Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2014-04-15 - Parks & Trails Agenda Packet
City of Corcoran Corcoran Parks and Trails Commission Agenda April 15, 2014 - 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval a. Agenda b. Minutes 03/18/2014* 4. Open Forum 5. Presentations 6. Reports/Information a. Active Corcoran Planning Applications* 7. Old/Unfinished Business 8. New Business a. Final PUD Development Plan for U.S. Home corporation (dba Lennar) for a residential development called “Ravinia” at Gleason Road and County Road 101 b. Sports Fundraiser Opportunity* c. Scoreboard Funding Request* 9. Subcommittee & Miscellaneous Reports a. City Council Liaison – Mayor Guenthner b. Athletic Association c. Park Dedication Fund* 10. Other Business 11. Announcements 12. Adjournment *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. This page has intentionally been left blank City of Corcoran Corcoran Parks and Trails Commission Minutes March 18, 2014 - 7:00 PM 3b. The Corcoran Parks and Trails Commission met on March 18, 2014, at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were, Commissioners - Anderson, Tessmer, Nybo, Regan, Meister, Krueger, Strehler, Dale; Student Commissioners Monzo, and Minkoff. Arriving at 7:15 pm – Commissioner Robran Also present were City Administrator Martens, and Council Liaison Mayor Guenthner Commissioner Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval a. Agenda Motion: made by Dale, seconded by Krueger to approve the agenda with removal of items 8b. and 8c. from the agenda to be placed on the April Parks and Trails Commission agenda. Voting Aye: Anderson, Tessmer, Nybo, Regan, Meister, Krueger, Strehler, and Dale (Motion carried 8-0) b. Minutes 01/21/2014 Motion: made by Nybo, seconded by Tessmer to approve the minutes as presented Voting Aye: Anderson, Tessmer, Nybo, Regan, Meister, Krueger, Strehler, and Dale (Motion carried 8-0) 4. Open Forum-None 5. Presentations-None 6. Reports/Information a. Active Corcoran Planning Applications –Informational no action required. 7. Old/Unfinished Business 8. New Business a. PUD Sketch Plan for Peachtree Partners, LLC for 103-acre Schendel property at 20400 County Road 10 (PID 23-119-23-42-0003) (City File 14-005)* - Terry Forbord and Paul Robinson gave a presentation of the sketch plan to the Commission. Chuck Lymangood (8105 County Road 116) presented two images of the proposed development to the Parks and Trails Commission and spoke of the lack of information provided by the applicant regarding loss of park land due to the proposed development. Commission members discussed the proposal in regards to the trail plan, park dedication, transportation and design. No motions were made however the following feedback was given by the Commission: i. The Commission was unsure whether natural areas within the development should be accepted as park and maintained by the City or whether they should be controlled and maintained by a homeowners association. ii. The Commission found the trail plan within the development to be generally acceptable. iii. The Commission agreed that the City Park is not sufficient in size to become an athletic complex and that the future athletic complex should be located on the Roehlke property of which the City has a purchase agreement. iv. The Commission agreed that park dedication in the form of fees is preferred to land acquisition to allow for improvements to the park as well as possible funds to purchase the Roehlke property. City of Corcoran Corcoran Parks and Trails Commission Minutes March 18, 2014 - 7:00 PM 3b. v. The Commission discussed the proposed location of the entrance to the proposed development and asked staff to look into if it could be shifted to the east to minimize the impacts to the City Park. vi. The Commission stated the importance of Meister field and that if the field were to be removed a temporary field would need to be constructed to meet the needs of the athletic association. It was also discussed that it takes two years to establish a field. vii. The Commission stated that if a cul-de-sac was built to serve the existing properties at the County Road 10/County Road 50 intersection trail connections should also be provided. 9. Subcommittee & Miscellaneous Reports a. City Council Liaison – Mayor Guenthner gave update on projects going on in the City. b. Athletic Association –Kevin Dale gave an update on Corcoran Athletic Association and stated registration is predicted to be approximately 250 kids of which there are 12 tee ball teams and three 10U teams. Jill Smith-Arens was thanked for getting information into the spring newsletter. Chad Robran gave an update on the soccer association and provided two checks to the City from the association. c. Park Dedication Fund – The commission reviewed the funds 10. Other Business - none 11. Announcements - none 12. Adjournment - Motion: made by Robran and seconded by Krueger to adjourn meeting. Voting Aye: Anderson, Tessmer, Nybo, Regan, Meister, Krueger, Strehler, Dale, and Robran (Motion carried 9:0) Meeting adjourned at 9:26 pm. MEMORANDUM 105 South Fifth Street, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net DATE March 20, 2014 TO Brad Martens CC City Council, Planning Commission, Parks & Trails Commission FROM Kendra Lindahl, City Planner RE Active Corcoran Planning Applications The following is a summary of project status for current, active projects: 1. Rockford School District Site Plan, Variances and Conditional Use Permit for a Baseball Field at 20400 County Road 50 (PID 23-119-23-34-001) (city file no. 13-023). The Parks Commission reviewed this at their meeting on October 15th and a public hearing was held at the Planning Commission on November 7th. On November 25th the City Council tabled this item to allow the applicant to try to address a number of issues. The applicant has been working with City staff, Peachtree Partners, who is proposing development on the Schendel property to the north, and the watershed to address a number of issues. The review period has been extended to May 1, 2014. 2. Corcoran Mini-Storage Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary PUD Development Plan, Preliminary Plat at 19219 and 19235 County Road 10 (PID 25-119-23-44-0002 and 25-119-23-44-0003) (city file 13-032). A sketch plan was reviewed by the City in August 2013 and comments were provided to the applicant. The applicant has taken those comments and prepared revised plans. This formal application is currently incomplete and the applicant has asked that the City process another round of sketch plan concepts in advance of completing their application submittal. The PUD Sketch Plan (round 2) was reviewed by the Parks and Trails Commission on January 21st, by the Planning Commission on February 6th and by the Council on February 27th. The Council did not support the concept. The applicant still has an active file and will likely submit a written request to withdraw the request and refund any remaining escrow. 3. Maple Hill Estates 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat (PID 24-119-23-43-0016 and 24-119-23- 43-0014) (city file 14-001). A site plan and variance was approved on April 25, 2013 for this project, but it was recently was determined that the new community center should be located on City property. The plat is required to adjust property lines. The preliminary plat was reviewed at a public hearing at the March 6th Planning Commission meeting. The City Council will review the preliminary and final plat on March 27th. 4. Kopperhead Ranch LLC Agriculture Preserve Designation and Initiate Expiration at 20471 Larkin Road (PID 26-119-23-31-0001 and 26-119-23-34-0001) (city file 14-002). Chris and Kristin Smith have requested that two parcels be enrolled in Agriculture Preserve and have also initiated expiration so that they will come out of Agriculture Preserve in 8 years. The property is located in the MUSA, but is not planned to be serviced until after expiration of the Agriculture Preserve designation. The City Council will review the request on March 27th. 5. Lennar Final Plat, Vacation, Development Contract and Final PUD Development Plan for “Ravinia” (City file 14-003). The applications have been submitted, but staff is still reviewing the applications for completeness. The items could be scheduled for April or May Parks Commission, Planning Commission and City Council meetings. Agenda Item ____ Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 6. Peachtree Partners request for PUD Sketch Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Schendel property at 20400 County Road 10 (City file 14-005). The application has a number of very significant Comprehensive Plan issues, including triggering the need for the County Road 10 realignment as shown in Comprehensive Plan and extension of municipal sewer and water to this site. The applicant is asking to reguide the 103-acre property from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential, which requires a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The City Council has informally reviewed this concept at December and January City Council meetings. This was reviewed by Parks Commission on March 18th, Planning Commission public hearing on March 6th and the City Council will review on March 27th. Also, there are a number of projects that have been approved, but are still not filed and closed out: 1. Corcoran Business Park (city file 06-005). The City Council granted a one year extension to the final plat approval, which expired on April 12, 2011. Staff has spoken to the applicant and is still working to close out this project. Notably, we met with the land owner in February and may have a new development application for this site later this year. 2. Park Place Storage After-the-Fact Extension of Approvals (city file no. 10-008). On September 23, 2010, the City Council approved a site plan and conditional use permit amendment for Park Place Storage to construct the 18th and final mini-storage building on that site. The approvals expired on September 23, 2011. The conditions have been met and a building permit was issued in September. The applicant has completed most of the site work with final items to be completed and final inspection this spring. 3. Hope Ministries Conditional Use Permit for Cemetery and Vacation of Drainage & Utility Easement at 19951 Oswald Farm Road (city file 12-002). Hope Ministries has submitted a request for a conditional use permit to allow a cemetery west of the existing church. The application was approved by the City Council on March 22nd and site work had begun. The letter of credit for site improvements has been released but we are holding the escrow pending completion of the approved landscaping. 7. Heinz Second Addition Preliminary and Final Plat at 20801 CR 117 (03-119-23-14-0002) (City file 13-003). A wetland and topographic waiver was approved on January 24th. This item was approved by the City Council action on April 25th. The applicant is working on complying with approval conditions so that they can get the final plat mylar signed and recorded. The applicant has site work to complete and then the escrow can be refunded. 8. Lano Equipment at 23580 Highway 55 Site Plan Amendment for Cold Storage. (31-119-23-34- 0007) (13-006). This item was approved by the City Council on July 11th. The building permit has been issued, but staff has determined that the building was not being built according the approved plans. The Code Enforcement Official is working to resolve the issue and correct the building defects. 9. Ess Addition (city files 05-017, 08-003 and 12-024). The City Council granted an after-the-fact extension for this final plat at their November 29, 2012 meeting and a second extension at the November 25, 2013 meeting. The plat has been recorded and staff is working with the applicant to address any outstanding issues and close out the file/refund the escrow after wetland monuments and lot monuments are installed this spring. 10. Ess Brothers Site Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Amendment for an accessory building at 9350 County Road (PID # 07-119-23-43-0004) (City File No. 13-031) The applicant is requesting approval for a 5,500 square feet detached, accessory building with 20-foot sidewalls. The City Council approved this item on January 23rd. The applicant must now file the resolution at the County and then staff will close out the file and refund any remaining escrow. The applicant may apply for a building permit after the resolution is recorded. MEMORANDUM 2 Finally, there are a few projects that have not yet been started but have been identified as action items or future projects: 1. Sign Ordinance Update. At the April 25th Council meeting, the City reviewed a request for the city to initiate a sign ordinance update. Specifically, they requested that the City review the ordinance standards relating to sign area, sign height and internal illumination and, because this is a city-wide issue, that the ordinance update be completed by the City out of the City funds. The Council discussed the issue and directed staff to bring a proposal back at a later date because the Council felt that this was a significant undertaking that would involve much more than this one issue. We will work with the City Administrator to determine the appropriate meeting to have this considered. 2. Design Guideline Update for Southeast District/Downtown. The Council approved a Landform proposal to update the existing design guidelines for this area. The design guidelines are adopted as part of the Zoning Ordinance and will be enforced as new development is proposed, consequently, the City Council wishes to revisit that planning effort to ensure it is still consistent with the City’s goals. The City Council appointed a subcommittee, but the City Council has decided to delay kickoff as we work through some associated issues as part of some new development plans. We expect to convene this subcommittee later this year. MEMORANDUM 3 This page has intentionally been left blank 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net TO: Corcoran Parks and Trails Commission FROM: Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: April 7, 2014 for the April 15, 2013 Parks and Trails Meeting RE: Final PUD Development Plan for U.S. Home Corporation (dba Lennar) for a residential development called “Ravinia” at Gleason Road and County Road 101 (PID 36-119-23-13-0007, 36-119-23-13-0005, 36-119-23-14-0005, 36-119-23-14-0003, 36- 119-23-14-0006, 36-119-23-43-0001, 36-119-23-41-0002, 36-119-23-41-0003, 36- 119-23-24-0001, 36-119-23-24-0003, 36-119-23-21-0001) (City File 13-025) 1. Application Request Lennar has submitted a request for approval of Final PUD Development Plan for “Ravinia” to allow 426 single family detached homes on 266.57 acres. The City Code only requires final PUD development plan review by the Planning Commission. Typically, the final PUD development plan would not be sent to the Parks and Trails Commission, but due to the scale of the project and issues raised during the review process staff is provided this report for informational purposes. *NOTE: Staff has attached the most relevant files to this packet; however, due to the size of the project not all files could be attached. The full set of plans, including detailed house plans and application materials, is available at City Hall for inspection during regular business hours. 2. CONTEXT Level of City Discretion in Decision-Making The City’s discretion in approving a final PUD development plan is limited to whether or not the proposed plan is in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary PUD development plan. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the final PUD development plan. The City’s discretion in approving a final plat is limited to whether or not 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. Background The City Council approved a Rezoning to PUD (Planned Unit Development), Preliminary PUD Development Plan and Preliminary Plat on December 23, 2013. The approvals were subject to a number of conditions. The developer has been working to address those conditions. Agenda Item: ____ Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 3. Analysis of Request Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with the approved preliminary plans, as well as City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report and the detailed comments are included in the attached engineering memo. Final PUD Development Plan The PUD offers enhanced flexibility to develop the site through the relaxation of most typical zoning district standards. The PUD allows for a greater variety of land uses, construction phasing and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this flexibility the City expects a higher level of design and a more sensitive development than might normally be the case. The final PUD development plan must be reviewed for compliance with the preliminary PUD approvals. Staff finds that the final PUD development plan is consistent with the approved preliminary plans. Parks, Trails and Open Space The preliminary approvals required a number trail easements and dedication of two public parks. Additionally, the developer is proposing a private park that will be constructed in Phase I. The 0.55 net acre site (0.67 gross acres) private park is owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association for their exclusive use. It includes a club house, small parking lot and swimming pool. No public parks are proposed for the area to be developed in phase I; however, future park dedication will include land dedication that exceeds ordinance requirement by approximately 40%. The ordinance requires dedication of 22.74 net acres of park dedication and the applicant is proposing to provide 32.12 net acres of public park. This additional park land dedication is one of the benefits of the PUD. • Public Park 1 in the northwest portion of the site is 23.06 net acres (42.84 gross acres) • Public Park 2 north of Gleason Road in the central portion of the site is 3.57 net acres (5.12 gross acres) • Public trails. The applicant is showing 4.99 net acres (4.99 gross acres) of public easements for off-road trails. Land dedication for park land is consistent with the preliminary approvals, except that the acreage amounts have been refined based on the approved wetland delineation. Land dedication will be provided with each phase of development that includes park land dedication. Staff notes that following City Council approval of the plans, the Hunter Road/Hunter Lane neighborhood submitted a petition voicing two concerns about the approved plans: 1. Removal of a tree barrier for construction of the on-road trail on the south side of the new Gleason (or Ravina) Parkway 2. A trail connection from Ravinia to this neighborhood in the existing 63rd Avenue right-of-way Attached is a summary of the materials presented at the meeting and some follow up correspondence. The meeting provided an opportunity to share factual information, including the Lennar final PUD Development Plan (14-003) 2 April 15, 2014 fact that the tree removal related to construction of Gleason Parkway is needed for the road construction and will be unchanged whether or the trail is constructed. There were also different opinions voiced by residents about the need for these trails within the neighborhood. • The approved plans require both of these trails and any change to the approved plans is a policy decision for the City Council. • Staff continues to recommend construction of the trail on the south side of Gleason Road as shown on the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the construction of the 63rd Avenue trail connection. This is currently a condition of the preliminary approvals. • The Parks and Trails Commission initially recommended construction of these trails and reaffirmed that recommendation earlier this year. Development Phasing The developer plans to develop this project in 9 phases. The developer would like to begin work on Phase I in May 2014. Phase I include 38 lots and 5 outlots. Three of the proposed lots include existing homes that will remain on site for a period of time, but will likely be redeveloped in future phases of the development. Timing will be contingent upon extension of public infrastructure. The phasing plan may be modified at each stage to better correspond with public improvements. Through the PUD process, the City has the legal authority to negotiate a phasing plan with the developer. The City does not have this same authority with standard zoning. The Council approved the phasing plan as part of the preliminary approvals. The phasing schedule is the developer’s best estimate and is subject the change depending on market conditions and infrastructure timing. Final Plat The applicant is requesting approval of a final plat to create 38 lots and 5 outlots (which are planned for future development phases). The final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat. • The final plat is reviewed only by the City Council. The Commissions will not provide a recommendation on the Final Plat. 4. Recommendation This report is provided for informational purposes only and no Parks and Trails Commission action is required. Attachments a. Location Map b. Memo from City Administrator Martens dated April 2, 2014 regarding trail dedication c. Site Graphics dated April 2, 2014 (partial only – full set available at city hall) d. Final Plat Graphics dated April 2, 2014 e. Private Park Plans Lennar final PUD Development Plan (14-003) 3 April 15, 2014 Parcel ID:36-119-23-21-0001 A-T-B:Abstract Owner Name:The Estate Richard J Deziel Market Total:$468,000 Parcel Address: 52 Address Unassigned Corcoran, MN 00000 Tax Total: $7,681.54 (Payable: 2013) Property Type: Sale Price:$1,140,000 Home- stead:Non-Homestead Sale Date:05/2012 Parcel Area: 41.68 acres 1,815,501 sq ft Sale Code:Vacant Land Map Scale: 1'' ≈ 1600 ft. Print Date: 6/6/2013 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 Property Map Page 1of 1Hennepin County GIS -Printable Map 6/6/2013http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/Property/print/default.aspx?C=458538.0516891034,4991317.3... Attachment B Memo from City Administrator Martens dated April 2, 2014 regarding trail dedication CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 – Office 763.420.6056 – Fax E-mail - general@ci.corcoran.mn.us / Web Site - www.ci.corcoran.mn.us MEMO Date: April 1, 2014 To: Kendra Lindahl From: Brad Martens Re: Feedback from March 20, 2014 neighborhood discussion The purpose of this memo is to provide feedback from the March 20, 2014 neighborhood discussion in response to a petition from the Hunter Road/Hunter Lane neighborhood. A meeting was held on March 20, 2014 in which 10 persons attended. Staff presented information related to the proposed development and responded to questions. Most of the discussion revolved around the topic of trees and how the existing buffer would be affected by the development. Staff presented images which showed most trees being in the proposed road bed which requires removal. Staff further stated that the removal of the proposed trail on the south side of the roadway will not improve the buffer. Several individuals emailed comments to staff prior to, and after the meeting which are attached to this memo. Staff also received two phone calls prior to the meeting from individuals that could not attend: • Sally Smith, 6524 Hunter Lane o Stated she was fine either way in regards to the trails, stated however that the buffer between the existing neighborhood and proposed neighborhood is important to maintain. • Lauri Spidahl, 6235 Hunter Road o Stated she was in support of the petition. Attachments: 1. Invitation to neighborhood 2. Staff presentation 3. Email correspondence received prior to and following meeting CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 CO RD 116 ∙ Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 Email: general@ci.corcoran.mn.us Website: www.ci.corcoran.mn.us March 12, 2014 _______________, At the February 13, 2014 City Council meeting a petition was presented to the City Council in regards to trail items related to the proposed Lennar development. The petition included 34 signatures from the Hunter Road/Hunter Lane/63rd Ave N/Elm Ridge Circle neighborhood and a request that the City consider eliminating trails in two locations adjacent to the neighborhood in the proposed development. The Council accepted the petition and suggested a meeting with property owners and staff be set up to further discuss the trail related concerns. A meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, March 20th at from 6:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. to learn more about the proposed development and to share concerns. The meeting will begin with a brief staff presentation and follow with an opportunity for attendees to ask questions and provide comments to staff. Open house to discuss trail issues related to the proposed Lennar development Thursday, March 20, 2014 6:00 p.m. Corcoran City Hall If you have questions prior to the meeting or are unable to attend but would like to provide comments please contact Brad Martens at bmartens@ci.corcoran.mn.us or 763-400-7030. Sincerely, Brad Martens City Administrator CITY OF CORCORAN Trail Discussion Meeting in Response to Petition Reason for the meeting Reason for the meeting •34 signatures representing 25-26 properties •Notes from petition – From Kristin Sharma “a representative of the Hedke Hackamore Estates” –Concern regarding the removal of the natural tree barrier –Concern regarding proposed sidewalk on the south side of Gleason Road –Concern of second trail entrance near 63rd Ave. N creating a loop for people to walk through the neighborhood Reason for the meeting •Notes from petition continued – Currently a quite neighborhood with little vehicle or pedestrian traffic –Natural tree barrier will be removed making neighborhood more accessible to pedestrian traffic as well as subjected to invasive noise and street lights –To combat the noise and light a sound barrier wall is planned to be installed Reason for the meeting •Petition presented to Council on February 13th •Staff directed to staff to meet with property owners in the area to further discuss the trail related concerns Purpose of the meeting •Ensure that the City firmly understands the opinions of the neighborhood •Present information on trail/sidewalk options available to City •Answer questions •Inform you of where the project is and of the next steps in the process Who was invited? Background information •Trail plans created collaboratively –Lennar –Staff –Parks and Trails Commission Background information •Wall barrier clarification Background information •Planning history of neighborhood –Plat review in 1974 –Planned with 80 foot wide right-of-way (ROW) for future thoroughfare along the northerly boundary of the property Background information •Road location Background Information •Trail plan Trail Plan – east of neighborhood Trail Plan – east of neighborhood Options •Take easement and build trail as planned •Take easement and not build trail –Cost becomes City’s if constructed in the future –Continued use as access to adjacent property may be viewed as trespassing •Don’t take easement and don’t build trail Trail Plan – Hunter Road connection Trail Plan – North of neighborhood Options •Take easement and build trail as planned •Take easement and not build trail –Cost becomes City’s if constructed in the future –Continued use as access to adjacent property may be viewed as trespassing •Don’t take easement and don’t build trail Trail Plan – Gleason Road Options •Build trail as planned on both sides of new roadway •Eliminate trail on south side of roadway west of trail connection on north end of Hunter Road What’s the difference •What if we eliminate the trail on south side of roadway west of Hunter Road Cross Section A Cross Section B Next Steps •Hear comments/questions from attendees this weekend •Follow up with questions we cannot answer tonight •Include in packet information during approval process in April Comments/Questions CITY OF CORCORAN Thank you. 1 Brad Martens From:lynn miller <lynnmiller1969@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:49 PM To:Brad Martens Subject:Hedtke's Hackamore Estates Hi Brad To start off, my husband and I have been homeowners in this neighborhood for 19 years and business owners in Corcoran as well. We've been very interested in the possible trails that could potentionly hook up to our neighborhood. Last fall, we were made aware of the new Lennar developement on the north and east side of our neighborhood. As we are all aware of the new changes to our city, we were excited about access to possible walking/biking trails. At this point, we need to "leave" our neighborhood to get to any walk/bike trails. When a petition was introduced by a few of the neighbors, the information that was given was not accurate. If the correct and complete information was given, we would have never signed it. I understand there is a meeting tonight that many of neighbors plan on attending. Due to prior commitments, I may not be able to attend. I am not sure what will be discussed, but I wanted the council to know and take into consideration that many of the neighbors, as well as myself, would like to see the trails join up to our neighborhood. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Thank you for your time Lynn Miller 6230 Elm Ridge Circle (763)478-3200 1 Brad Martens From:Lauri Spidahl <lspidahl@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, March 20, 2014 6:47 AM To:Brad Martens Subject:Petition from Hunter Road/Hunter Lane neighborhood Hi Brad, I thought I would send an email in case you don't have time to call me back. This is regarding the petition from the Hunter Road/Hunter Lane neighborhood. I like the idea of having the one access point on the east cul de sac (end of that road) and would prefer not to have the additional access added from the vacant lot. This allows both neighborhoods access to the other but also allows us to stay a little more indenpendant of the new development. We moved to this neighborhood because it was quiet and further away from the large/busy neighborhoods, so it would be nice to retain some of that. Regarding the removal of trees near the west cul de sac - my preference is to always keep as many of the trees as possible, so I hope they are able to do that. I think it makes more sense in this case to keep the trees instead of building a privacy wall later. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! Lauri Spidahl 612/418-6964 1 Brad Martens From:Alan Schultz <Alan.Schultz@aonbenfield.com> Sent:Friday, March 21, 2014 12:18 PM To:Brad Martens; ktorve@wenck.com Subject:Hunter Petition Brad, please forward to Kendra. Thank you. Brad/Kendra/Kent, Thank you for your presentation last night regarding the Hunter neighborhood petition. After reviewing the material and comments from last night I have a couple thoughts for your consideration. Regarding the proposed trail on the south side of Gleason Road. I asked about a trail crossing at the end the of the Hunter Rd emergency trail to the trail on the north side of Gleason Road. It was mentioned that it is preferred from a safety standpoint that people cross at intersections. It is my concern that people will not cross at an intersection but rather in the middle of the street with no protection of signage of any kind. As an example using the proposed trail maps on page 127 of the 2013‐12‐23_CC_Packet_Lennar.pdf , east of the Hunter emergency trail there is a trail coming down from the north approximately 350’ from where the Hunter emergency trail connects. People are not going to continue walking east to the first intersect to cross the street and walk west back to the trail, based on the scale of the map that would add about 800’ to their walk. I can also see this happening more in the winter as the city has no plan to plow trails so people would cross at the closest point to get to the more traveled north trail. Therefore, I think it would be safer if people where force to cross right away in a designated crossway. From a connectivity stand point, eliminating the trail on the south side of Gleason that runs along the Hunter development does not diminish the connectivity of any future proposed trail at Cty Rd 116 and 66th. That trail can still be connected from the trail on the north side of Gleason Rd. In reviewing both the sketches of cross sections A & B it appears there is an area within the ROW 24’ wide on the south side. It was mentioned that one option the developer is working with the owners of the Rudolph and Jenni properties is to have a privacy fence along their property boundary. If the south side trail was eliminated, that 24’ could be used for the planting of evergreens to shield the fence from viewing from the streets and the homes to the north of Gleason. This would be more astatically pleasing and provide additional buffering with the fence to noise and light. Regarding trees in the ROW, Evergreens do not need a flat surface to grow and are safer to motorists in case of an accident than hitting a retaining wall. Regarding the trail coming to Hunter Rd at 63th Ave, unless the city gets direct contract from residents indicating they have changed their written position on the petition then the petition must be used as the official consensus of the neighborhood. Regarding a comment made that from the photo it appears the trail is currently being used, for the most part in that photo are snowmobile tracks accessing private property. Snowmobiling on public trails is probably against ordinance, so that use should not be considered in the decision making process. Again that you for your time. I appreciate you forwarding this note on to anyone appropriate in the decision making process regarding the finalization of these trails. If you have any questions, please let me know. Best regards, 2 Alan Schultz 6519 Hunter Ln 612‐865‐2578 1 Brad Martens From:Ron Rudolph <rrudolph50@hotmail.com> Sent:Thursday, March 20, 2014 7:56 PM To:Brad Martens Subject:Neighborhood meeting Brad ‐ I just returned home from the meeting at city hall tonight.I would like my name and my wife's name (Patricia)removed from the petition regarding trails in the proposed Lennar development. When Allen Schulz came with the petition he said it was to save my trees. Thank you Ron and Pat Rudolph Attachment C Site Graphics dated April 2, 2014 (partial only – full set available at city hall) 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PHONE 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 TOLL FREE1-888-937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PHONE 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 TOLL FREE1-888-937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PHONE 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 TOLL FREE1-888-937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PHONE 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 TOLL FREE1-888-937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PHONE 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 TOLL FREE1-888-937-5150 x x x x x x x 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PHONE 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 TOLL FREE1-888-937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PHONE 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 TOLL FREE1-888-937-5150 Attachment D Final Plat Graphics dated April 2, 2014 s.f.0.30 acres s.f.s.f.0.30 acres s.f.0.25 acres s.f.s.f.0.25 acres s.f.0.23 acres s.f.s.f.0.23 acres s.f.0.44 acres s.f.s.f.0.44 acres s.f.0.36 acres s.f.s.f.0.35 acres s.f.0.29 acres s.f.s.f.0.29 acres s.f.0.21 acres s.f.s.f.0.21 acres s.f.0.22 acres s.f.s.f.0.22 acres s.f.0.27 acres s.f.s.f.0.27 acres s.f.0.30 acres s.f.s.f.0.30 acres s.f.0.36 acres s.f.s.f.0.36 acres s.f.0.32 acres s.f.s.f.0.32 acres s.f.0.37 acres s.f.s.f.0.37 acres s.f.0.30 acres s.f.s.f.0.30 acres s.f.0.44 acres s.f.s.f.0.44 acres s.f.0.28 acres s.f.s.f.0.28 acres s.f.4.96 acres s.f.s.f.4.95 acres s.f.0.29 acres s.f.s.f.0.29 acres s.f.0.23 acres s.f.s.f.0.23 acres s.f.0.24 acres s.f.s.f.0.24 acres s.f.0.26 acres s.f.s.f.0.26 acres s.f.0.25 acres s.f.s.f.0.25 acres s.f.0.24 acres s.f.s.f.0.24 acres s.f.0.22 acres s.f.s.f.0.22 acres s.f.0.24 acres s.f.s.f.0.24 acres s.f.0.36 acres s.f.s.f.0.36 acres s.f.0.34 acres s.f.s.f.0.34 acres s.f.0.26 acres s.f.s.f.0.26 acres s.f.2.91 acres s.f.s.f.2.91 acres s.f.0.96 acres s.f.s.f.0.96 acres s.f.0.32 acres s.f.s.f.0.32 acres s.f.0.23 acres s.f.s.f.0.23 acres s.f.0.21 acres s.f.s.f.0.21 acres s.f.0.21 acres s.f.s.f.0.21 acres s.f.0.23 acres s.f.s.f.0.23 acres s.f.1.20 acres s.f.s.f.1.20 acres s.f.1.49 acres s.f.s.f.0.67 acres s.f.3.64 acres s.f.s.f.0.27 acresLot 2 11,958 0 11,958 BLOCK 5 GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA Lot 1 29,178 0 29,178 Total 0 52,17752,177 Lot 5 9,996 0 9,996 Lot 3 9,219 0 9,219 Lot 4 9,219 0 9,219 Lot 1 13,883 0 13,883 Lot 2 9,860 0 9,860 BLOCK 3 GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA Lot 1 41,965 0 41,965 RAVINIA Corcoran, Minnesota BLOCK 4 GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA Total 126,696 0 126,696 Lot 10 14,903 0 14,903 Lot 11 11,301 0 11,301 Lot 8 10,257 0 10,257 Lot 9 15,587 0 15,587 Lot 6 10,314 0 10,314 Lot 7 9,404 0 9,404 Lot 4 11,249 0 11,249 Lot 5 10,879 0 10,879 Lot 2 10,056 0 10,056 Lot 3 10,244 0 10,244 BLOCK 2 GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA Lot 1 12,502 0 12,502 Contact:David Pemberton Project #5401-664 Date April 2, 2014 Contact:Joe Jablonski Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. 150 Broadway Ave. S. Wayzata, MN 55391 1000 Plymouth Road Plymouth MN 55446 Lennar of Minnesota 9,156 9,797 11,846 tel:952-249-3014 tel:952-476-6000 Prepared by:Prepared for: 16,231 13,020 19,261 12,054 15,888 0 0 0 595 0 BLOCK 1 215,424 9,156 9,797 11,846 13,263 15,888 13,806 0 595 0 0 0 Total 13,806 16,231 13,020 19,261 12,054 216,019 12,942 GROSS AREA NET AREA 15,286 12,594 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,881 10,059 19,342 0 WETLAND AREA 12,594 13,263 12,942 10,881 10,059 19,342 15,881 Lot 11 Lot 12 Lot 13 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 14 Lot 15 Lot 16 Lot 5 Lot 6 Lot 7 Lot 8 Lot 9 Lot 10 s.f.3.31 acres s.f.s.f.0.30 acres s.f.0.80 acres s.f.s.f.1.25 acres s.f.2.41 acres s.f.s.f.2.24 acres s.f.4.02 acres s.f.s.f.4.02 acres s.f.42.10 acres s.f.s.f.23.49 acres s.f.41.63 acres s.f.s.f.35.40 acres s.f.60.67 acres s.f.s.f.50.10 acres s.f.59.37 acres s.f.s.f.49.62 acres s.f.35.24 acres s.f.s.f.28.61 acres s.f.239.01 acres s.f.s.f.187.21 acres s.f.10.72 acres s.f.s.f.10.44 acres s.f.1.50 acres s.f.s.f.1.50 acres s.f.17.71 acres s.f.239.01 acres s.f.10.72 acres s.f.267.43 acres Total Lots:43 Site Total 11,649,218 Total ROW 466,769 Total Outlots 10,411,198 Total Lots 771,251 Summary TOTAL AREA Exception 65,341 0 65,341 Exception GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA ROW 466,769 11,849 454,920 ROW GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA Total 10,411,198 2,256,156 8,155,043 E 1,535,004 288,859 1,246,145 D 2,586,165 424,814 2,161,352 C 2,642,688 460,365 2,182,323 B 1,813,475 271,351 1,542,124 Lot 1 105,056 7,557 97,499 GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA A 1,833,865 810,766 1,023,100 OUTLOTS GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA Lot 1 175,038 0 175,038 BLOCK 7 GROSS AREA WETLAND AREA NET AREA Lot 3 13,163 0 13,163 Total 54,299 0 54,299 BLOCK 6 Attachment E Private Park Plans This page has intentionally been left blank 8b. CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 – Office 763.420.6056 – Fax E-mail - general@ci.corcoran.mn.us / Web Site - www.ci.corcoran.mn.us MEMO Meeting Date: April 15, 2014 To: Parks and Trails Commission From: Brad Martens, City Administrator Re: Sports Fundraiser Opportunity ______________________________________________________________________________ A fundraising group has approached the City of Corcoran with an opportunity to assist in raising funds through advertising on bat rack holders at the City Park. Information on the opportunity is attached to this memorandum. Staff is concerned with language in the proposed agreement giving exclusive rights for advertisement. The Park and Trails Commission should discuss which terms would be acceptable for a fundraising opportunity. Attachment: 1. Sports Fundraiser Proposal 2. Sports Fundraiser Advertising Agreement Sports Fundraiser Giving back to Maple Grove CONTACT US: info@minnesotasportsfundraiser.com www.minnesotasportsfundraiser.com Mission Statement 2 Establishing Brand Awareness for local businesses while giving back to the community where it matters. What is Sports Fundraiser? •An opportunity for local businesses to advertise to families and friends during sporting events in order to raise money for the athletic organization. Sports Fundraiser serves 3 purposes: 1)Complimentary Bat holder 2)Creative Advertising Opportunity 3)Raise Money for Athletic Organization 3 Our Process Minnesota Sports Fundraiser reaches out to business in the local community with a unique marketing opportunity that gives back where it matters. 1.Meet with local Parks and Recreation or Baseball Associations with opportunity to receive free bat racks and additional donations. 2. Meet with local business in the surrounding area to seek sponsorship opportunities. 3.Generate and maintain bat racks with local sponsors advertised on the baseball fields. 4.Send donations to Park and Recreation or Baseball Association at the end of each year. 4 Base Fall Fields Minnesota Sports Fundraiser is requesting permission to implement the following on fields that are agreed upon. 1.We would like to donate 2 baseball racks per field that contain advertisement that has approval. 2.2 additional sign's that contain local advertisement will be hung in on the back side of the bat rack or in approved locations. 3.Equipment will be maintained by Minnesota Sports Fundraiser and taken down seasons end. 4.Advertisements containing alcohol, tobacco, or any other inappropriate pictures is under the discretion of the baseball diamond organization. 5 6 Bat Rack Locations on the Baseball Diamond Advertisement and Signs •Baseball rack will contain up to 5 sponsors total. •The bat rack is 1ft by 3ft long •The bat rack is made of steel and is able to hold 8 bats and 2 game balls. •Advertisement is a vinyl and is placed on a back board which is made of •Sign will contain up to 5 sponsors total •The sign is 2ft by 3ft long 7 Donations How much is Minnesota Sports Fundraiser giving back to the local baseball fields? Sports Fundraiser will donate up to $1000 per field that we are allowed to advertise on depending on sponsorship fulfillment. Things that may affect sponsorship fulfillment and rates: •Time of year the sponsor begins advertising •Discounted sponsorship rates 8 Sponsors We are looking to reach out to local businesses in the general location that would like to create brand awareness and establish a good reputation in there community. Benefits for Sponsors 1.Name Branding 2.Giving Back Where It Matters 3.Capturing a Captive Audience 9 Vision Minnesota Sports Fundraise would like to give this opportunity to sporting facilities and communities through out the nation by continuing to donate back to where it matters allowing us to grow and expand to other states. 10 11 This page has intentionally been left blank This page has intentionally been left blank 8c. Corcoran Athletics Association 03/10/2014 To: Corcoran Parks and Trails Commission RE: Scoreboard Proposal From: Corcoran Athletics Association The CAA would like to invite the Parks and Trial Commissioners and the City of Corcoran to consider this matching fund proposal. The CAA would like to add to the experience the young players have while playing ball in Corcoran. In the past we upgraded the uniforms, purchased better equipment, and helped the city improve and maintain the fields. The CAA would like to propose the addition of a remote controlled, electronic scoreboard to one of Corcoran’s baseball fields At this time the funds raised are: CAA $3500.00, Corcoran Lions $1200.00 and $100.00 from a private party for a total of $4800.00. The Association will be presenting this donation request to the NW Area Jaycee’s on March 27th We have attached two samples of what the scoreboard may look like. I am still looking for reports and reviews of scoreboard manufacturers. Also am looking for maintenance contracts that may be offered. Kevin Dale CAA Manager. WWW.DAKTRONICS.COM E-MAIL: SALES@DAKTRONICS.COM 201 Daktronics Drive, PO Box 5128, Brookings, SD 57006 Phone: 1-800-325-8766 or 605-692-0200 Fax: 605-697-4746 DD2118191 051013 Page 1 of 6 This outdoor LED baseball/softball scoreboard displays HOME and GUEST team scores for up to seven innings, total RUNS to 99, BALL to three, STRIKE to two and OUT to two. Scoreboard shown with optional striping and amber PanaView® digits. DIMENSIONS UNCRATED WEIGHT POWER (120 VAC) 6'-6" H x 16'-0" W x 8" D (1.98 m, 4.87 m, 203 mm)525 lb (238 kg) 600 Watts, 5 Amps Note: Models with 240 VAC power at half the indicated amperage are also offered (International Use Only). DISPLAY COLOR Choose from 150+ colors (from Martin Senour® paint book) at no additional cost. CONSTRUCTION Alcoa aluminum alloy 5052 for excellent corrosion resistance PRODUCT SAFETY APPROVAL ETL listed to UL Standards 48 and 1433; tested to CSA standards and CE labeled for outdoor use OPERATING TEMPERATURES • Display: -22 to 122° Fahrenheit (-30 to 50° Celsius) • Console: 32 to 130° Fahrenheit (0 to 54° Celsius) DIGITS • All digits are 15" (381 mm) high. • Select all red or all amber LED digits. Scoreboard may instead have mixed LED digit colors (see DD1965467). • Scoreboard features robust weather-sealed digits (see DD2495646). • Digits may be dimmed for night viewing. CAPTIONS • HOME and GUEST captions are 10" (254 mm) high. BALL, STRIKE and OUT captions are 9" (229 mm) high. All other captions are 8" (203 mm) high. • Standard captions are vinyl, applied directly to the display face. DAKTRONICS BA-2022 PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS BALL STRIKE OUT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RUNS GUEST HOME DAKTRONICS WWW.DAKTRONICS.COM E-MAIL: SALES@DAKTRONICS.COM All Sport® and PanaView® are trademarks of Daktronics, Inc. Martin Senour® is a registered trademark of its owner. DD2118191 051013 Page 2 of 6 Copyright © 2013 Daktronics, Inc. CONTROL CONSOLE CONTROL OPTIONS All Sport® 5000 (see SL-03991) Wired (standard): One-pair shielded cable of 22 AWG minimum is required. A cover plate with mounted connector and standard 2" x 4" x 2" (51 mm x 102 mm x 51 mm) outlet box is provided. Connector mates with signal cable from control console. Wireless (optional): 2.4 GHz spread spectrum radio features 64 non-interfering channels and 8 broadcast groups (see SL-04370). DAKTRONICS BA-2022 PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS MOUNTING Scoreboard is typically mounted on two vertical beams or poles. Hardware to mount scoreboard on two beams is included; hardware for more beams is at additional cost. Standard mounting uses I-beam clamps. Optional mounting method using angle brackets is also offered; maximum beam width is 12" (305 mm) and maximum beam depth is 22" (559 mm). Refer to attached drawings for more information on mounting methods. SERVICE ACCESS Digit panels and electronics are serviced from the front of the scoreboard. GENERAL INFORMATION Scoreboard provides scoring capabilities for two teams. 100% solid state electronics are housed in an all aluminum cabinet. Scoreboard is shipped in one section. Specifications and pricing are subject to change without notice. OPTIONS & ACCESSORIES • Scoreboard border striping • Multiple caption and striping colors (see DD2101644) • Team name caption in place of HOME • Team names on changeable panels • Individual digit protective screens (see SL-04939) • Protective netting • Optional angle bracket mounting method • Advertising/identification panels • Decorative accents • Electronic message centers and video displays in multiple sizes ADVERTISING/IDENTIFICATION PANELS Backlit & Non-Backlit: 1'-6" H x 16'-0" W (457 mm, 4.87 m) 2'-0" H x 16'-0" W (610 mm, 4.87 m) 2'-6" H x 16'-0" W (762 mm, 4.87 m) 3'-0" H x 16'-0" W (914 mm, 4.87 m) For additional non-backlit panel sizes, see SL-03761. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION • Installation Specifications: DWG-298975 (attached) • Standard I-beam Mounting: DWG-1052565 (attached) • Optional Pole Mounting: DWG-1048184 (attached) • Component Locations: DWG-1066358 (attached) • Architectural Specifications: See SL-08405 • Installation Manual: See DD2118213 • Service Manual: See DD2124597 01 04 F E B 1 3 KD D PE R E C - 9 2 6 2 , R E P L A C E D " T O T A L " W I T H " R U N S " C A P T I O N WWW.DAKTRONICS.COM E-MAIL: SALES@DAKTRONICS.COM 201 Daktronics Drive, PO Box 5128, Brookings, SD 57006 Phone: 1-800-325-8766 or 605-692-0200 Fax: 605-697-4746 DD2594524 121813 Page 1 of 6 TIME PITCH COUNT AT BAT PITCH COUNT DAKTRONICS BALL STRIKE OUT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 RUNS HITS ERRGUEST HOME AT BAT H/E This outdoor LED baseball/softball scoreboard displays HOME and GUEST team scores for up to 10 innings, total RUNS and HITS to 99 and ERR (errors) to nine for each team, AT BAT to 99, BALL to three, STRIKE to two, OUT to two and H/E (hit or error) with field position number for the error. Scoreboard can show TIME or PITCH COUNT instead of AT BAT, as well as AT BAT or PITCH COUNT in place of H/E. Scoreboard shown with optional striping and amber PanaView® digits. DIMENSIONS # OF SECTIONS UNCRATED WEIGHT POWER (120 VAC) 7'-0" H x 25'-0" W x 8" D (2.13 m, 7.62 m, 203 mm)Two Total 875 lb (397 kg) 900 Watts, 7.5 Amps 3'-0" H x 25'-0" W x 8" D (914 mm, 7.62 m, 203 mm)One Top 375 lb (170 kg) 4'-0" H x 25'-0" W x 8" D (1.22 m, 7.62 m, 203 mm)One Bottom 500 lb (227 kg) Notes: 1) Models with 240 VAC power at half the indicated amperage are also offered (International Use Only). 2) Optional TNMCs add 300 Watts to scoreboard power and 80 lb (36 kg) to weight of bottom scoreboard section. Optional Team Name Message Centers (TNMCs) DAKTRONICS BA-2125 PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS DIGITS • AT BAT, BALL, STRIKE, OUT and H/E digits are 18" (457 mm) high. All other digits are 15" (381 mm) high. • Select all red or all amber LED digits. Scoreboard may instead have mixed LED digit colors (see DD1965467). • Scoreboard features robust weather-sealed digits (see DD2495646). • Digits may be dimmed for night viewing. CAPTIONS • HOME and GUEST captions are 12" (305 mm) high. AT BAT, BALL, STRIKE, OUT and H/E captions are 10" (254 mm) high. All other captions are 8" (203 mm) high. • Standard captions are vinyl, applied directly to the display face. • Optional TNMCs are 10.6" (269 mm) high. DISPLAY COLOR Choose from 150+ colors (from Martin Senour® paint book) at no additional cost. CONSTRUCTION Alcoa aluminum alloy 5052 for excellent corrosion resistance PRODUCT SAFETY APPROVAL ETL listed to UL Standards 48 and 1433; tested to CSA standards and CE labeled for outdoor use OPERATING TEMPERATURES • Display: -22 to 122° Fahrenheit (-30 to 50° Celsius) • Console: 32 to 130° Fahrenheit (0 to 54° Celsius) HAWKS DOWN DOWNHOME DOWNHOME DOWN HAWKS HOME HAWKS TIGERS SHOTS SHOTS PLAYER PLAYER Choose one of three vinyl captions for upper scoreboard corners (Optional changeable caption panels also offered) WWW.DAKTRONICS.COM E-MAIL: SALES@DAKTRONICS.COM 201 Daktronics Drive, PO Box 5128, Brookings, SD 57006 Phone: 1-800-325-8766 or 605-692-0200 Fax: 605-697-4746 DD2594524 121813 Page 2 of 6 CONTROL CONSOLE CONTROL OPTIONS All Sport® 5000 (see SL-03991) Wired (standard): One-pair shielded cable of 22 AWG minimum is required. A cover plate with mounted connector and standard 2" x 4" x 2" (51 mm x 102 mm x 51 mm) outlet box is provided. Connector mates with signal cable from control console. Wireless (optional): 2.4 GHz spread spectrum radio features 64 non-interfering channels and 8 broadcast groups (see SL-04370). DAKTRONICS BA-2125 PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS TIME CLOCK The two-digit clock can display hours/minutes/seconds. Clock information shifts from hours to minutes to seconds as time counts down. MOUNTING Scoreboard is typically mounted on two or three vertical beams that require specific spacing. Hardware to mount scoreboard on two beams is included; hardware for more beams is at additional cost. Standard mounting uses I-beam clamps. Optional mounting method using angle brackets is also offered; maximum beam width is 12" (305 mm) and maximum beam depth is 22" (559 mm). Refer to attached drawings for more information on mounting methods. For mounting to horizontal beams, contact your Daktronics representative for more information. SERVICE ACCESS Digit panels and electronics are serviced from either the front or rear of the scoreboard. GENERAL INFORMATION Scoreboard provides scoring capabilities for two teams. 100% solid state electronics are housed in an all aluminum cabinet. Scoreboard is shipped in two sections. Specifications and pricing are subject to change without notice. OPTIONS & ACCESSORIES • Scoreboard border striping • Striping around BALL, STRIKE and OUT digits • TIME, AT BAT or PITCH COUNT captions on changeable panels • Multiple caption and striping colors (see DD2101644) • Team name caption in place of HOME * • Team names on changeable panels * • Programmable Team Name Message Centers (see DD1696958) • Individual digit protective screens (see SL-04939) • Protective netting • Optional angle bracket mounting method • Advertising/identification panels • Decorative accents • Electronic message centers and video displays in multiple sizes * Only for scoreboard without Team Name Message Centers ADVERTISING/IDENTIFICATION PANELS Backlit & Non-Backlit: 1'-6" H x 25'-0" W (457 mm, 7.62 m) 2'-0" H x 25'-0" W (610 mm, 7.62 m) 2'-6" H x 25'-0" W (762 mm, 7.62 m) 3'-0" H x 25'-0" W (914 mm, 7.62 m) 4'-0" H x 25'-0" W (1.22 m, 7.62 m) For additional non-backlit panel sizes, see SL-03761. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION • Installation Specifications: DWG-316750 (attached) • Standard I-beam Mounting: DWG-1052565 (attached) • Optional Pole Mounting: DWG-1048184 (attached) • Component Locations: DWG-1151033 (attached) • Architectural Specifications: See DD2587726 • Installation Manual: See DD1969938 • Service Manual: See DD2124597 DAKTRONICS, INC.THE CONCEPTS EXPRESSED AND DETAILS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. DO NOT REPRODUCE BY ANY MEANS WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF DAKTRONICS, INC. COPYRIGHT 2011 DAKTRONICS, INC. BROOKINGS, SD 57006 DO NOT SCALE DRAWING PROJ:OUTDOOR SCOREBOARD TITLE:P1647; I-BEAM CLAMP MOUNTING DESIGN:MCARSRU DRAWN:MCARSRU DATE:23-OCT-13 SCALE:1/8 SHEET:REV JOB NO: FUNC-TYPE-SIZE 10525651 OF 1 03 P 1647 E -07 -AREVDATE:BY: 01 21 FEB 12 CHANGED ROCKER TO I-BEAM KDD 02 07 MAR 12 ADDED STADNARD MOUNTING METHOD NOTES KDD 03 23 OCT 13 CHANGED BOLT TORQUE FROM 30 FT-LB TO 40 FT-LB PER EC-12382 NJM MOUNTING INSTRUCTIONS: 1. PLACE SPRING NUTS INTO SCOREBOARD CHANNEL IN APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF VERTICAL BEAMS 2. LIFT SCOREBOARD INTO POSITION 3. MAKE SURE THE 1/2-13 BOLTS ARE AS CLOSE TO THE I-BEAM FLANGES AS POSSIBLE 4. WHEN SCOREBOARD IS ADJUSTED TO FINAL DESIRED POSITION, TIGHTEN BOLTS FIRMLY 5. IF FLANGE THICKNESS IS MORE THAN 3/4" THICK LONGER BOLTS WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE CUSTOMER'S EXPENSE. STANDARD MOUNTING METHOD TOP VIEW VERTICAL BEAM - FLANGE THICKNESS MUST BE 1/4" - 3/4" 1/2-13 X 3.000 BOLT - BOLT THREAD MUST ENGAGE ENTIRE DEPTH OF SPRING NUT. BOLT MUST BE TIGHTENED TO 40FT-LB TORQUE 1/2" LOCK WASHER 1/2" FLAT WASHER I-BEAM CLAMP - ASSURE CLAMP IS TIGHTLY ENGAGED TO I-BEAM AND NUT SPRING NUT SCOREBOARD FRONT OF SCOREBOARD EXPLODED REAR ISOMETRIC VIEW SPRING NUT ***CRITICAL*** MAKE SURE SPRING NUT IS TURNED TO VERTICAL POSITION INSIDE SCOREBOARD CHANNEL I-BEAM CLAMP 1/2" FLAT WASHER 1/2" LOCK WASHER 1/2-13 X 3.000 BOLT DAKTRONICS, INC.THE CONCEPTS EXPRESSED AND DETAILS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. DO NOT REPRODUCE BY ANY MEANS WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF DAKTRONICS, INC. COPYRIGHT 2010 DAKTRONICS, INC. BROOKINGS, SD 57006 DO NOT SCALE DRAWING PROJ:OUTDOOR SCOREBOARDS TITLE:P1647; POLE MOUNTING OPTIONS DESIGN:DOPPELT DRAWN:DOPPELT DATE:22 MAR 11 SCALE:1/5 SHEET:REV JOB NO: FUNC-TYPE-SIZE 10481841 OF 1 03 P1647 E -10 -A REV 01 DATE: 06 OCT 11 REPLACED VERTICAL I-BEAM WITH 6" X 6" SQUARE TUBE BY: JAVA REV 02 DATE: 20 SEP 12 REMOVED CHAMFER FROM 0M-133259 PER EC-7114 BY: LMG REV 03 DATE: 3 JULY 13 ADDED STRUCTURAL NOTE BY: TTF NOTES: - THREADED RODS RUN ALONG BOTH SIDES OF BEAM - RODS DO NOT PASS THROUGH THE FLANGES OF THE BEAM - NO DRILLING NECESSARY - MAKE SURE SPRING NUT IS PERPENDICULAR TO CHANNEL OPENING ON SCOREBOARD STRUCTURAL NOTES: - BOLT TORQUE: 30 FT-LB SIDE VIEW 1/2" FLAT WASHER, LOCK WASHER, AND NUT VERTICAL BEAM 1/2" THREADED ROD SPRING NUT SCOREBOARD REAR MOUNTING ANGLE TOP VIEW SCALE 1/10 1/2" FLAT WASHER LOCK WASHER, AND NUT 1/2" THREADED ROD VERTICAL BEAM FRONT OF DISPLAY SPRING NUT DISPLAY REAR MOUNTING ANGLE ***CRITICAL*** MAKE SURE SPRING NUT IS TURNED TO VERTICAL POSITION INSIDE SCOREBOARD CHANNEL REAR ISOMETRIC VIEW EXTRA THREADED ROD CAN BE CUT OFF AH OU T D O O R E X T R U D E D S C O R E B O A R D S CO M P O N E N T L O C A T I O N ; B A - 2 1 2 5 KD R A G T 18 S E P 1 3 P 16 4 7 E 10 A 1= 4 0 KD R A G T 11 5 1 0 3 3 00 A1 5 18" A2 9 15" A2 10 15" A2 11 15" A2 3 15" A2 2 15" A2 1 15" A2 4 15" A2 5 15" A2 6 15" A2 14 15" A2 13 15" A2 12 15" A2 15 15" A3 9 15" A3 1 15" A2 7 15" A3 2 15" A3 10 15" A3 11 15" A3 3 15" A3 4 15" A3 5 15" A3 13 15" A3 12 15" A3 14 15" A3 15 15" A3 16 15" A3 8 15" A3 7 15" A3 6 15" OPTIONAL AT BAT OR PITCH COUNT CAPTION OPTIONAL TIME OR PITCH COUNT CAPTION BA-2125-R/A/W SEE DETAIL A (MASTER DRIVER) @1 OPTIONAL TNMCS 8X32-34MM SEE DETAIL B (SLAVE DRIVER) @2 FRONT VIEW REAR VIEW KNOCKOUTS FOR 1/2" CONDUIT ENCLOSED 16 COLUMN SLAVE LED DRIVER AND POWER/SIGNAL ENCLOSURE @1 (THE COVER HAS BEEN REMOVED TO SHOW THE ENCLOSURE COMPONENT DETAIL) ENCLOSED 16 COLUMN MASTER LED DRIVER AND POWER/SIGNAL ENCLOSURE @1 (THE COVER HAS BEEN REMOVED TO SHOW THE ENCLOSURE COMPONENT DETAIL) A1 6 18" A1 7 18" A1 8 18" A1 9 18" A1 10 18" A1 11 18" A2 1 15" = LED DRIVER NUMBER & LED DRIVER CONNECTOR WIRED TO THAT DIGIT = DIGIT SIZE KEY A1 A3 A2