Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-10-03 Planning Commission Agenda PacketCorcoran Planning Commission Agenda October 3, 2024 - 7:00 pm 1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Agenda Approval 4.Open Forum – Public Comment Opportunity 5. Minutes a. Minutes – September 5, 2024, Meeting* 6.New Business a.Public Hearing. 3019 Addition Preliminary Plat, Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment (City File 23-027). i.Staff Report ii.Open Public Hearing iii.Close Public Hearing iv.Commission Discussion & Recommendation 7. Reports/Information a.Other Business b.Planning Project Update* c.City Council Report* – Council Liaison Vehrenkamp 8.Commissioner Liaison Calendar Suggested City Council Meetings 10/10/2024 10/24/2024 11/14/2024 11/25/2024 12/16/2024 01/09/2025 Lind Yang Brummond Hargeaves Kozicky Lind 9. Adjournment HYBRID MEETING OPTION AVAILABLE The public is invited to attend the regular Planning Commission meetings at City Hall. Meeting Via Telephone/Other Electronic Means Call-in Instructions: +1 305 224 1968 US Enter Meeting ID: 847 1826 9472 Video Link and Instructions: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/8471826 9472 Or visit http://www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 847 1826 9472 *Please note in-person comments will be taken at the scheduled meeting where noted. Comments received via email to the City Planner (dklingbeil@corcoranmn.gov) or via public comment cards will also be accepted. All email and public comment cards must be received by the 4PM of the day before the meeting. For more information on options to provide public comment visit: Agenda Item 5a. Corcoran Planning Commission Minutes September 5, 2024 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran Planning Commission met on September 5, 2024, in Corcoran, Minnesota. All five Planning Commissioners were present in the Council Chambers. Members of the public were able to participate in-person and monitor the meeting through electronic means using the audio and video conferencing platform Zoom. Present: Commissioners Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind were present at the start of the meeting. Also present: Community Development Director Davis McKeown, Planner Klingbeil, and Council Liaison Vehrenkamp. Absent: Commissioners Kozicky and Yang. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval Motion made by Lind, seconded by Brummond, to approve the agenda for the September 5, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). 4. Open Forum (none) 5. Minutes Motion made by Lind, seconded by Brummond, to approve the August 1, 2024, Planning Commission Minutes. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). 6. New Business – Public Comment Opportunity a. Public Hearing. Domino’s Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance. (City File No. 24-027) i. Planner Klingbeil presented the Staff Report. ii. Public Hearing 1. Marilyn Nyquist, 20139 78th Place, had concerns regarding the light and noise pollution from vehicles in the drive-through and the size of the proposed wall sign. 2. Andy Rasmussen, 19235 Bridle Path, had questions regarding additional screening for the reduced setback variances, and expressed a desire to minimize the size of the proposed wall signs. Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Hargreaves, to close the public hearing. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). iii. Commission Discussion & Recommendation – Commission discussion included a response from the applicant regarding the reduced size of wall signs if granted the variance and shifting landscaping to accommodate concerns from nearby residents. The Commission provided questions to the applicant related to the clarification that in-house delivery services will be offered at this location; complying with the glare standards; clarification that this site does not have to comply with Town Center and Downtown Core design standards; addition of a sidewalk to connect to a future trail along County Road 10; expected hours of operation; minimum distance for access points from the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50; vinyl siding as a proposed use; clarification of the height of freestanding light fixtures; acknowledgement of a typographical error in the staff report; expectations for stacking; consideration of installing a picnic table for outdoor dining; reducing the number of parking stalls to comply with the width standards. The Commission discussion continued with concerns of confusing drive- through traffic with traffic on the County Roads; desire to install a round-about at the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50; overall traffic concerns in this area; concerns for larger vehicles fitting within the reduced parking width; internal traffic flow; and future access points for Corcoran Farms Business Park onto County Road 50. Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Hargreaves, to recommend approval of the Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for Domino’s. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). The Commission discussion continued with adding conditions to the variance requests which included shifting landscaping to screen the property from the Rush Creek Reserve development; hesitation for shifting landscaping creating less screening elsewhere; placing a picnic table in a grassy area rather than installing more concrete; concerns of potential public safety impacts for late night activity near the City Park; preference to discourage customers from loitering on-site; parking stalls used by delivery drivers; clarification of the vinyl siding location; concerns regarding the condition of the vinyl siding in the long-term; and adding a condition of approval to the setback variance to provide a graphic vinyl wrap around the outdoor cooler. Motion made by Hargreaves, seconded by Brummond, to recommend approval the variance requests with the added condition that a vinyl wrap be installed over vinyl siding and additional screening be provided toward the north corner of the lot along County Road 10. for Domino’s with the condition that additional screening be provided in the north corner of the property in the form of landscaping. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). b. Public Hearing. Slabaugh Preliminary Plat and Variance (City File No. 23-029) i. Staff Report – Staff Report was presented by Community Development Director Davis McKeown. ii. Public Hearing 1. Patrick Gillespie, 9945 Ebert Road, discussed the transaction to sell a portion of his property to Gideon Slabaugh, future improvements to Ebert Road, and better layout for both parcels. 2. Gideon Slabaugh, 9925 Ebert Road, discussed a house fire on the property, previous requests made to the council, squaring off his property and the added flexibility to construct accessory structures on the property. Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Lind, to close the Public Hearing. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). iii. Commission Discussion & Recommendation – Commission discussion included a clarification for the subdivision requirements for access to improved roads; and recognition of the steps taken by the applicant to satisfy the request. Motion made by Brummond. seconded by Lind, to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Slabaugh Addition. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). 7. Reports/Information a. Other Business – None. b. Planning Project Update* - None. c. City Council Report* – None. 8. Commissioner Liaison Calendar 9. Suggested City Council Meetings 9/12/2024 9/26/2024 10/10/2024 10/24/2024 11/14/2024 11/25/2024 Kozicky Brummond Lind Yang Brummond Hargreaves 10. Adjournment Motion made by Lind, seconded by Hargreaves, to adjourn the September 5, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. Voting Aye: Brummond, Hargreaves, and Lind. (Motion passed 3:0). The meeting adjourned at 8:19 pm. Page 1 of 14 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 6a. Planning Commission Meeting: October 3, 2024 Prepared By: Kendra Lindahl, AICP Topic: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat for “3019 Addition” (PID 07-119-23-14- 0003) (City File No. 23-027) Action Required: Decision Review Deadline: December 31, 2024 1. Request The applicant, Craig Scherber & Associates, Inc., is requesting approval of the following: a. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reclassify a portion of the property from Rural/Ag Residential to Rural/Service Commercial b. Rezone a portion of the property from Rural Residential to Rural Commercial and from Transitional Rural Commercial to Rural Commercial c. Preliminary plat to create four residential lots and 15 commercial lots. 2. Background On October 17, 2023, Scherber and Associates submitted an application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat for “3019 Addition” (PID 07-119-23-14-0003). The 66-acre property is currently guided Rural/Service Commercial on the west and Rural/Ag Residential on east. The property is zoned Transitional Rural Commercial on the west and Rural Residential on the east. The property has seven development rights. The application was deemed incomplete and did not become complete until May 20, 2024 after numerous items (including Hennepin County preliminary approval of the septic sites) were submitted. Staff notes that this application was inconsistent with our City development policy which recommends a pre-application meeting with staff and a concept plan review prior to submittal of a formal application. This process would have allowed the applicant to discuss the development rights program with the Council prior to submittal of a formal application and provide the information required for the feasibility before completing development application. Page 2 of 14 On January 24, 2024, the applicant submitted a concept plan and a request for Council review. The applicant asked the City to pause review of the formal development application while the concept plan was being reviewed (because the development application was incomplete, the statutory review period had not yet started). The City Council reviewed the application on February 8th and provided feedback on the concept. The Council also directed staff to review the development rights program. On March 14, 2024, the Council adopted an interim ordinance prohibiting development applications in the Rural Commercial and Transitional Rural Commercial districts to Page 3 of 14 allow the City time to study the development density and intensity within the districts and discuss amended standards within the Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan. After review of numerous options for potential standards, the City determined to retain continued application of the development rights map standard. The City updated the Zoning Ordinance on August 22, 2024 to further clarify the development rights language in the City Code and repealed the interim ordinance on that date, which allows this application to proceed. 3. Context Zoning and Land Use The western two-thirds of the property is guided Rural Service/Commercial and zoned Transitional Rural Commercial (TRC). The eastern third of the site is guided Rural/Ag Residential and zoned Rural Residential (RR). The site is located outside of the 2040 Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Surrounding Properties The surrounding properties to the north and east are guided Rural/Ag Residential and zoned rural residential. Properties to the east and south are guided Rural/Ag Residential and Rural Service/Commercial. The properties to the south are zoned Transitional Commercial Rural, Rural Commercial and Rural Residential. Properties to the east are zoned Transitional Rural Commercial and Rural Residential. Natural Characteristics of the Site The 2040 Comprehensive Plan Natural Resources Inventory Areas Map identifies no natural resources on the subject property. Properties abutting the site to the east and northeast are identified as high quality natural communities. A small portion of the site on the east is in the Shoreland Overlay District. 4. Analysis Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and City Code requirements, as well as City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report, the detailed comments are included in the attached engineering memo and the approval conditions require compliance with the memo. A. Level of Discretion in City Decision-Making The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a comprehensive plan amendment. The comprehensive use plan is the city’s long-range planning tool that indicates what type of development should occur on all land within the City. In other words, it is the City’s plan for how it wants to direct future development Page 4 of 14 and growth. The City Council may guide property as it deems necessary to protect and promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community. The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a rezoning application. The proposed zoning for a property must be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. If the proposed zoning is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the City must deny the rezoning application. The Zoning Ordinance and Map are the enforcement tools used to implement the goals and standards set in the Comprehensive Plan. The City’s discretion in approving a preliminary plat is limited to whether the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the City’s subdivision and zoning ordinance and the conditions of preliminary plat approval. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the final plat. B. Consistency with the Ordinance Standards Development Rights The 66.37-acre site has seven development rights according to the development rights map. The proposed development of 19 lots (15 commercial and four residential lots) exceeds the number of development rights for the property. Corcoran uses a development rights program as a method of managing development density in rural areas where municipal services are not planned and in Metropolitan Urban Service Areas (MUSA) where municipal services are planned but have not yet been provided. Section 1040.030, Subd. 7 (RR District) of the Zoning Ordinance regulates development density and “identifies the maximum number of residential or non-residential lots that may be developed” (italics added). The development rights program allows one development right for each 10 acres of land. Section 1040.090, Subd. 7 (CR District) of the Zoning Ordinance says: “Development Rights. This Section identifies the maximum number of non- residential lots that may be developed. The development rights program is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses. Development right were calculated based on the total lot area and rounded to the nearest whole number. Development rights shall be recorded on the official City of Corcoran “Development Rights Map” on file at City Hall. A. Landowners shall be permitted one development right for each 10 acres of land. B. No lot or outlots shall be allowed to be created without development rights.” Section 1070.070 (Development Rights) of the Zoning Ordinance says: Page 5 of 14 “Subd. 1. Purpose. The Development Rights Map reflects the number of development rights remaining on properties zoned Urban Reserve, Rural Residential, Rural Commercial and Transitional Rural Commercial. It is intended to show the maximum number of residential and non-residential lots that may be developed per individual property. Subd. 2. Non-transferable. Development rights cannot be transferred, except as allowed by Section 940.050, Subd. 1(8)(5) as part of an Open Space & Preservation Plat. Development rights can be reassigned as part of a lot consolidation, lot line adjustment or subdivision application. Maintenance. The number of development rights shown on the map shall be revised to reflect the number of remaining development rights on property following subdivision of the land or paving of the adjacent street. It shall be the duty of the Zoning Administrator to maintain the map as required. Appeals. Should an objection to the number of development rights remaining on a particular property arise, the property owner may file an appeal to be heard by the City Council. All appeals should be submitted in writing to the Zoning Administrator and should state the calculation error or provide evidence of a record keeping error justifying the objection. The Council may decide the matter at any regularly scheduled meeting. A property owner may only file a second appeal for the same property if the justification has changed.” The Zoning Ordinance shows seven development rights on this property. The developer would be allowed to create a total of seven lots, not the 19 lots proposed. The subdivision does not comply with the development right standards in the Zoning Ordinance. Comprehensive Plan Amendment The applicant has not provided an exhibit with the exact acreage of the proposed change to the land use designation, but staff assumes the land use boundary runs up the centerline of the right-of-way of Street A. The applicant is proposing to adjust the portion of the site guided Rural/Ag Residential to be approximately 15.4 acres in area (through a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning). Landowners are permitted one development right for each 10 acres of land, rounded to the nearest whole number. This would permit the applicant to develop two residential lots based on the proposed Rural/Ag Residential area of 15.4 acres. The remaining property guided Rural Service/Commercial would be permitted five commercial lots, utilizing the five remaining development rights based on the City Code. Figure 1 - Land Use Map Page 6 of 14 The Comprehensive Plan is a living document and when the City finds evidence to support a change to the plan, the City Council has the discretion to make a change. The City should consider the following issues when reviewing a comprehensive plan amendment request:  Evidence submitted by the applicant demonstrating the reason(s) that the plan should be changed, including, but not limited to, whether new information has become available since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted that supports re- examination of the plan, or that existing or proposed development offers new opportunities or constraints that were not previously considered by the plan.  Whether or not the change is needed to allow reasonable development of the site.  The relationship of the proposed amendment to the supply and demand for particular land uses within the city and the immediate vicinity of the site.  A demonstration by the applicant that the proposed amendment has merit beyond the interests of the proponent.  The possible impacts of the amendment on all specific elements of the Comprehensive Plan as may be applicable, including, but not limited to: o Transportation o Sanitary sewer, including existing and proposed sanitary sewer flows as compared to the adopted plan; o Housing, including the extent to which the proposal contributes to the City’s adopted housing goals; o Surface water, including compliance with the City’s goals for water quality as well as water quantity management; o Water supply; o Parks and open space; and  Consideration of the impact of the proposed amendment upon current and future special assessments and utility area charges, future property tax assessments or other fiscal impacts upon the City. This is a policy decision for the City Council. The City should evaluate all of these issues when considering the decision. The development proposal connected to the land use guide plan amendment does not comply with City Code standards and cannot be approved. Page 7 of 14 Rezoning The west portion of the property is zoned Transitional Rural Commercial (TCR) and the eastern portion is zoned Rural Residential. “The Transitional Rural Commercial District (TCR) represents transition areas that have been identified as practical and generally suitable for future development as part of the Rural Commercial District. The purpose of the TCR District is to provide a holding zone until a landowner makes application for development, at which time the City may rezone the affected property to CR, consistent with the land use plan. Residential land uses will be allowed to continue pending future redevelopment consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan.” The applicant is proposing to rezone the TCR property to Rural Commercial (CR) and shift the line between the CR and RR district to align with the proposed land use designations with the boundary on the centerline of the Street A right-of-way. When evaluating a request for rezoning, the City must consider the standards in Section 1070.010, Subd. 2. Specifically: A. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. The City engineer’s memo and the feasibility study identify infrastructure improvements needed to support the requested rezoning. The development proposal connected to the rezoning request does not meet City Code requirements. B. The proposed action meets the purpose and intent of this Ordinance or, in the case of a map amendment, it meets the purpose and intent of the individual district. The Planning Commission must determine whether the proposed rezoning meets the purpose and intent of the district. The zoning change from TCR to CR is anticipated when development is proposed. However, the development proposed by the applicant does not comply with City Code standards and cannot be approved. C. There is adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed action. Figure 2 - zoning map Page 8 of 14 The site would be served by private wells and septics. Hennepin County gave preliminary approval of the septic sites. The site cannot currently support the proposed rezoning. The feasibility study and City engineer’s memo include street improvements that would be required to serve the proposed change in zoning. D. There is an adequate buffer or transition provided between potentially incompatible districts. The proposed change to the boundary of the Rural Residential district is a minor shift to the east. The proposed Street A would be an adequate transition between the RR district and CR district within this development. The CR portion of the would need to provide buffers and transitions to the properties to the north as required by the Zoning Ordinance. Lot Standards The preliminary plat appears to show compliance with the Rural Residential and Rural Commercial districts lot standards, which requires the minimum standards as shown in the table below. However, the applicant indicates that they will not be developing the lots; therefore, a site plan review will be required to be submitted for review and approval prior to approval of a building permit. Rural Residential Rural Commercial Lot Area 2 acres 2.5 acres Minimum Lot Width 200 feet 100 feet Minimum Lot Depth 300 feet 200 feet Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks: Front, From Major Roadways 100 feet 100 feet Front, From all other streets 50 feet 50 feet Front Porch (≤ 120 square feet) 40 feet n/a Side 25 feet 20 feet Rear 25 feet 20 feet Adjacent to Residential n/a 50 feet Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet 35 feet Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage n/a 50% The proposed residential lots range in area from 3.01- to 4.65-acres in size and would comply with the lot dimension and setbacks for the Rural Residential district. If the plat Page 9 of 14 is revised to comply with ordinance requirements regarding the number of development right (lots) allowed, the lots would be even larger. The 15 proposed commercial lots range in size from 2.5- to 4.72-acres in size and would comply with the lot dimensions and setbacks for the Rural Commercial district. However, the 15 proposed commercial lots exceeds the number of commercial lots permitted by the remaining development rights. If the plat is revised to comply with the ordinance requirements regarding the number of development right (lots) allowed, the lots would be even larger. Proposed Uses The proposed residential lots are single family homes and the proposed commercial lots are conceptually shown as office and warehouse uses (i.e. contractors operations). The conceptual buildings are 10,000 square feet in size with 8,000 square feet of warehousing space and 2,000 square feet of office space. There is extremely limited space for outside storage for these types of uses on the small lots shown, particularly once landscaping, septic, well and setback requirements are met. Staff notes that the proposed uses suggested by the applicant and allowed by the Zoning Ordinance are similar to the uses in the historic downtown industrial area. Landowners and the City have noted that those lots are too small to reasonably accommodate current business operations. Those businesses have a limited ability to grow and several struggle to provide adequate parking. While the applicant’s plans appear to comply with the minimum lots, staff believes that they will struggle to find quality users on such constrained lots and we have encouraged the applicant to consider larger lots. If the plat is revised to comply with the development rights standards in the Code, a total of seven lots would be allowed on the property. If the plat was revised to comply with the ordinance standards, the lots would be more than double the proposed size and would address many of staff’s concerns about the feasibility of the commercial lots. Parking Office uses require one space for each 200 square feet of floor area (at a minimum of 8 spaces). Warehousing uses require five spaces plus one space for each two employees on the largest shift. The plan shows 14 parking spaces provided for each lot. Depending on the number of employees for the largest shift for one lot, at least 15 parking spaces would be required for each commercial lot. Staff is concerned that the lots are too small to accommodate parking requirements and protect the primary and secondary septic systems. It is the developer’s responsibility to ensure reasonable development can occur on each lot. The applicant has indicated that he intends to sell vacant lots to end users who would ultimately develop the lots. Eliminating lots to comply with the development rights standards will allow the developer to provide larger lots with more flexible space for future landowners. Page 10 of 14 Utilities The entire site is situated outside the MUSA and will be served with well and septic. The applicant must provide information with the preliminary plat that shows primary and secondary septic sites can fit on each individual lot. It may be challenging to find two viable septic sites per lot and leave adequate space for a commercial structure and required parking stalls. The applicant’s plan shows two septic sites for each lot have received preliminary approval from Hennepin County. Some of the lots show septic sites in the front yard, which historically have been a challenge for landowners as they work to protect both sites from construction impacts. Both septic sites must be protected during and after construction. If the plat is revised to comply with the development rights standards, which allows a total of seven lots, there would be additional options for septic sites that would allow development flexibility. Access The proposed access to the site is from County Road 30 in the southeast corner of the site and provides a street extension (Street A) to the parcel to the north. The applicant’s narrative indicates the proposed access location from County Road 30 has been deemed acceptable by the Hennepin County Highway Department with construction of turn lanes. Residential lots will have access from Street A. Access to the commercial lots is provided by a second street (Street B) and cul-de-sac (Street C), both interior to the site. Street B also provides an extension to the parcel abutting the site to the southwest for future access when the property is redeveloped. The feasibility study requires construction of turn lanes along the CSAH 30 with an eastbound left turn lane and a westbound right turn lane. The right-of-way shall be extended to Rush Creek Drive. Trails and Sidewalks The Parks and Trails plan in the Comprehensive Plan identifies a proposed on-road trail through the site and proposed off-road trail along the east and north property lines. The plan does not show either proposed trail. Plans should be revised to show the approximate location of future trails. The plans are required to provide 20-foot trail easements for both of these trails. The location of the trail on the north side will impact the required landscape buffer. Additionally, the applicant must show how employees and residents would be able to access these trails from the lots. Page 11 of 14 Landscaping The applicant has shown the required landscape buffer on the North and West, additional landscaping on the south for a reduced setback and the base landscape requirements. Provision of the required off-road trail easement on the north would require revisions to the landscape plan. The applicant indicates that landscaping would be installed in the future by individual lot owners. Stormwater The City Engineer’s memo and feasibility study provides detailed comments on stormwater for the plat. A stormwater basin is shown in the east portion of the site to accommodate stormwater for the proposed development. Offsite conveyance needs to be analyzed and improvements may be necessary to mitigate impacts which could require modifications to the stormwater management plan. Offsite improvements would be the financial responsibility of developer. Wetlands The applicant has provided a wetland report that indicates there are no wetlands on the site. Floodplain The site includes a small portion of floodplain along the east property line. As part of a formal submittal, the plans will need to indicate the areas that are considered floodway, flood fringe and general floodplain as defined in Section 1050.030 Subd. 3. Based on the revised boundaries of the districts covering the property, the corresponding standards from Section 1050.030 shall apply. Shoreland The eastern portion of the site is in the shoreland overlay district. The affected residential lots shall be subject to the shoreland ordinance standards. If the plans are revised to comply with the development rights program standards, it would be reduced from four to two residential lots in the shoreland overlay district. Preliminary Plat The preliminary plat does not comply with ordinance standards. The City Code allows a maximum of seven lots on this property not the 19 lots proposed by the developer. Section 930.010, Subd. 4 of the City Code requires the Commission to recommend denial of the preliminary plat if it makes any of the following findings: 1. That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Capital Improvements Program, or other policy or regulation, except as such regulations may be modified within a duly approved planned unit development (PUD). Page 12 of 14 The proposed subdivision is in conflict with Section 1040.030, Subd. 7 (RR District), Section 1040.090, Subd. 7 (CR District) and Section 1070.070 (Development Rights) of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance allows only seven lots on this parcel not the 19 lots proposed. 2. That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the purpose and intent of this Chapter. The proposed subdivision is in conflict with the purpose and intent of this Chapter, which uses the development rights program, which is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses. The development rights program allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The plat shows 19 lots, which is 12 lots more than allowed by the City Code. 3. That the physical characteristics of the site are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. Such physical characteristics may include topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage and retention and other similar characteristics. The development rights programs is designed to preserve the character of the City. The seven development rights allowed on this site are based on physical characteristics desired for rural Corcoran. The plat shows 19 lots where a maximum of seven lots are allowed and is not consistent with the City Code. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the intensity or type of development or use contemplated. The site is not suited for the intensity of development allowed. The development rights program is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses and allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The 19 proposed lots do not comply with the City Code standards. Further, the proposed intensity is likely to negatively affect the orderly development and intended use of the lots within the proposed subdivision. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial and irreversible environmental damage. The design of the subdivision would cause substantial damage by allowing more development than is suited for the site. The development rights Page 13 of 14 program is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses and allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The 19 proposed lots do not comply with the City Code standards. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the public. The design of the subdivision would be detrimental to the general welfare of the public in rural Corcoran by allowing more development than is suited for the site. The development rights program is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses and allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The 19 proposed lots do not comply with the City Code standards. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will conflict with easements on record or with easements established by judgment of a court. N/A 8. That the subdivision is premature as determined by the standards of Section 508 of this Chapter. N/A Summary The applicant has not revised the plans to reflect the seven development rights available to the site. There is no tool available to grant additional development rights. The application does not comply with zoning ordinance standards; therefore, the application must be denied. The applicant submitted a joint applicant for a comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning and preliminary plat; therefore, because the preliminary plat must be denied, and because the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to show that the adopted comprehensive plan land use map should be changed to allow reasonable development of the site, and further because requested rezoning does not meet the standards in Section 1070.010, Subd. 2 of the Zoning Ordinance, the related applications should also be denied. 5. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission move to recommend approval of the draft Resolution Denying the request. Page 14 of 14 Attachments 1. Draft Resolution Denying Request 2. Location Map 3. City Engineer’s Memo dated September 25, 2024 4. Feasibility Study dated April 2024 5. Hennepin County email dated October 26, 2023 6. Applicant Narrative dated October 17, 2023 7. Preliminary Plat and Civil plans dated March 11, 2024 8. Preliminary Parking and Impervious Area Plan dated March 11, 2024 9. Landscape Plan dated March 8, 2024 10. Ghost Plan dated March 11, 2024 11. Land Use Map 12. Zoning Map 13. Parks and Trails Plan 14. Development Rights Map dated May 8, 2024 City of Corcoran xx, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX Page 1 of 4 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION DENYING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR “3019 ADDITION” (PID 07-119-23-14-0003) (CITY FILE NO. 23-027) WHEREAS, Craig Scherber & Associates, Inc. has requested approval of a comprehensive plan amendment, zoning map amendment and preliminary plat to create 19 lots on property legally described as follows: See Attachment A WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called Public Hearing and recommends denial; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the request comprehensive plan amendment, zoning map amendment and preliminary plat to create 19 lots, based on the following findings and conditions: 1. Application received on October 17, 2023 and additional information received on March 13, 2024 and May 20, 2024 include 19 lots where seven lots are permitted. 2. The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to show that the adopted comprehensive plan land use map should be changed to allow reasonable development of the site. 3. The zoning map amendment request does not meet the standards in Section 1070.010, Subd. 2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically: a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be inconsistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. The City engineer’s memo and the feasibility study identify infrastructure improvements needed to support the requested rezoning. The development proposal connected to the rezoning request does not meet City Code requirements. b. The proposed action does not meet the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance or of the individual district. The development proposed by the applicant does not comply with City Code standards and cannot be approved. c. There is not adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed action. The site cannot currently support the proposed rezoning. The feasibility study and City engineer’s memo include street improvements that would be required to serve the proposed change in zoning. City of Corcoran xx, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX Page 2 of 4 4. The preliminary plat does not meet the standards in Section 930.010, Subd. 4 of the City Code. Specifically: a. The proposed subdivision is in conflict with Section 1040.030, Subd. 7 (RR District), Section 1040.090, Subd. 7 (CR District) and Section 1070.070 (Development Rights) of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance allows only seven lots on this parcel, and not the 19 lots proposed. b. The proposed subdivision is in conflict with the purpose and intent of the Subdivision Ordinance, which uses the development rights program, which is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses. The development rights program allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The plat shows 19 lots, which is 12 lots more than allowed by the City Code. c. The development rights programs is designed to preserve the character of the City. The seven development rights allowed on this site are based on physical characteristics desired for rural Corcoran. The plat shows 19 lots where a maximum of seven lots are allowed and is not consistent with the City Code. d. The site is not suited for the intensity of development allowed. The development rights program is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses and allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The 19 proposed lots do not comply with the City Code standards. Further, the proposed intensity is likely to negatively affect the orderly development and intended use of the lots within the proposed subdivision. e. The design of the subdivision would cause substantial damage by allowing more development than is suited for the site. The development rights program is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses and allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The 19 proposed lots do not comply with the City Code standards. f. The design of the subdivision would be detrimental to the general welfare of the public in rural Corcoran by allowing more development than is suited for the site. The development rights program is intended to preserve a rural and agricultural environment with active rural commercial businesses and allows a maximum of seven lots on this site. The 19 proposed lots do not comply with the City Code standards. 5. Adequate public facilities and services are not available to accommodate the proposed use, specifically additional street improvements are required to support the use. There is not adequate street infrastructure on County Road 30 to support the project and prevent detrimental impact to the existing use of the surrounding properties. City of Corcoran xx, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX Page 3 of 4 VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this xx day of October 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jay Tobin – City Administrator City of Corcoran xx, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX Page 4 of 4 Attachment A Legal Description THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, EXCEPT THE SOUTH 761.52 FEET OF Th'£ WEST 629.18 FEET OF SECTION SEVEN (7), TOWNSHIP ONE HUNDRED NINETEEN (119) NORTH, RANGE TWENTY- THREE (2J) WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA. Hennepin County Property Map Date: 1/30/2024 Comments: 1 inch = 800 feet PARCEL ID: 0711923140003 OWNER NAME: Craig Scherber & Assoc Inc PARCEL ADDRESS: 52 Address Unassigned,Corcoran MN 00000 PARCEL AREA: 66.37 acres, 2,891,272 sq ft A-T-B: Abstract SALE PRICE: $850,000 SALE DATE: 10/2021 SALE CODE: Warranty Deed ASSESSED 2022, PAYABLE 2023 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non-Homestead MARKET VALUE: $730,000 TAX TOTAL: $12,780.01 ASSESSED 2023, PAYABLE 2024 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non-Homestead MARKET VALUE: $570,900 This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is not suitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2024 Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, Public Works Director From: Kent Torve, PE, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: 3019 Addition Preliminary Plat Review Date: September 25, 2024 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the 3019 Addition site plan by Scherber & Associates with the following documents; a. 3019 Addition Plans by Civil Engineering Site Design, dated 03/11/2024. The plan shows 4 single family units and 15 commercial lots. Comments: General: 1. Comments provided are based on the Plan provided. Additional comments should be anticipated on future submittals that include more details of the development. 2. In addition to engineering related comments per these plans, the proposed plans are subject to the review of planning, zoning, Public Safety, and all other applicable codes and standards of the City of Corcoran, NPDES, ECWMC, Hennepin County, etc. 3. A feasibility study was conducted on the development which reviewed and identified impacts of the development on the transportation, water, sewer and stormwater system. Those impacts should be reviewed and mitigated and the stormwater system shall be designed to incorporate the onsite and offsite impacts as identified in the report. 4. Adjacent development to the west has a current SIPA and is incorporating site improvements into the development. The adjacent grading and stormwater management shall be considered in the design of this development. Plat: 5. The applicant shall show all drainage and utility easements and all platting requirements are met per the City Code. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided per City requirements. 6. Easements should be provided over all infrastructure used for the maintenance, conveyance and treatment of stormwater. 7. Easements should be provided over any/all public infrastructure as applicable. 8. Any existing easements should be provided to the City for review. Vacation of existing easements currently in place requires a City process and should be identified in the project schedule. September 25, 2024 3019 Development Plan Review Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 3 Transportation 9. The Comprehensive Plan identifies a minor collector to run north/south through the site. The location of the north/south roadway is sufficient for this minor collector location as it is located slightly farther east from the intersection of County Road (CR) 19 and CR 30 since there are trees and wetlands which could be impacted if the roadway was aligned with the shared lot line to the south of CR 30. 10. Turn lanes along CR 30 into the proposed development are anticipated to be required by the County. Both an eastbound left turn lane and westbound right turn lane should be anticipated to be required. 11. Temporary cul-de-sacs will be necessary on both Street A and Street B. 12. An 80-foot dedicated Right of Way (ROW) is shown which is anticipated to be sufficient for the rural roadways. 13. ROW dedications are shown for both CR 30 and CR 19 of 70-feet which are intended to be sufficient. Actual ROW dedication requirements will be determined by Hennepin County and have previously typically been 65-feet of half ROW. 14. No trails or sidewalk systems are shown in the plans but may be necessary as required by City. 15. No road connection is shown to the adjacent development to the east. Preserving adequate ROW for the option for future looping or utilities should be provided. 16. All roadways, including drainage systems, draintile and signage shall meet City Standards. Stormwater 17. A stormwater management plan will be required for this development in accordance with City of Corcoran and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Standards. 18. Applicant shall reference the City of Corcoran Stormwater Guidelines for Development Review for standards for stormwater systems and modeling. 19. Wetland delineations for this site have been completed and any impacts will follow WCA protocols. 20. The wetland buffer zones and wetland buffer signage shall be clearly identified and labeled. If existing vegetation is proposed to be used as wetland buffer, these areas shall be reviewed with the City of Corcoran wetland specialist to determine if they are viable candidates. 21. The site discharges generally to the east to Rush Creek. o A large drainage swale conveys water through the site through a drainage ditch from the south to the east of the site. o An existing draintile is believed to drain from west to east across the site and connect to a additional draintile from the south of the site before it ultimately discharges to Rush Creek. o The development shall identify the route and conditions of this draintile flow and its conveyance should be rerouted through the site without adverse impacts. o Applicant shall investigate and document the condition, capacity and elevations of this draintile, including video documentation. 22. Site plans shall identify stormwater maintenance access routes to the ponds and all features of the stormwater management system. 23. All drainage swales shall maintain a minimum of 2% slope and all slopes should be 4:1 or flatter unless approved by the City Engineer. 24. If abstraction is required by ECWMC for the site, the City strongly prefers a NURP pond with filter bench (offset to one side of the pond) be used with an adequate maintenance access. The filter bench design is efficient from land use and requires less future maintenance as compared to other treatment options. September 25, 2024 3019 Development Plan Review Kevin Mattson Page 3 of 3 25. Due to the rural nature of Corcoran conveyance systems, offsite receiving waters will be evaluated to understand any impacts from additional drainage. The development shall be responsible for mitigation of these impacts. o The offsite receiving conveyance system is part of a larger floodplain which is adjacent to infrastructure and structures. o Additional onsite mitigation may be necessary (reduced rates, stilling basins/velocity mitigation, etc.) may be required. Alternatively, offsite mitigation conveyance may be required. 26. A floodplain is present along the very east side of the site. This floodplain elevation shall be defined and the development shall meet all City, watershed and other regulatory floodplain regulations. 27. It is assumed a subregional stormwater system will collect and treat the stormwater from the entire development as individual stormwater treatment systems for each lot would be inefficient within the space provided. Water/Sewer 28. Water and sewer will be provided via well and septic system. 29. The site layout shows the parking lots and layouts being utilized up to the septic systems. Working around and maintaining viable primary and secondary septic sites may compromise some of the usable space within the lots. 30. All septic systems shall be reviewed by and approved by Hennepin County. 31. Wells and septics will need to be reviewed for the regulatory setbacks within the development. From:Ashley Morello To:Dwight Klingbeil Cc:Kevin Mattson; Torve, Kent; Hegland, Steven; mgottschalk; rburns; Natalie Davis; Kendra Lindahl, AICP; Clare Riley Subject:RE: [External] Distribution - 3019 Addition, Pre-Plat, Rezone, Comp Plan Amendment (City File Number 23-027) Date:Thursday, October 26, 2023 8:14:53 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image003.png RE_ _External_ Corcoran property -- Concept C 2021-12-15.msg State Use Deed Doc No 5393810.pdf Dwight, Thank you for sharing. County staff had the opportunity to review. We appreciate that this sitealigns with the previous correspondence and comments. I’ve attached that previouscorrespondence for your convenience. We accept the access location, and appreciate the inclusion of turn lanes as previously discussed. Also appreciate the ROW shown as 70’ half. Regarding the exception parcel, I appreciate the ghost plat showing that any access will be cul de sac’d and connected internally. I will iterate in the event that this parcel is redeveloped, the two driveways on CSAH 30 will need to be closed and no new access will be permitted on 19 or 30. There is an opportunity to connect to the stub at Rush Creek Blvd, this would require modifying the northeastern portion of the site. We advocate connecting these developments internally to support a strong local network. With the presence of the regional trail on CSAH 19, we recommend considering pedestrian connections to the trail. This could include trail along CSAH 30 (we don’t have any near term plans for trail, but see the benefit), or internally. The plans could include a trail on the east side, near the drainage pond, which would create a safe connection to the CSAH 19 trail for this development, as well as the existing development to the east. There is forfeited parcel just east of this project (PID 0811923230012). Looking at the state use deed (attached), it can be used for trail purposes. Has city staff considered any options with this parcel as part of this development? We can discuss further if you’d like. Since this is a preliminary plat, we’d like to provide a formal comment letter for your and ourrecords. We can typically provide this in a couple of weeks. CAUTION: This email was sent from outside of Hennepin County. Unless you recognize the sender and know the content, do not click links or open attachments. Ashley Morello she/herTransportation Planning Office: 612-596-0359ashley.morello@hennepin.us | hennepin.us From: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 12:20 PM To: Kevin Mattson <kmattson@corcoranmn.gov>; Torve, Kent <kent.torve@stantec.com>; Hegland, Steven <steven.hegland@stantec.com>; Ashley Morello <Ashley.Morello@hennepin.us>; mgottschalk <mgottschalk@corcoranmn.gov>; rburns <rburns@corcoranmn.gov> Cc: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov>; Kendra Lindahl <klindahl@landform.net> Subject: [External] Distribution - 3019 Addition, Pre-Plat, Rezone, Comp Plan Amendment (City File Number 23-027) Hi all, Craig Scherber submitted the following materials for a preliminary plat, rezoning, and comprehensive plan for "3019 Addition" at PID 07-119-23-14-0003. We would appreciate all comments to be returned by November 27th. Thank you, Dwight Klingbeil Planning Technician Direct: 763-338-9290 Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly permanently delete this message from your computer system. Revised 12/18/20 Please attach a brief description of your project/reason for your request. Project Narrative: The existing 66 acre property has current comprehensive plan land use of Rural Service/Commercial (west 1,640 ft) and Rural/Ag Residential (east 990 ft), and is currently zoned TCR (west 1,640 ft) and RR (east 990 ft). We are applying for a comprehensive plan amendment to shift the boundary location between the two land uses approximately 490 ft to the east to align with a proposed north-south collector street. The location of the proposed north-south collector street has been determined appropriate to accommodate future street extension to the south and future street extensions to the north. The proposed north-south collector street intersection location with CSAH 30 has been deemed acceptable by Hennepin County Highway Department. We are applying for rezoning from TCR to CR (west portion) similar to adjacent properties. We are also applying for adjustment of the boundary location between the CR (west portion) and RR (east portion) to align with the proposed north-south collector street, constant with the requested comprehensive plan amendment noted above. We are applying for Preliminary Plat review for proposed subdivision and development of Rural Commercial lots on the west portion of the property, and Rural Residential lots on the east portion of the property. The project proposes 15 CR compliant lots and 4 RR compliant lots. All lots will have private well and septic systems on each lot. Access to all lots would be by new public streets internal to the project. No lots will have direct access to CSAH 30 or direct access to CSAH 19. New public streets are extended to property boundaries at locations appropriate for future extension to adjacent properties. Public street access to the development is proposed from CSAH 30 with left and right turn lanes constructed as required by Hennepin County Highway Department. The developer will subdivide, construct drainage improvements, and construct public streets per city standards. The developer will not build houses, commercial buildings or site improvements on each lot. Lots will be sold to end users. End users will obtain site plan and building permits for construction of buildings and site improvements on each lot. Landscape improvements will be installed by end users on each lot. Landscape design will satisfy base landscape requirements and buffer yard requirements where applicable. No impacts are proposed to adjacent properties. Access for the development will be direct from County Road 30. Buffer yard landscape requirements will provide appropriate screening to adjoining properties. Minimal impacts to utilities, parks, and natural environment are proposed by the project. Municipal utility services are not available, all lots will provide private well/septic utility services. The project will pay required park fees to accommodate additional park needs resulting from the project. Proposed stormwater management features address natural environment stormwater related concerns. Schedule for development construction is Spring 2024 provided city approvals are obtained. 3019 Addition Feasibility Study April 2024 Prepared for: City of Corcoran, MN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. One Carlson Pkwy Suite 100 Plymouth, MN 55447 Project Number: 193806190 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Table of Contents April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 i Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1.1 2.0 TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................................... 2.1 2.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS ................................................... 2.1 2.2 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................ 2.1 2.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................. 2.1 2.4 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ............................................................................................... 2.2 2.5 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 2.3 2.6 ROADWAY SYSTEM ................................................................................................... 2.5 2.7 FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 2.6 3.0 SEWER AND WATER ................................................................................................. 3.1 3.1 SEWER ........................................................................................................................ 3.1 3.2 WATER ........................................................................................................................ 3.1 3.3 FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 3.2 4.0 WATER RESOURCES ................................................................................................. 4.3 4.1 REGULATORY OVERVIEW ......................................................................................... 4.3 4.2 WATERSHED SETTING, CONVEYANCE AND FLOODPLAIN .................................... 4.3 4.3 FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 4.5 5.0 FUNDING RESPONSIBILITY/INFRASTRUCTURE APPROACH ................................ 5.1 5.1 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 5.1 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 6.1 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Project ......................................................... 2.2 Table 2: Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................................. 2.3 Table 3: Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................................. 2.3 Table 4: Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results ...................................................... 2.4 Table 5: Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results ...................................................... 2.4 Table 6: Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results ...................................................... 2.4 APPENDICES Appendix A Development Plans Appendix B Stormwater Guidelines for Development 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Introduction April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 1.1 1.0 Introduction Scherber Associates is proposing the 3019 Addition development which is a combination of rural residential and rural commercial development, northeast of the intersection of County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 30 and CSAH 19 on PID 0711923140003. Scherber Associates are proposing four rural residential lots and 15 rural commercial lots on the approximately 66-acre parcel. The proposed development plans are included as Appendix A which includes the parking and impervious plan as well as the proposed development plan. The Feasibility Study is the basis for understanding the impacts on public infrastructure by the proposed development. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 2.1 2.0 Transportation 2.1 Proposed Development Characteristics For purpose of the traffic impact analysis, the uses of the proposed development are summarized below. The concept plan provided by for the development identified that each of the commercial lots consisted of a 10,000-sf building in which 2,000-sf of the building is office and 8,000-sf of the building is warehouse. The remainder of the lots will be used for outdoor storage and parking. The proposed development conditions used for traffic generation is assumed to consist of the following uses: · 30,000-sf of office · 120,000-sf of warehouse · 4 single family dwelling units One access point will be provided on CSAH 30 approximately 2,200 feet east of CSAH 19. The development is expected to be complete by 2029. 2.2 Background This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: · CSAH 19/CSAH 30 · CSAH 30/development access (future only) 2.3 Existing Conditions The proposed project site is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is bounded by CSAH 30 on the south, CSAH 19 on the west, agricultural land to the north, and existing rural residential use on the east. To the Southwest of the development, a contractor storage facility is currently being constructed. Existing conditions near the proposed project location are described below. CSAH 19/CSAH 30 - This three-way intersection is controlled with a stop sign on the westbound approach. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane and one right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one through lane and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn lane and one through lane. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 2.2 2.4 Traffic Forecasts To adequately assess the impacts of the proposed project at its buildout, the development, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2029. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: · 2024 Existing. Traffic volumes collected in October 2022 by Hennepin County were increased by 3.1 percent per year to determine 2024 Existing volumes. The 3.1 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on historic growth on CSAH 19 and CSAH 30. · 2029 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 3.1 percent per year to determine 2029 No-Build volumes. The 3.1 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on historic growth on CSAH 19 and CSAH 30. · 2029 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2029 No-Build volumes to determine 2029 Build volumes. The expected new development trips were calculated based on data presented in Trip Generation, Eleventh Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. These calculations represent total trips that will be generated by the proposed development. The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Project Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Office 30,000 SF 40 6 46 7 36 43 325 Warehouse 120,000 SF 16 4 20 6 16 22 205 Single Family Dwelling Units 4 DU 1 2 3 2 2 4 38 Totals 57 12 69 15 54 69 568 Notes: SF=square feet, DU=dwelling units Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are described below: · 70 percent to/from the east on CSAH 30 · 15 percent to/from the south on CSAH 19 · 15 percent to/from the north on CSAH 19 Development trips from Table 1 were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant peak hour volumes are shown in Tables 2 and 3. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 2.3 Table 2: Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes CSAH 19/CSAH 30 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2024 Existing - - - 121 - 41 - 115 271 202 452 - 2029 No-Build - - - 141 - 48 - 134 316 235 527 - 2029 Build - - - 143 - 50 - 134 325 244 527 - CSAH 30/access EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2024 Existing - 473 - - 162 - - - - - - - 2029 No-Build - 551 - - 189 - - - - - - - 2029 Build 18 551 - - 189 39 - - - 8 - 4 Table 3: Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes CSAH 19/CSAH 30 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2024 Existing - - - 227 - 189 - 406 178 118 166 - 2029 No-Build - - - 264 - 220 - 473 207 137 193 - 2029 Build - - - 272 - 228 - 473 209 139 193 - CSAH 30/access EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2024 Existing - 296 - - 416 - - - - - - - 2029 No-Build - 345 - - 485 - - - - - - - 2029 Build 4 345 - - 485 11 - - - 38 - 16 2.5 Traffic Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. In accordance with Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) guidelines, this analysis used the LOS D/E boundary as an indicator of acceptable traffic operations. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: · Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. · Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. · Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 2.4 · Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. · Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. · Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. The LOS results for the study intersections are presented below. 2024 Existing Table 4: Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS CSAH 19/CSAH 30 WB stop A/F B/E Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, the intersection operates at LOS A and the westbound left turn operates at LOS F. All other movements operate at LOS A. During the p.m. peak hour, the intersection operates at LOS B and the westbound left turn operates at LOS E. All other movements operate at LOS B or better. 2029 No-Build Table 5: Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS CSAH 19/CSAH 30 WB stop C/F D/F Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, the intersection operates at LOS C and the westbound left turn operates at LOS F. All other movements operate at LOS A. During the p.m. peak hour, the intersection operates at LOS D and the westbound left turn operates at LOS F. All other movements operate at LOS C or better. 2029 Build Table 6: Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS CSAH 19/CSAH 30 WB stop D/F D/F CSAH 30/access SB stop A/B A/C Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 2.5 During the a.m. peak hour, the CSAH 19/CSAH 30 intersection operates at LOS D and the westbound left turn operates at LOS F. All other movements operate at LOS A. The CSAH 30/access intersection operates at LOS A and all movements operate at LOS B or better. During the p.m. peak hour, the CSAH 19/CSAH 30 intersection operates at LOS D and the westbound left turn operates at LOS F. All other movements operate at LOS C or better. The CSAH 30/access intersection operates at LOS A and all movements operate at LOS C or better. CSAH 19/CSAH 30 Intersection Operations As shown above, the westbound left turn operates at LOS F during all scenarios except the 2024 p.m. peak hour, when it operates at LOS E. As volumes increase on CSAH 19 and CSAH 30, the westbound left turn delays will continue to increase. Traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on delays at this intersection and does not cause any movements to operate at unacceptable levels of service. This intersection should be monitored by Hennepin County to determine if changes to the intersection control are needed, whether or not the proposed development occurs. 2.6 Roadway System In addition to the traffic analysis provided above, there are several items related to the transportation system which are shown on the site plan provided for the 3019 Addition project which should be considered. The Comprehensive Plan identifies a minor collector to run north/south through the site. The location of the north/south roadway is sufficient for this minor collector location as it is located slightly farther from the intersection of CSAH 19 and CSAH 30 which is a major intersection and also there are trees and wetlands which could be impacted if the roadway was aligned with the shared lot line to the south of CSAH 30. Where the roadway stub is provided to the north, it appears that the roadway stub location is not centered along the shared lot line. Given the parcel to the east appears to be wooded and indicates the potential for wetlands, staggering the roadway to the west is most likely appropriate for the stub location. To the east of the development is stubbed right of way from the Oak Hollow development. Currently, the development is not proposing a roadway stub. However, right of way should be provided with this development to allow for future roadway, trail, or utility connections. At the development entrance to CSAH 30, both southbound right and left turn lanes should be expected for the City street. The site plan provided for the development shows a proposed 70-foot half right of way for CSAH 30 and an 80-foot right of way for the internal city streets. Both are reasonable based on similar projects. At the time of platting, the City may review easements to ensure utilities can be installed throughout the development in the future, should they become available. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 2.6 2.7 Findings · The proposed development is expected to generate 69 trips during the a.m. peak hour, 69 trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 568 trips daily. · Based on the traffic forecasts and operations analysis for the development and adjacent significant intersection (CSAH 19/CSAH 30), the following mitigation measures are recommended: o CSAH 19/CSAH 30  No improvements required to accommodate the proposed development. This intersection should be monitored by Hennepin County to determine if changes to the intersection control are needed, whether or not the proposed development occurs. o CSAH 30/access  Construct turn lanes along the CSAH 30 with an eastbound left turn lane and a westbound right turn lane. o ROW shall be extended to Rush Creek Drive. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Sewer and Water April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 3.1 3.0 Sewer and Water The development is not within the MUSA and utilities will be provided via private well and septic systems. Right of way and easement widths should be reviewed at the time of preliminary plat to identify potential corridors for public utilities when infrastructure is available, and the Council formally directs the connections. 3.1 Sewer Rural developments typically utilize installation of an individual subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) for each parcel. Given the typically clayey soils in the area, these systems would utilize septic tank(s), with treated effluent being pumped to mound systems for further treatment/infiltration. Hennepin County is the governing authority for permitting and tracking the installation, operation, maintenance, and enforcement of all SSTSs in Corcoran. Existing ground cannot be disturbed once approved for septic. This can provide site challenges for a viable grading plan. . A second potential option would be to install a community wastewater system, which would utilize one larger area for the infiltration area (mounds), rather than the smaller individual mound systems located at each lot, as currently shown. The developer would need to ensure that a suitable area that is large enough in size as determined by soil testing is included in the development design. This would also require working out a cost sharing agreement amongst the various lots for system installation and for long-term operation and maintenance. The County would govern this approach and if system is large enough the MPCA would be involved. 3.2 Water Rural developments Corcoran typically include smaller diameter wells (typically 4-inch), completed in glacial till that are located at depths of 100 to 200 feet based on site specific conditions and business demand. The developer is proposing smaller sized buildings which should be reviewed prior to building permit by the building official to determine if fire protection is necessary. If necessary, the developer will need to install fire protection systems in accordance with public safety requirements, as determined by the City’s designated Fire Marshal. This may require installation of water storage tank that would serve as a reservoir to supply a building’s fire suppression system. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Sewer and Water April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 3.2 3.3 Findings Sewer · Individual SSTS systems are shown for each parcel. These can propose challenges and possible easement and setback conflicts since no grading is allowed on approved septic sites. · An alternative approach is a community system located on site and would require HOA management, adequate funding, and permitting. Water · Individual wells are proposed and would require MDH permitting and typically the depth is based on site specific conditions and building demand. Easement/ROW for Utilities · The development should provide adequate right of way to ensure utilities can be installed to service the parcels in the future, should they become available. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Water Resources April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 4.3 4.0 Water Resources 4.1 Regulatory Overview Stormwater management regulations in the proposed project area would be guided or directed by Elm Creek Water Management Commission’s Local Surface Water Management Plan (Local Plan), the City Stormwater Guidelines, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and MS4 requirements. Each of these documents has a larger regulatory context: · The Local Plan reflects the goals, policies, and rules of the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission’s Third Generation Watershed Management Plan. · The SWPPP is a requirement of the City’s stormwater permit, also known as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. The MS4 permit is issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) which was reissued in October of 2021. · City guidelines lay out the required modeling parameters, preferred BMPs and some construction materials. City approval is required prior to application for the WMO approval process. A copy of the City Stormwater Guidelines for Development is included in Appendix B. Further City review occurs with construction plan approval process. Wetlands · Wetlands may be present within and adjacent to the proposed development. The formal WCA process will need to be followed for any proposed impacts and Corcoran is the LGU. 4.2 Watershed Setting, Conveyance and Floodplain On site stormwater is manageable for the site and will be subject to City Stormwater Guidelines, wetland regulations, and Elm Creek Watershed approval. Drainage/Conveyance · The project will cause significant changes to the hydrology of the area, via land cover changes to impervious, daylighting of rural tiles and urban stormwater BMP’s that discharge offsite to a rural stream system and floodplain. o Projects that discharge to existing natural or rural system have typically been required to review, analyze, and potentially mitigate impacts to the downstream rural system until the next significant water body that can assimilate the drainage and volume from the project’s land use changes. o This project will require an analysis of the downstream systems to investigate in-stream capability to convey stormwater for existing and proposed conditions. The system shall be reviewed with stormwater modeling programs approved by the City to calculate and 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Water Resources April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 4.4 understand impacts to the erodibility of downstream elements and identify any changes in shear stress from existing and proposed discharge events.  Offsite improvements for mitigation of conveyance would be financial responsibility of Developer.  City may consider reduced onsite discharge rates to potentially review if lowering the discharge rates (i.e reducing the 100-year event to a 10-year rate if shown to protect the natural conveyance). These changes would alter the proposed stormwater plan. Adjacent Drainage Conveyance Systems The design plans provided to the city show stormwater modifications to an adjacent property to the southwest. If the 3019 Addition is proposing modifications to the stormwater BMPs of offsite properties, those improvements would need to be incorporated into the 3019 development plans, approvals and permitting. Throughout the development are several draintile lines which convey stormwater from offsite properties to the north, west and south. The development shall ensure that the draintile lines aren’t impacted from the proposed work by either protecting the corridors and placing them in easements or rerouting the drainage through a new conveyance system. This has previously been done by rerouting the draintile flow through separate dedicated stormwater pipes to bypass BMP’s. A significant drainage swale is present within the site which routes runoff from a significant area south of CSAH 30 northeast across the development to the Rush Creek channel. The development shall identify and model the drainage area to the south of the development and convey this runoff through the site. Floodplain A small area in the southeast corner of the development is adjacent to and mapped as the FEMA floodplain. The development shall review the mapped floodplain and shall identify any floodplain present within the site. If impacts to the floodplain are proposed, the Developer shall follow all regulatory requirements related to fill and or excavation within the floodplain. 3019 ADDITION CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Water Resources April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 4.5 4.3 Findings Stormwater is manageable for the site and regulated by City and the ECWMC. · Offsite conveyance needs to be analyzed and improvements may be necessary to mitigate impacts which could require modifications to the stormwater management plan. Offsite improvements would be financial responsibility of developer. · The stormwater management plan for the 3019 Addition is showing altered stormwater BMPs for the development to the southwest from what is approved by the City for that development. If incorporating offsite BMPs, this development shall be responsible for all approvals, permitting and construction of those BMPs if part of the stormwater system. · Conveyance of offsite surface drainage and draintile flow shall be incorporated into the development stormwater management plan. · Developer shall identify existing floodplain within the development and follow all regulatory requirements if impacts are proposed. · Developer shall incorporate feasibility study into the stormwater management plan. These updates could have an impact on the lot count and/or layout. · A stormwater area charge may be adopted by the City prior to final platting and this development may be subject to costs. 3019 CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Funding Responsibility/Infrastructure Approach April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 5.1 5.0 Funding Responsibility/Infrastructure Approach 5.1 Summary The funding responsibility of the development necessary for infrastructure and to mitigate impacts typically follow the approach of: · On-site infrastructure is designed, funded and constructed by the developer. · Offsite improvements are typically designed and constructed as a City project but are the financial responsibility of the developer. · A stormwater area charge may be adopted by the City prior to final platting and this development may be subject to costs. The financial obligations of the development will be further detailed as the project moves forward and culminates in final cost responsibility in the Developer Agreement. 3019 CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Conclusions and Recommendations April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 6.1 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The following conclusions items are feasible and necessary to manage the impacts of the development. These improvements are consistent with similar requirements for other developments in Corcoran and have shown to be necessary for managing the additional growth. Transportation · The proposed development is expected to generate 69 trips during the a.m. peak hour, 69 trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 568 trips daily. · Based on the traffic forecasts and operations analysis for the development and adjacent significant intersection (CSAH 19/CSAH 30), the following mitigation measures are recommended: o CSAH 19/CSAH 30  No improvements required to accommodate the proposed development. This intersection should be monitored by Hennepin County to determine if changes to the intersection control are needed, whether or not the proposed development occurs. o CSAH 30/access  Construct turn lanes along the CSAH 30 with an eastbound left turn lane and a westbound right turn lane. o ROW shall be extended to Rush Creek Drive. Sewer and Water Sewer · Individual SSTS systems are shown for each parcel. These can propose challenges and possible easement and setback conflicts since no grading is allowed on approved septic sites. · An alternative approach is a community system located on site and would require HOA management, adequate funding, and permitting. Water · Individual wells are proposed and would require MDH permitting and typically the depth is based on site specific conditions and building demand. Easement/ROW for Utilities · The development should provide adequate right of way to ensure utilities can be installed to service the parcels in the future, should they become available. 3019 CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Conclusions and Recommendations April 2024 Project Number: 193806190 6.2 Stormwater Stormwater is manageable for the site and regulated by City and the ECWMC. · Offsite conveyance needs to be analyzed and improvements may be necessary to mitigate impacts which could require modifications to the stormwater management plan. Offsite improvements would be financial responsibility of developer. · The stormwater management plan for the 3019 Addition is showing altered stormwater BMPs for the development to the southwest from what is approved by the City for that development. If incorporating offsite BMPs, this development shall be responsible for all approvals, permitting and construction of those BMPs if part of the stormwater system. · Conveyance of offsite surface drainage and draintile flow shall be incorporated into the development stormwater management plan. · Developer shall identify existing floodplain within the development and follow all regulatory requirements if impacts are proposed. · Developer shall incorporate feasibility study into the stormwater management plan. These updates could have an impact on the lot count and/or layout. · A stormwater area charge may be adopted by the City prior to final platting and this development may be subject to costs. APPENDIX A Development Plans CONCEPT GHOST PLAT CON C E P T G H O S T P L A T PROJECT LOCATION SURVEY DATA 1/1 LEGEND: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES CONCEPTUAL CR ZONE BUILDING USES AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS CONCEPTUAL CR ZONE IMPERVIOUS AREA PROJECT LOCATION SITE MINNESOTA 3019 ADDITION RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CORCORAN, MN CITY OF CORCORAN, MNHENNEPIN COUNTY SITE SITE SITE INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES PROJECT LOCATION SURVEY DATAEXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION SITE DATA: CR ZONE SETBACKS: CR ZONE MIN. LOT REQUIREMENTS INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES LEGEND:RR ZONE SETBACKS: RR ZONE MIN. LOT REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGEND:SURVEY DATA INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES TYPICAL HOUSE PAD 80x100 TYPICAL COMMERCIAL PAD 100x100 LEGEND: INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES SURVEY DATA APPENDIX B Stormwater Guidelines for Development Stormwater Guidelines for Development March 2019 Issue Cities changing from rural to urban development are challenged by the additional stormwater generated due to construction of impervious surfaces, along with the offsite infrastructure, or lack thereof, to manage effectively. To standardize the modeling and review process, the guidelines below were created for efficiency. Note: A watershed approval is required per Elm Creek WMO rules, which also reviews flow rates, water quality and volume management. Modeling Watershed Information · Provide an aerial photo of the development that includes the overall watershed and subwatershed boundaries · Provide a summary of the acreage to each discharge point leaving the site. Any increase (or decrease) shall be identified. · Show any floodplain adjacent to project or within the project · Show downstream water bodies and flow paths o Downstream flow paths and water bodies typically need to have elevations, inverts, and condition identified. Subwatersheds A HydroCAD model (typically used) has inputs that can vary by user. To minimize resubmittals, review time and effort, the following data shall be utilized. · Electronic model shall be submitted · Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) shall be lowered one category due to the mass grading and compaction of the soils. For example, an existing B soil, shall be modeled as a proposed C soil (unless it remains undisturbed) · Wetlands, filtration basins, and ponds shall be modeled at CN of 98 · Identify peak rates for storm events and proposed shall be equal or less than existing rates. o Note: There are certain conditions where at City’s discretion the off-site conditions require a reduction in flow rate from existing rates. · SWMM (i.e. EPA-, XP-, or PC-) models can be submitted for review, however these increase review time. Model Setup for Outlet Control Structures, NWLs and Infiltration · The model’s flow control structures (OCS, culverts, etc.) shall match the construction plan information. During the plan and model review both may be modified and revised · Individual detail plates are required for each OCS, and individual plates shall have inverts identified · A pond or wetland NWL (and model starting elevation) shall be set at the constructed outlet control elevation. o No live storage shall be utilized below the controlling OCS elevation. o No live storage shall be used for filtration shelves on ponds below controlling OCS elevation · If a pond or wetland has an NWL (wet surface), infiltration shall not be used in flood routing. · If a pond has filtration BMP causing drawdown below the NWL, this drawdown elevation shall not be used as the NWL for flood routing. (Filtration has a slower release time and during wet periods is not available as live storage). Construction Plans Catch Basins · Street drainage shall be sufficient to manage the 10-year event · Typical a CB inlet capacity is 2 to 2.5 CFS, and CBs shall be spaced accordingly · Three inches (0.25 feet) of head on a CB will inundate a street centerline (2% slope). · Spacing is 200 to 250 feet using longitudinal street dimensions of 40 feet from road centerline to half the house footprint (assumes rear half of house drains to rear yard). Dimensions equal 10,000 SF. · CBs may be required on both sides of ped ramps to capture flows Natural Drainage Features · Waterbodies receiving urban drainage (wetlands, ditches, gullies) may need to have OCS installed, erosion protection, or reduced flow rates to allow the feature to function over the long term due to more consistent flows from increased impervious via development · Offsite work may be necessary and City will assist with coordination, easements, etc. HWLs and EOFs · The freeboard requirements are: o Low Opening is a minimum of two feet above the HWL o Low Opening is a minimum of two feet above the EOF · EOFs shall be accurately shown and as builts are required. The highest point shall be the EOF (for example top of curb) since this is the controlling elevation o In certain instances, channel calculations of the swale may be required to show the EOF has capacity to manage estimated flow · Overland EOFs are preferred, however if a second pipe serves as an EOF then modeling will include a 100-year event using the second pipe (EOF) as the only outlet (primary outlet plugged). Rear Yards · Rear yards or swales less than 2% shall have draintile. Typically, every two to three lots will require rear yard CBs. Sump Connections · Houses adjoining a wetland or pond do not need individual sump connection · Others will have access to rear yard stormsewer. Offsite Impacts Adjacent Parcels · City will review adjacent parcels (downstream and upstream) for impacts from volume, point discharge, etc. and may require off site improvements. City will assist in coordination of any off site work. · Off site water quality improvement projects may be determined by the City for assistance with compliance with City’s TMDL approach of implementing improvements upon development. · FEMA modifications may be necessary due to development and implemented by City. PROJECT LOCATION SITE MINNESOTA 3019 ADDITION RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CORCORAN, MN CITY OF CORCORAN, MNHENNEPIN COUNTY SITE SITE SITE INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES PROJECT LOCATION SURVEY DATAEXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION SITE DATA: CR ZONE SETBACKS: CR ZONE MIN. LOT REQUIREMENTS INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES LEGEND:RR ZONE SETBACKS: RR ZONE MIN. LOT REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGEND:SURVEY DATA INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES TYPICAL HOUSE PAD 80x100 TYPICAL COMMERCIAL PAD 100x100 LEGEND: INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES SURVEY DATA INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES HORIZ: 1"=50' VERT: 1"=5' INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES HORIZ: 1"=50' VERT: 1"=5' EROSION CONTROL INSTALLATION SCHEDULE EROSION CONTROL NOTESEROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE VEGETATION GROUND COVER SCHEDULE SWPP NARRATIVE POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES RESPONSIBLE PARTY DESIGN CALCULATIONS SWPPP Designer: Owner: Scherber Associates Contractor: Manager: EROSION CONTROL QUANTITIES: TOTAL SITE DATA: FILTRATION BASIN NOTES INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES PROJECT LOCATION SURVEY DATA EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LEGEND: INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES LEGEND: DEMOLITION NOTES EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES SURVEY DATA INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES INDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES FILTRATION BASIN GENERAL NOTES: POND OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE OCS-1 CONCEPT GHOST PLAT CON C E P T G H O S T P L A T PROJECT LOCATION SURVEY DATA 1/1 LEGEND: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES CONCEPTUAL CR ZONE BUILDING USES AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS CONCEPTUAL CR ZONE IMPERVIOUS AREA LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS: GRAPHIC MATERIAL ROCK MULCH SOD BLUEGRASS PEAT SOD SPECIFICATION 0 50' 100' 200' SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" NORTH TREE PLANTING PLAN: Registration #: Signature: I hereby certify that this plan was prepared byme or under my direct supervision and that I am Registered Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Drawn By: Checked By: Sheet Title: Date: Revision: Project #: Name:Paul Kangas 26017 14165 James Road - Suite 200A Rogers, MN 55374 Phone: 612-237-8355 www.insideoutsidearchitecture.com Sheet Number: COPYRIGHT 2024 © This plan is copyrighted and shall be used only for the project shown and shall not be copied or reproduced without written permission from Inside Outside Architecture, Inc. Project Name: CORCORAN 3019 ADDITION Corcoran, Minnesota 23-015 CITY SUBMITTAL | 03-08-2024 PK PK TREE PLANTINGPLAN L1-1 InsideOAutside rchitecture Inc. GROUNDCOVER SCHEDULE: TREE PLANTING KEY: BASE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: PER THE CITY OF CORCORAN LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE, REQUIRED BASE LANDSCAPE QUANTITIES ARE DETERMINED USING CALCULATIONS OF THE GROSS BUILDING FLOOR AREA OR SITE PERIMETER AT THE FOLLOWING RATIOS: OVERSTORY TREES: GROSS BUILDING AREAS DIVIDED BY 1,000 OR SITE PERIMETER DIVIDED BY 50 (WHICHEVER IS GREATER). SHRUB PLANTINGS: GROSS BUILDING AREAS DIVIDED BY 300 OR SITE PERIMETER DIVIDED BY 30 WHICHEVER IS GREATER. SETBACK FLEXIBILITY LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: SETBACK FLEXIBILITY ON THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY REQUIRES ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING BASED ON THE FRONTAGE AND IS CALCULATED AS FOLLOWS: DECIDUOUS OVERSTORY TREES (1 PER 100 LF) OVERSTORY CONIFEROUS TREES (1 PER 100 LF) DECIDUOUS ORNAMENTAL TREES (2 PER 100 LF) SHRUBS (10 PER 100 LF) BUFFER YARD LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: BUFFER YARD LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AFFECT THE WEST, NORTH, AND EAST SIDES OF THIS PROJECT. ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING BASED ON THE FRONTAGE AND IS CALCULATED AS FOLLOWS:: OVERSTORY TREES (6 PER 100 LF) DECIDUOUS ORNAMENTAL TREES (9 PER 100 LF) SHRUBS (18 PER 100 LF) 1.5" DIA. CRUSHED GRANITE ROCK MULCH COLOR TO MATCH/COMPLIMENT BUILDING BASE LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS NORTHWOOD RED MAPLE Acer rubrum 'Northwood' BOULEVARD LINDEN Tilia americana 'Boulevard' PRINCETON ELM Ulmus americana 'Princeton' SWAMP WHITE OAK Quercus bicolor HACKBERRY Celtis occidentalis BURR OAK Quercus macrocarpa NORTHWOOD MAPLE Acer rubrum 'Northwood'BLACK HILLS SPRUCE Picea glauca densata RIVER BIRCH Betula nigra SHOWY MOUNTAIN ASH Sorbus decora CLUMP SERVICEBERRY Amelanchier x grandiflora 'Aut. Brilliance' PONDEROSA PINE Pinus ponderosa SCOTCH PINE Pinus sylvestris AUSTRIAN PINE Pinus nigra COLORADO SPRUCE Picea pungens QUAKING ASPEN Populus tremuloides PINK SPIRE CRABAPPLE Malus x 'Pink Spire' THORNLESS HAWTHORN Crataegus crus-gali var. inermis JAPANESE TREE-LILAC Syringa reticulata 'Ivory Silk' SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE Malus x 'Spring Snow' 95 42 52 63 20 24 18 15 15 15 15 196 27 42 42 73 55 31 30 0 SPECIES SPECIES SPECIESQTYQTYQTYSYMBOLSYMBOLSYMBOL BUFFER YARD PLANTINGS SETBACK FLEXIBILITY PLANTINGS OVERSTORY TREES Size = 2.5" caliper minimum Cont = Balled & Burlapped ORNAMENTAL TREES Size = 1.5" caliper minimum Cont = 15 Gallon Pot or B&B CONIFEROUS TREES Size = 4-6' height minimum Cont = Balled & Burlapped DECIDUOUS SHRUBS Size = 24" Height Cont = 2 Gallon Pot CONIFEROUS SHRUBS Size = 24" Spread Cont = 5 Gallon Pot MINIMUM PLANTING SIZES TURF SEED MN/DOT SEED MIX #25-131 220 LBS/ACRE SHRUB PLANTING PLAN: Registration #: Signature: I hereby certify that this plan was prepared byme or under my direct supervision and that I am Registered Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Drawn By: Checked By: Sheet Title: Date: Revision: Project #: Name:Paul Kangas 26017 14165 James Road - Suite 200A Rogers, MN 55374 Phone: 612-237-8355 www.insideoutsidearchitecture.com Sheet Number: COPYRIGHT 2024 © This plan is copyrighted and shall be used only for the project shown and shall not be copied or reproduced without written permission from Inside Outside Architecture, Inc. Project Name: CORCORAN 3019 ADDITION Corcoran, Minnesota 23-015 CITY SUBMITTAL | 03-08-2024 PK PK SHRUBPLANTING PLAN L1-2 InsideOAutside rchitecture Inc. COMPACT AMER. CRANBERRYBUSH Viburnum trilobum 'Bailey Compact' FRAGRANT SUMAC Rhus aromatica ARCTIC FIRE RED TWIG DOGWOOD Cornus stolonifera 'Farrow' DWARF BUSH-HONEYSUCKLE Diervilla lonicera ANTHONY WATERER SPIREA Spirea x bumalda 'Anthony Waterer' DAUB'S FROSTED JUNIPER Juniperus chinensis 'Daub's Frosted' WHITE SNOWBERRY Symphoricarpus albus REGENT SERVICEBERRY Amelanchier alnifolia 'Regent' FLAMINGO WILLOW Salix integra 'Flamingo' BASE LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS SPECIES SPECIES SPECIESQTYQTYQTYSYMBOLSYMBOLSYMBOL BUFFER YARD PLANTINGS SETBACK FLEXIBILITY PLANTINGS 245 245 245 24 149 27 154 233 196 SHRUB PLANTING KEY: PERENNIAL PLANTING SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" LOOSEN ROOTS OFPLANT MATERIAL PRIOR MULCH - 3" DEPTH EDGER - SEE SPECS. 12" DEPTH (MIN.) LOAMPLANTING SOIL VARIESSEE PLAN TO PLANTING EDGE VARIES - SEE PLAN 2L1-2 SHRUBS PLACED SO THAT TOP MULCH - 3" DEEP - SEE SPECLANDSCAPE FABRIC - SEE SPEC. PLANTING SOIL - SEE SPEC. SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OFHOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING LOOSEN ROOTS OF ALLCONTAINERIZED PLANTS. EDGE VARIES - REFER TO PLAN REFER TO PLAN18" MIN. SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL EDGING MATERIAL - SEE SPEC. BUILDING WALL (TYP) OF CONTAINER SITS FLUSHWITH PROPOSED GRADE. 1 L1-2 PLANTING DETAILS: GRAPHIC MATERIAL ROCK MULCH SOD BLUEGRASS PEAT SOD SPECIFICATION 0 50' 100' 200' SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" NORTH GROUNDCOVER SCHEDULE: 1.5" DIA. CRUSHED GRANITE ROCK MULCH COLOR TO MATCH/COMPLIMENT BUILDING TURF SEED MN/DOT SEED MIX #25-131 220 LBS/ACRE SEEDING AND SODDING PLAN: Registration #: Signature: I hereby certify that this plan was prepared byme or under my direct supervision and that I am Registered Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Drawn By: Checked By: Sheet Title: Date: Revision: Project #: Name:Paul Kangas 26017 14165 James Road - Suite 200A Rogers, MN 55374 Phone: 612-237-8355 www.insideoutsidearchitecture.com Sheet Number: COPYRIGHT 2024 © This plan is copyrighted and shall be used only for the project shown and shall not be copied or reproduced without written permission from Inside Outside Architecture, Inc. Project Name: CORCORAN 3019 ADDITION Corcoran, Minnesota 23-015 CITY SUBMITTAL | 03-08-2024 PK PK SEEDING & SODDINGPLAN L1-3 InsideOAutside rchitecture Inc. PLANTING NOTES: PLANT SELECTIONS: SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED ONLY IF REQUESTED PRIOR TO BIDDING OF THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AVAILABILITY OF THE SPECIFIED MATERIALS AND INFORM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONCERNS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A BID. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE NURSERY STOCK STANDARDS AS PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN NURSERY AND LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATION (ANLA). UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, DECIDUOUS SHRUBS SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 5 CANES AT THE SPECIFIED SHRUB HEIGHT. ORNAMENTAL TREES SHALL HAVE NO 'V' CROTCHES AND SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 3' ABOVE THE ROOT FLARE. STREET AND BOULEVARD TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 6' ABOVE THE ROOT FLARE. ANY CONIFEROUS TREE PREVIOUSLY PRUNED FOR CHRISTMAS TREE SALES SHALL NOT BE USED. ALL CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL HAVE A FULL, NATURAL FORM CONSISTENT WITH THE SPECIES. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE PLANT SCHEDULE IF ANY DISCREPANCIES IN QUANTITIES EXIST. SPECIFICATIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. STORAGE OF PLANTS ON CONSTRUCTION SITE: PLANTS SHALL NOT BE STORED ON SITE FOR EXTENDED TIME PERIODS. IF PLANTINGS CANNOT BE PLACED IN THE GROUND, AND WELL WATERED THAT SAME DAY, THE PLANTINGS SHALL HAVE MOIST MULCH COVERING THE ROOTS AT ALL TIMES. PLANTING INSTRUCTIONS: ALL PLANTINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE PLANTING DETAILS AS SHOWN IN THESE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. PARTICULAR ATTENTION WILL BE PAID TO OVERSIZING THE PLANTING HOLE AND CREATION OF A WATERING WELL TO ALLOW SOAKING OF THE PLANTING BACKFILL FOR EACH PLANTING. EDGING AND MAINTENANCE STRIPS: BLACK POWDER COATED STEEL EDGER TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SHRUBS AND MAINTENANCE STRIP AREAS. MAINTENANCE STRIPS SHALL HAVE EDGER AND MULCH AS SPECIFIED OR AS INDICATED ON DRAWINGS. MULCHING: A 3" DEPTH OF RIVER ROCK MULCH SHALL BE CLEAN AND FREE OF ANY SIGNIFICANT DIRT, SOIL, OR ORGANIC MATTER THAT WILL PROMOTE WEED GROWTH. HIGH QUALITY GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, WITH EDGES OVERLAPPED AT LEAST 12", SHALL BE PLACED UNDER ALL ROCK MULCH. ALL TREES SHALL HAVE A MULCH RING (MINIMUM 48" DIAMETER) OF 4" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH NONE IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK. STAKING: STAKING OF THE TREES IS OPTIONAL, BUT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECTING ANY TREES THAT FALL OUT OF PLUMB DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD. REMOVAL OF TAGGING: ALL TAGGING AND PLANT LABELS SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER PLANTING. BALLED AND BURLAPPED PLANTINGS SHALL HAVE ANY ROPE REMOVED FROM THE TRUCK AND THE TOP OF THE WIRE CAGE REMOVED FROM THE BALL AFTER PLACEMENT IN THE PLANTING PIT. WARRANTY PERIOD: ALL PLANTING SHALL BE COVERED BY A ONE YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD TO COVER REPLACEMENT OF ANY PLANTINGS THAT HAVE DIED OR ARE SHOWING OBVIOUS SIGNS OF STRESS AT THE WARRANTY INSPECTION. REPLACEMENT OF ANY FAILED PLANTINGS INCLUDES RE-ESTABLISHING CLEAN MULCH AROUND ANY REMOVALS AND OFF-SITE DISPOSAL OF ANY MATERIALS. IRRIGATION: ALL PLANTING AREAS, AND MOWN TURF AREAS, SHALL BE COVERED BY AN AUTOMATIC, UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM WITH PROGRAMMABLE CONTROL STATION, RAIN SENSOR, AND SEPARATE ZONES FOR TURF AND PLANTINGS. SODDING ALL TURF AREAS SHALL BE BLUEGRASS SOD LAID PERPENDICULAR TO ANY SLOPES. STAGGER JOINTS AT LEAST 2' AND STAKE IF NEEDED TO KEEP FROM BEING DISPLACED BY HEAVY RAIN. WARRANTY PERIOD: ALL PLANTING SHALL BE COVERED BY A TWO YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD TO COVER REPLACEMENT OF ANY PLANTINGS THAT HAVE DIED OR ARE SHOWING OBVIOUS SIGNS OF STRESS AT THE WARRANTY INSPECTION. REPLACEMENT OF ANY FAILED PLANTINGS INCLUDES RE-ESTABLISHING CLEAN MULCH AROUND ANY REMOVALS AND OFF-SITE DISPOSAL OF ANY MATERIALS.UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE MUST BE MAINTAIN PLUMB THOUGH THE WARRANTYIS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S DISCRETION. THE TREEAFTER PLANTING. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUTTREES SHALL BE PLUMB IN BOTH DIRECTIONS CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF POOR DRAINAGERATES PRIOR TO PLANTING AND NOTIFYCONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD TEST PERCOLATION PERIOD AND CONFORM WITH A.N.A. GUIDELINES FORSTANDARD LANDSCAPE PRACTICES IS SUSPECTED REMOVE ALL FLAGGING AND LABELING COMPACT MORE THAN NEEDED TO MAINTAINSATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOTINSTALL BACKFILL IN 8-12" DEEP LAYERS & AND DISPOSE FROM SITE PRUNE ANY DAMAGED OR CROSSING BRANCHES PLUMB 2 x ROOT BALL WIDTH 4" DEEP MULCH - NO MULCH IN DIRECT CUT BACK WIRE BASKET AND REMOVE CONTACT WITH TRUNK VERIFY ROOT FLARE ELEVATION AND PLACEAT OR JUST ABOVE SURROUNDING GRADE. BURLAP FROM TOP OF BALL LOAM PLANTING SOIL BACKFILL SHALL FORM WATERING RING AT OUTEREDGE AND BE FILLED WITH WATER AT TIME OF INITIAL PLANTING PRIOR TO MULCHING NATURAL FORMS OTHER THAN LIMITED PRUNING FORFOR THIS PROJECT. TREE SPECIMENS SHOULD HAVECHRISTMAS TREE PRODUCTION CANNOT BE USEDCONIFEROUS TREES GROWN FOR COMMERCIAL HEALTHY GROWTH AND PLANT STRUCTURE. 1 L1-3 UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL SAFETY FLAGGING IF STAKING IS USED TREE WRAP TO FIRST BRANCH SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE MUST BE MAINTAIN PLUMB THOUGH THE WARRANTYIS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S DISCRETION. THE TREEAFTER PLANTING. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUTTREES SHALL BE PLUMB IN BOTH DIRECTIONS DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF POOR DRAINAGERATES PRIOR TO PLANTING AND NOTIFYCONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD TEST PERCOLATION PERIOD AND CONFORM WITH A.N.A. GUIDELINES FORSTANDARD LANDSCAPE PRACTICES IS SUSPECTED REMOVE ALL FLAGGING AND LABELING COMPACT MORE THAN NEEDED TO MAINTAINSATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOTINSTALL BACKFILL IN 8-12" DEEP LAYERS & AND DISPOSE FROM SITE PRUNE ANY DAMAGED OR CROSSING BRANCHES PLUMB 2 x ROOT BALL WIDTH 4" DEEP MULCH - NO MULCH IN DIRECT CUT BACK WIRE BASKET AND REMOVE CONTACT WITH TRUNK VERIFY ROOT FLARE ELEVATION AND PLACEAT OR JUST ABOVE SURROUNDING GRADE. BURLAP FROM TOP OF BALL LOAM PLANTING SOIL BACKFILL SHALL FORM WATERING RING AT OUTEREDGE AND BE FILLED WITH WATER AT TIME OF INITIAL PLANTING PRIOR TO MULCHING 2 L1-3 GRAPHIC MATERIAL ROCK MULCH SOD BLUEGRASS PEAT SOD SPECIFICATION 0 50' 100' 200' SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" NORTH GROUNDCOVER SCHEDULE: TURF SEED 1.5" DIA. CRUSHED GRANITE ROCK MULCH COLOR TO MATCH/COMPLIMENT BUILDING MN/DOT SEED MIX #25-131 220 LBS/ACRE CONC E P T G H O S T P L A T RURA L C O M M E R C I A L ZONI N G CONC E P T G H O S T P L A T RURA L R E S I D E N T I A L ZONI N G COUNTY ROAD NO. 30 C O U N T Y R O A D N O . 1 9 RUSH CREEK BLVD TESSMER ROAD EXIST I N G RURA L R E S I D E N T I A L ZONI N G PROP O S E D RURA L C O M M E R C I A L ZONI N G PROP O S E D RURA L R E S I D E N T I A L ZONI N G MEADOWVIEW DR H E A T H E R L A N E 1/1 LEGEND: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES CR ZONE SETBACKS: CR ZONE MIN. LOT REQUIREMENTS RR ZONE SETBACKS: RR ZONE MIN. LOT REQUIREMENTS Ci t y o f G r e e n f i e l d City of Maple Grove City of Medina City of Rogers Be c h t o l d R d Pion e e r T r l Trail Haven Rd Co u n t y R o a d 1 1 6 County Road 30 Schutte Rd Oakdale Dr County Road 10 Horseshoe Trl Co u n t y R o a d 5 0 Larsen Rd Wi l l o w D r Hunter Rd Co u n t y R o a d 1 9 Homestead Trl Ca i n R d Ro l l i n g H i l l s R d Country Rd Mo h a w k D r Larkin Rd Fo x l i n e D r Strehler Rd Dassel Ln Old S e t tl e r s Rd Stieg R d Ka l k R d Meister Rd Ma p l e H i l l R d 93rd Ave N Tessmer Rd Bl u e B o n n e t D r Jubert Ln 456710 456750 456719 456730 4567116 4567101 4567117 Br o c k t o n L n N 109th Ave N 4567101 ")55 Hackamore Rd MorinLake ScottLake JubertLake GooseLake CookLake R u s h C reek RushCreek South F o r k R u sh Creek SouthFor k R u shCr eek 6/21/2022 6/21/2022 1/25/2026 1/25/2026 1/22/2023 6/21/2022 5/27/2029 1/22/2023 1/22/2023 5/27/2029 12/13/22 4/27/2022 4/27/2022 5/27/2029 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet ± Path: \\MSPFSV02\DesignDepot\Library\Software\GIS\Client\City of Corcoran\City wide maps\2040 Future Land Use.mxd Date: 10/27/2021 Time: 9:57:35 AM User: LPSRemote Rural/Ag Residential Existing Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Mixed Residential High Density Residential Rural Service/Commercial Commercial Mixed Use Business Park Light Industrial Public/Semi-Public Parks/Open Space Agricultural Preserve (Date of Expiration) Open Water Municipal Boundary 2040 MUSA Future MUSA Expansion Area Parcel Boundaries Streams Lake/Open Water Wetlands Map 2-12040 Future Land Use Source:Revised National Wetland Inventory (MN DNR, 2009-2014) ñ ñ ñ [j [j s s s î î î î î ï ï ï 4567116 456719 456750 456730 456730 4567116 456710 456719 456750 456710 Sh a n n o nLa Schutte Rd Ch is h ol m Tr Su n d a n c e R d Ru sh Mea dow L a Will ow D r Larson Rd CSAH 10 H orses h o e B en d D r E C o rc o r a n Tr W C or c o r anT r Fo x V a l le y D r M y s t i q ue Dr H a g e Dr O a k d a l e D r S u nny H i l l La Brand yw i n e R d Woodland Tr Gleason Rd Bl u e B o n n e t D r Mea dow Greek Dr CS A H 1 9 Tessmer Rd Rebecca Park Tr Oakdale Dr H ighBluff La Pio neer Tr CSAH 50 73rdAv e N Meister Rd Homestead Tr Ma p l e H i l l R d Be c h t o l d R d 109th A v e N 97th Ave N Ka l k R d Larkin Rd Horseshoe Tr Ro l l in g H i l l sRd O l d S ettler s R d Stieg Rd Ca i n R d Tr a i l H a v e n R d 97th Ave N 93rd Ave N CR - 1 1 6 CSAH 10 CS A H 1 9 CSAH 50 Strehler Rd CSAH 10 Jubert Lake Scott Lake Cook Lake City Hall Old Public Works Public Works Official Zoning Map 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet City Limit 2040 MUSA ñ Government Building [j Public Park s Golf Course î Church ï Cemetery Zoning Districts: UR: Urban Reserve RR: Rural Residential RSF-1: Single Family Residential 1 RSF-2: Single Family Residential 2 RSF-3: Single Family Residential 3 RMF-1: Medium Density Residential RMF-2: Mixed Residential MP: Manufactured Home Park P-I: Public/Institutional TCR: Transitional Rural Commercial CR: Rural Commercial C-1: Neighborhood Commercial C-2: Community Commercial DMU: Downtown Mixed Use GMU: General Mixed Use BP: Business District I-1: Light Industrial PUD: Planned Unit Development Open Water Shoreland Overlay District Parcels Streams Prepared in July, 2024 ± Path: V:\2277\resource\gis\Corcoran\Pro\zoning_mapping\Zoning Map\Zoning Map.aprx City of Greenfield City of Maple Grove City of Medina City of Rogers Trailhead Morin Lake Scott Lake Jubert Lake Cook Lake 10 50 19 30 Co u n t y R o a d 1 1 6 Oakdale Dr B r i d l e P a t h J e f f r e y L n Abilene Ln Trail L n HuntersRdg County Road 30 H e a t h e r Ln PioneerTrl Trail Haven Rd CountyRoad10 Horseshoe Trl Robert Ln H o r s e s h o e BendDr C o u n t y R o a d 5 0 Larsen Rd GleasonP k w y Willow Dr Hunter Rd Co u n t y R o a d 1 9 ESt Homestead Trl Maple Hill Rd Cain Rd Rolling Hills Rd S u n d a n c e Rd Country Rd Mohawk Dr ElmS t Larkin Rd Foxline Dr Strehler Rd Ca i n Pl 6 5 t h Pl N Dassel Ln Old Se t t le rs Rd County R o a d 1 1 7 StiegRd Be chtold Rd Kalk Rd S c h u t t e R d Meister Rd F o x V a l l e y Dr M y s t i q u e Dr H a g e Dr 93rd Ave N Sc hut t e Pl B r a n d y w i n e R d Chisholm T r l Tessmer Rd HighBluffLn Winc hesterTrl JubertLn R u s h C r e e k RushCreek County Ditc h N u m b e r S i x t e e n Co u n t y Ditch N u mber Three SouthFor k R u s h C r e e k NP NP NP NP NP NP NP ASA ASA ASA ASA OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP Page 1 of 4 Agenda Item 7b. MEMO Meeting Date: October 3, 2024 To: Planning Commission From: Dwight Klingbeil Re: Planning Project Update Projects/comments in blue italics are new. The following is a status summary of active planning projects: 1. Kwik Trip CUP, Lot Line Adjustment, and Site Plan (PID 12-119-23-14-0006; 12-119- 23-14- 0004) (City File 23-006) Kwik Trip Inc. submitted a Site Plan, Lot Line Adjustment and CUP application for the two parcels north of Mama G’s in early 2023. A feasibility study was required to evaluate the infrastructure needs of the project. The feasibility study has been distributed to the applicant. Staff and the applicant team continue to work through requirements for the application to move forward. The application is still incomplete, and the item is not currently scheduled for any upcoming meetings. 2. Commercial and Industrial Development Standards (Citywide) (City File 23-023) The purpose of this zoning ordinance amendment is to address and evaluate the allowed uses and use specific standards within commercial and industrial developments. The Council adopted a work plan at the November 20, 2023, regular meeting, and requested the Planning Commission to provide their initial feedback. The Planning Commission discussed this item at the December 5, 2023, meeting and expressed their desire Commercial and Industrial Development Standards address a number of items such as: specific architectural standards, infrastructure investment incentives, encouragement toward sustainable development practices, proper transitions of intensities and height, the permitted and conditional uses of each zoning type, verbiage, and lighting standards. City Staff prepared a survey for current landowners and lessees to express their opinions on items addressed with this update. Staff mailed the online survey invitation to property owners and tenants whose property is either currently zoned, or guided for Page 2 of 4 Commercial, Industrial, or Mixed-Use. The comment period for this survey closed on January 31, 2024. During the February 8, 2024, City Council meeting, Council directed staff to prioritize Rural Commercial (CR) and Transitional Rural Commercial (TCR) district updates for approval by the end of quarter 2. Staff presented feedback from the Planning Commission and results from the Business Community Survey to the City Council at the April 25, 2024, regular Council meeting for further direction. The City Council and Planning Commission discussed the Commercial and Industrial standards during the May 21, 2024, Joint Work Session. A survey invitation for feedback on Rural Commercial Subdivisions was posted to the City’s media pages and mailed out to properties within 500 feet of CR & TCR parcels. Council discussed the results of this survey during the June 27, 2024, meeting. A public hearing for an ordinance amendment removing self-storage/mini-storage from the CR and I-1 districts was held at the July 2, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. After some discussion, the Planning Commission motioned to recommend approval of this ordinance amendment. Council approved the zoning ordinance amendment, removing self-storage/mini-storage from the CR & I-1 districts at the July 25, 2024, meeting. A public hearing to clarify the use of development rights for subdivision in the UR, RR, CR, and TCR districts was held at the August 1, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission motioned unanimously to recommend approval of the draft ordinance. Council approved the Zoning Ordinance Amendment at the August 22, 2024, meeting. 3. 3019 Addition Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Preliminary Plat (PID 07-119-23-14-0003) (City File 23-027) Craig Scherber & Associates LLC applied for a Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a Rural Residential and Rural Commercial Development on the property at PID 07-119-23-14-0003. The application includes 15 commercial lots and 4 single-family residential lots. The applicant received Council feedback on a concept version of this proposal at the February 8, 2024, meeting. A feasibility study has been completed to evaluate the infrastructure needs of the project. This item is complete for City review and the public hearing has been scheduled for the October 3, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. 4. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park Final Plat & Final PUD (PID 32-119-23-43-0005, 32- 119-23-43-0006, 32-119-23-43-0013)(City File 23-030). Contour Development LLC applied for a Final Plat and a Final PUD at 6210 Pioneer Trail. The application consists of 0 lots and 3 outlots. This application is incomplete for City review and is not currently scheduled for any upcoming meetings. 5. 610 Extension Business Park Concept Plan (PID 12-119-23-23-0001) (City File 24-003). United Properties submitted a Concept Plan application to develop a business park at the Oswald Farm, located at 19510 County Road 30. The narrative provided by the applicant describes the proposed business park to range from 864,000 - 1,017,500 sq ft on the 76.89-acre parcel. The applicant submitted revised plans which indicate two 128,000 sq ft buildings, and two 168,000 sq ft buildings. The applicant received informal feedback from the Council during the May 21, 2024, City Council meeting. Council provided informal feedback during the September 26, 2024, work session. 6. Tonka Auto CUP (PID 26-119-23-12-0004) (City File 24-008). Jake Hautman submitted a Conditional Use Permit application to allow the operation of Page 3 of 4 an auto repair business, Tonka Auto, at 20201 County Road 50. The application is complete for city review and is scheduled for the November 7, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. 7. Corcoran Industrial Northeast (PID 01-119-23-11-0001) (City File 24-010). Hemple Real Estate is seeking Council feedback on conceptual light industrial development at 10585 County Road 101. The plan includes 2 primary industrial buildings ranging from 200,200 to 342,000 sq ft on a 78.85-acre site. The applicant received informal feedback from the Council during the March 28, 2024, Council meeting. This item is not currently scheduled for any upcoming meetings. 8. Heitke Lot Line Adjustment (PID 28-119-23-33-0001 & 28-119-23-34-0001)(City File 24-013). Dan Heitke submitted application materials for a lot line adjustment which would allow his property at 7000 Rolling Hills Road to annex roughly 1.16 acres from Outlot A of Heitke Farm Addition. This item is incomplete for City review and is not currently scheduled for any upcoming meetings. 9. Camp Solberg (PID 08-119-23-31-0004) (City File 24-021). Aaron and Melissa Solberg submitted an application for a preliminary and final plat to create two single-family residential lots on Outlot B of Weinand Woods located at PID 08-119-23-31-0004. This item is incomplete for city review and is not currently scheduled for any upcoming meetings. 10. Kariniemi Orchards Preliminary Plat (PID 11-119-23-11-0012) (City File 24-024). Nathan Kariniemi submitted an application for a preliminary open space & preservation plat to allow for the development of 16 single-family lots at 20400 County Road 30. This item is incomplete and is not currently scheduled for any upcoming meetings. 11. Hope Meadows Final Plat, Final PUD (PID 11-119-23-11-0012) (City File 24-025). JPB Land, LLC. submitted application materials for a Final Plat and a Final Planned Unit Development for the first phase of “Hope Meadows”. For the first phase, the applicant is requesting approval of a Final Plat that would allow the development of 52 rowhome lots and 4 villa lots near the northwest corner of Hunters Ridge and County Road 116. The PUD Amendment was discussed during the August 1st Planning Commission meeting, and was approved during the September 12, 2024, Council meeting. Council approved a right-of-way easement vacation during the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 12. Domino’s Pizza (PID 23-119-23-43-0003, 23-119-23-43-0004) (City File 24-027). Strack Construction, Co. Inc. is seeking approval of a lot consolidation, site plan, CUP, and variance to allow the development of a Domino’s drive-thru/walk-out only store on the former site of the Corcoran Meat Locker and the 10-50 Club. A public hearing was held during the September 5, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. After some discussion, the Commission voted to recommend approval of the site plan, CUP, and variance requests with the conditions that additional screening be provided along County Road 10 and graphic vinyl wrapping be installed around the outdoor cooler. Council approved this item at the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 13. Tavera 7 Final Plat, Final PUD (PID 35-119-23-24-0007) (City File 24-028). Lennar has submitted application materials for Final Plat and Final PUD for Tavera 7th, which would develop 40 twin-homes, 60 villas, and 6 outlots. Council approved this item during the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 14. Slabaugh Plat (PID 10-119-23-24-0014 & 10-119-23-21-0013) (City File 24-029). Page 4 of 4 Gideon Slabaugh submitted application materials for a preliminary plat, final plat, easement vacation, and variance for the property at 9925 Ebert Road. The request would allow the applicant to annex a portion of the neighboring property, 9945 Ebert Road, and square off the two lots. The applicant also requests approval of a variance to allow these properties to replat without upgrading Ebert Road. The public hearing for this item was held during the September 5, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. The commission motioned to recommend approval of the preliminary plat and variance request. Council approved the preliminary plat, final plat, easement vacation, and variance during the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 15. M&J Creekside Vineyard Concept Plan (PID 08-119-23-23-0017 & 08-119-23-23-0018) (City File 24-038). Margaret and John Fernandez are seeking Council feedback on a concept plan for a wine tasting room/private event space on their property at 23020 County Road 30. Council provided informal feedback for this item during the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 16. Upward Acres Final Plat (PID 17-119-23-13-0001) (City File 24-031). Skies Limit LLC. submitted an application for the final plat of Upward Acres, which would allow the development of 6 single-family lots at 22625 County Road 10. City Council approved the preliminary plat and variance for Upward Acres during the June 27, 2024, meeting. Council approved this item during the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 17. Heather Meadows 3rd Addition Preliminary Plat/OS&P (PIDs 05-119-23-31-0001 & 088-119-23- 22-0011) (City File 24-032). Mark and Markus Lee, of ML Unlimited LLC, submitted a final plat application to create 12 single-family lots and 2 outlots at 22901 Oakdale Drive. The Council approved the Variance, CUP, and Preliminary Plat with additional conditions for Heather Meadows during the June 27, 2024, regular meeting. Council approved this item during the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 18. Schuttee/Streeter Rezoning Concept (PID 26-119-23-13-0006) (City File 24-033). Ken Streeter, on behalf of Phil Schuttee, is requesting council feedback on a concept plan that would rezone the property at 20130 Larkin Road from Light Industrial (I-1) to Medium Density Residential. Council provided informal feedback for the applicant during the September 26, 2024, regular meeting. 19. Old Farm Ridge (PID 36-119-23-33-0008) (City File 24-034). Michael Kelly submitted an application for a preliminary plat, final plat, conditional use permit, and variance to plat a single lot from Outlot A of Country Season Estates, located at 6620 County Road 116. The application is under review for completeness and has not been scheduled for any upcoming meetings.