H
all A v e Ne
Goo
d
r
i
c
h
Ave
Ne
116 t h S t N e
E Broadway St
P i n e S t T o E b I94
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
A
v
e
N
e
C o u n t y R o a d 3 9 N e
C a m e r o n A v e N e
Eb I94 ToPine
St
Aetna
Av e N e
MillR u n Rd
Mississippi Dr Ne
Pine St T o W b I 9 4
AcaciaAveN
e
Ja
b
e
r
A
v
e
N
e
F e n n i n g A ve Ne To E b I 9 4
7th St
W
ChelseaRd
H
a
mil t o n A veNe
8 5 t h S t N e
Ga
r
r
i
s
o
n
A
v
e
N
e
W b I94T
o
F
e
n
ningAve Ne
1 2 0 t h S t N e
12 7 t h S t N e
Brad d ock Ave
Ne
7 5 t h S t N e
1 0 0 t h S t N e
County Road 75 Ne
8 0 t h S t N e
WBroadway St
D
a
v
i
d
s
o
n
A
v
e
Ne
Jason Ave Ne
8 5 t h S t N e
A
c
a
c
i
a
A
v
e
Ne
H
a
r
d
i
n
g
A
ve
Ne
B
ria
r
w
o
o
d
A
v
e
N
e
County Road 75
I
f
f
e
rt
A
v
e
N
e
Interstate94
1 inch = 1,500 feet
Floodway
Fl ood Fr inge
500-Year Floodplain
DNR Protected Waters
Wild and Scenic Boundary
Shoreland Setback
DNR Watercourse
City Boundary
²
Date: 2/12/2014