Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/21/2021 Agenda Packet M eeting L ocation: M unicipal C enter 7100 147th S treet West Apple Valley, M innesota 55124 Planning C ommission meetings have resumed at the Municipal C enter and are open to the public with physical distancing restrictions. Attendee procedures and access inf ormation are posted on the C ity's website and include virtual participation opportunities. July 21, 2021 PLA N N IN G C O MMIS SIO N T EN TAT IVE A G EN D A 7:00 P M 1.C all to Order A.Planning C ommissioners will be attending either in-person or virtually. A roll-call will be taken. 2.Approve Agenda 3.Approve C onsent Agenda Items C onsent Agenda Items are considered routine and will be enacted with a single motion, without discussion, unless a commissioner or citizen requests to have any item separately considered. It will then be moved to the land use/action items f or consideration. A.A pprove Minutes of J une 16, 2021, Regular Meeting. 4.Public Hearings A.O rdinance Amending Residential Impervious Surface C overage Requirements - P C 21-21-O C onsider Ordinance amending Sect. 155.350 (C ) and (D) concerning residential impervious surface coverage Location: C itywide Petitioner: C ity of Apple Valley 5.Land Use / Action Items A.Eagle Pointe - PC21-05-SB 1. Subdivision by Preliminary Plat of 22.2 Acres for Residential Development and Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization to Allow for C onstruction of 27 Villas and 53 Townhome Dwellings Location: 8661 140th Street West (Northwest C orner of 140th Street West and Garden View D rive) Petitioner: J . David Management, LLC and J oel Watrud 6.Other Business A.O rchard Place C ommercial Phase II - Sketch Plan Review of a Proposed 12-Acre C ommercial D evelopment Location: Northwest C orner of 155th Street West and Pilot Knob Road Petitioner: HJ Development, LLP and Rockport Development, LLC B.Buller Property Single Family Sketch Plan - PC21-XX-XXX Sketch plan review of proposed development of the Buller properties consisting of subdivision by preliminary plat to create six single family lots, for construction of five new single family homes. Location: 13009 Diamond Path Road Petitioner: J MH Land D evelopment, Randy and C arolyn Buller C .Review of Upcoming Schedule and Other Updates Planning C ommission - Wednesday, August 4, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. Planning C ommission - Wednesday, August 18, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. C ity C ouncil - T hursday, J uly 22, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. C ity C ouncil - T hursday, A ugust 12, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. 7.Adjourn Regular meetings are broadcast, live, on Charter C ommunications C able C hannel 180 and on the C ity's website at www.cityofapplevalley.org I T E M: P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:S pecial Notification Description: Planning Commi ssion meetings have resumed at the Municipal Center and are open to the public with physi cal distancing restricti ons. Attendee procedures and access information are posted on the Ci ty's website and include virtual participation opportunities. S taff Contact: B reanna Vincent, Department A ssistant D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: Please let us know you have joined us by either signing at the door or requesting to be an attendee on-line. S UM M ARY: Note: Planning C ommission meetings have resumed at the Municipal C enter and are open to the public with physical distancing restrictions. B AC K G RO UND : N/A B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A I T E M: 1.A . P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:Call to O rder Description: P lanning Commissioners will be attending either in-person or virtually. A roll-call will be taken. S taff Contact: B reanna Vincent, Department A ssistant D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: N/A S UM M ARY: During the C O VID-19 Pandemic, the C ouncil C hambers in the Apple Valley Municipal Building has been set-up to allow for the Planning C ommissioners to attend meetings either in-person (observing social distancing in accordance with Emergency Executive Order 20-81) or virtually (via GoToMeeting). A roll-call will be taken. B AC K G RO UND : N/A B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A I T E M: 3.A . P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:C onsent Agenda Description: A pprove Minutes of J une 16, 2021, Regular Meeting. S taff Contact: B reanna Vincent, Department A ssistant D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: Approve minutes of regular meeting of J une 16, 2021. S UM M ARY: T he minutes of the last regular Planning C ommission meeting is attached for your review and approval. B AC K G RO UND : State statute requires the creation and preservation of meeting minutes which document the official actions and proceedings of public governing bodies. B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A AT TAC HM E NT S: Minutes CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 16, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission Meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Kurtz at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Jodi Kurtz, David Schindler, Paul Scanlan, Keith Deikmann, Philip Mahowald, Becky Sandahl Member(s) Absent: Tim Burke City staff members attending: Community Develo pment Director Bruce Nordquist, City Planner Tom Lovelace, City Engineer Brandon Anderson, Water Resource Specialist Samantha Berger, City Attorney Sharon Hills, and Department Assistant Breanna Vincent. * Present Virtually 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Vice Chair Kurtz asked if there were any changes to the agenda – None. MOTION: Commissioner Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan, approving the agenda. Roll call vote: Ayes - 6 – Nays - 0. 3. CONSENT ITEMS MOTION: Commissioner Kurtz moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan, approving the minutes of the meeting of June 2, 2021 and authorizing a Special Planning Commission Meeting on Wednesday, June 30th. Roll call vote: Ayes – 6 – Nays – 0. 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Eagle Pointe Planner Tom Lovelace presented the staff report. Commissioner Scanlan asked what the color palette of the development will be and if all of the trees along 140th St W will be removed. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 2 of 10 Planner Lovelace advised that he would need to look further into it but that he believe it is the cottonwoods along 140th St W which do not have a great survival rate. Commissioner Scanlan advised that they likely would cause some site line issues. Commissioner Scanlan asked what the excavation of the site would entail and if there was a percentage available for how much would be changed. City Engineer Brandon Anderson advised that all of the trees along 140th St W would be removed with the addition of the turn-lane and trail. He also advised that there will be extensive excavation but that a lot of the elevations need to remain in order to keep storm water regulations and flood levels as well as some challenges with the pipeline easement and needing to keep current elevations there. Commissioner Mahowald advised that he would like to see a more detailed grading plan in the future. He mentioned that going by the site plan, it appears that there would be a lot of challenges for containing storm water with the significant changes happening on the site. He also mentioned whether or not the retention ponds would be adequate for the retention of storm water on site. Resident John Kuettner (13545 Hershey Ct), mentioned that at the last meeting he attended, there was great interest in acquiring green space for the lot but that he missed a few meetings and sees that has changed now. Petitioner Matt Olson with Brandl Anderson Homes presented some additional information on the site and asked if there were any questions. Commissioner Scanlan asked about the color scheme for the development. Mr. Olson advised that color was all personal preference and that there would be options for the homebuyers to choose from. Commissioner Scanlan asked how this development fits into the comprehensive plan, specifically the zoning for the property. Mr. Olson advised that the single-family detached villas abutting the existing single- family homes and the townhomes closer to Garden View and 140th St W which is consistent with the Low Density Flex designation. The development is on the lower end for the units per acreage at about 3.6 units/acre. Commissioner Scanlan asked about the natural integration of the site and how that fits into the plan. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 3 of 10 Mr. Olson advised that some of the wetlands would be impacted but ultimately others would be improved and there is an opportunity to help correct the flooding issues currently on the site. As far as the trees on the site, there will be a specialist coming out to observe which trees could be transplanted to other areas on site in order to preserve more of what is already there. Commissioner Scanlan mentioned that they are looking at over 70% of trees being removed and just under half of the wetlands will be impacted. Mr. Olson advised that was correct, though they will also be enlarging some of the existing wetlands for more ponding area from about 45,000 sq. ft. to 116,000 sq. ft. Commissioner Scanlan advised that idea behind the Low Density Flex was that they were supposed to take into account the natural integration and having the product work around it and it instead seems like the opposite is occurring with the natural aspects of the site being looked at in a secondary fashion. Commissioner Kurtz stated that the proposed plan seemed to fit into her understanding of the Low Density Flex designation. She also asked if there would be additional landscaping added around the ponding areas. Mr. Olson advised that was correct and that they are trying to keep the site more intact and they are open to adding additional screening. CD Director Bruce Nordquist advised that with the questions relating to wetlands, we can defer to City Engineer Brandon Anderson and Water Resource Specialist Samantha Berger. City Engineer Brandon Anderson advised that the law does allow for storm water to be stored in a wetland depending on its classification. The wetlands are being reviewed by a technical evaluation panel which is required by law. The larger wetland in the middle of the site is being completely expanded on while the other two will be either partially or fully filled with additional storm water being stored nearby. Commissioner Mahowald asked if the square footage discussed previously in regards to the wetlands being expanded was linear surface or the capacity of the pond to retain storm water. Mr. Olson advised that it was linear surface and they were meeting requirements so that this site is hopefully improving water issues for sites further south. City Engineer Brandon Anderson advised that there are several requirements for storm water in the ordinance such as volume reduction, rain control, elevation challenges and CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 4 of 10 dead storage, as well as flood storage. The City is working with the applicant and their engineer to address some technical components but that the routing and configurations are pretty close. Resident Vickie Loher Johnson (8907 138th St Ct) asked if the traffic study was completed during the pandemic. City Engineer Brandon Anderson advised that the projected numbers were taken prior to the pandemic. Ms. Loher Johnson asked if the traffic study took into account the maximum of 6 cars per lot. City Engineer Anderson advised that the trips projected are taken from the Institute of Traffic Engineer Manual studies all the types of homes to project the number of trips for each home and is typically very accurate. Ms. Loher Johnson advised that having no traffic control devices along 140th St W would be very hazardous for people and especially children trying to cross the road to get to Sunset Park. What is the plan for a traffic control device when needed, where will it be placed, and will the developer need to place a LOC with the City in order to fund this in the future? She stated that there were no other developments in the area that would cause an increase in traffic other than this proposed development and the increase in density. City Engineer Anderson advised that the traffic projections provided are “full buildout.” There are several criteria to meet in order to necessitate a traffic control device and by MNDOT standards, this site does not meet any of those. He did not recommend adding any type of pedestrian crossing for 140th St W as it is a major collector, four-lane road with a 45 mph speed limit and this would add to an increase in accidents. The City does not promote any pedestrian crossing of 140th St W. The City also needs to take into account spacing issues with adding another intersection and the conflicting left turns it would cause as well as sight-line and elevation issues. Ms. Loher Johnson advised that people will still attempt to cross even without a mid- block crossing and that someone will be hurt especially with just a single access point from the site. She asked if two access points should be required in the case of emergencies. City Engineer Anderson advised it was not a requirement and that the plans have been reviewed by the Fire Marshal. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 5 of 10 Ms. Loher Johnson mentioned that during the time of the rezoning in 2019-2020, the residents were told that only 8.5 acres that were able to be developed and that the natural conditions of the site would limit the density of the site and that with the proposed plan, all 22 acres are being developed which does not seem to meet the Low Density Flex zoning. She also asked if the public hearing closes tonight, will the public have an additional opportunity to comment on the revised plans. City Attorney Sharon Hills advised that is at the discretion of the commission whether or not to keep the hearing open. The hearing can be closed and the commission has the discretion to allow comments from the public at future meetings if new information is provided. Resident Brad Blackett (457 Reflection Rd) asked if Water Resource Specialist Samantha Berger could provide a definition of a pond versus a wetland is. Water Resource Specialist Samantha Berger stated that historically with developments, storm water would be routed into these wetlands which is what is currently happening on the site. When looking at a proposal, the applicant must delineate these wetlands and whether they take on additional storm water or exist naturally and how they plan to impact these wetlands. In putting an application forward, there is a request to review these wetlands and historical imagery is used to see how the wetlands existed previously or created as an incidental wetland. In looking at the wetlands, Natural Resources determines whether these wetlands can be impacted and how they can be impacted. The City administers the Wetland Conservation Act which is a state requirement and the application is reviewed by a technical evaluation panel. A wetland has three different factors – hydrology, vegetation, and soil. Wetlands can have a dual purpose of taking on storm water as well. Mr. Blackett commented that the review of the delineation only went back to aerial photos from 1970 but that there are some photos that go back to 1937 and that the topography has been altered extensively. He mentioned that Dakota County has a depletion of ground water in our aquifers and that Apple Valley is a one of the largest contributors to ground water drawdown which impacts other communities. He stated that as a community, it is our responsibility to provide clean water for our future generations. He mentioned that the buffer zone around the pond areas should include emergent plants that can help infiltrate rain water into the ground. Water Resource Specialist Samantha Berger stated that what was included in the packet was not the entirety of the report and also stated that while historic aerial images are looked at, they also look at what is on the site today. The Wetland Conservation Act was enacted in 1991, so these protections were not in place prior to then. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 6 of 10 Mr. Blackett mentioned that the Wetland Conservation Act was enacted to protect wetlands similar to what is on the site. Water Resource Specialist Berger stated that the applications are reviewed in accordance to the state’s Wetland Conservation guidelines and will continue to do so with the help of the technical evaluation panel. Mr. Blackett stated that legally these wetlands can be filled, the City has ordinances and can put forth the recommendations and can be more stringent in applying standards for conserving these natural aspects. Mr. Blackett asked how the City decides what trees are considered “significant trees” and that he believes the age of the tree should be taken into account. He also stated that the single-family homes abutting the property have current widths of 80’ whereas the proposed development lots are 45-50’ widths. Mr. Blackett expressed concern over whether the squares shown on the site plan are the lots or the actual homes. CD Director Nordquist advised that the squares are the lots and the homes would be within those and would abide by setbacks. Mr. Blackett advised that the square footage shown in the floorplans for the homes would not fit inside of the lots shown on the site plan. He requested to see where the different models would fit on the lots provided in the site plan. Commissioner Kurtz mentioned that the significance of the trees is likely dependent on where they are located and whether they are in areas where the developer is proposing to build. CD Director Nordquist advised that the next meeting will include an update on where the trees are located that will be removed. Mr. Blackett advised that the landscape plan also be reviewed as there is an ordinance stating how far back trees need to be from the roadway and each other and eliminates a lot of the proposed planting sites. Resident Todd Walden (8943 138th St Ct W) encouraged that the commissioners consider that the plan seems to fit the developer’s needs as opposed to the new zoning designation created. He stated that as a City, we should be trying to meet the highest bars we can instead of just meeting the lowest requirements. Resident Elliott Ashwell (13599 Hollins Ct) mentioned that Planner Lovelace stated there were accessible parks in the neighborhood but that there really aren’t any since there is one about 15 minutes away and the other is Sunset Park though people would need to CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 7 of 10 cross 140th St W which is a safety hazard and he agrees that some type of traffic control c would be needed. Mr. Ashwell also stated that the flooding on the site is significant and that all the water flows down McAndrews Rd. to the site and that he had concerns for people living on the site. Commissioner Kurtz asked Planner Lovelace if the units per acre originally proposed were much higher previously and if the applicant reduced that number. Planner Lovelace stated he did not have exact numbers but that there are 8 units per acre maximum and 22 acres total which gives the maximum number. He added that the lay of the land would also restrict how many units can truly be developed on the property. CD Director Nordquist mentioned that there was a much higher count discussed in 2019 and that multi-unit housing was being considered for part of the site. Resident Jim Schiffman (8680 135th St W) stated that the current proposal is not ideal but that the residents are happy that it is not a strip mall or multi-unit housing. He and his wife were glad to see the improvements on the wetland areas at the neighborhood meeting. He stated that the density near where the single-family lot will be located seems a bit cramped. Mr. Schiffman also mentioned that there seems to be a lot more trees being planted in front of the development and not much in the back of the lots. He asked if the 10’ easement located off 135th St W and what is happening to that easement – will it be reclaimed by the property owners or will it be given to the developer? Planner Lovelace stated that there is an outlot located on that side and it will be replatted as part of lot 81. There were some negotiations made between Joel Watrud and the residents about the easements and that they would go away in the event that the golf course goes away. City Attorney Hills advised that staff look into the issue to provide a clear answer at the next meeting. Mr. Schiffman requested that a contact number be provided to residents in the event that there are construction issues such as dust control. He also mentioned that mercury was discovered at the site from the chemicals used on the greens and that the developer mentioned this would be remediated. Mr. Schiffman asked that the proposed trail along 140th St W could be connected down to the intersection along 140th St W which could help with crossing. CD Director Nordquist advised that when doing new developments, “trails to nowhere” are often created in order to allow for future trails when needed. The developer will not be required to finish these trails, the City would be responsible for this. Also back in CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 8 of 10 2019, a profile of the neighborhood was shared. Within a quarter mile, there are 634 housing units. There is difficulty associated with the safe crossing of 140th St W long before the developer adds 81 additional housing units. Resident Peter Inman (13511 Hollins Ct) commented that the “trail to nowhere” should be taken into consideration and linked to other trails nearby. He also recommended the “high intensity activated crosswalk” being put in near Greenleaf Elementary as an option for safer crossing of 140th St W. Resident Wendy Manuel (13399 Hughes Ct) commented that at the neighborhood meeting, the developer spoke about the benefit of the development being that it will be targeted towards seniors. Ms. Manuel stated that the development seemed to benefit those who will be living on the site as opposed to the rest of the neighborhood and that they are losing the green space. With no further comments, Vice Chair Kurtz closed the public hearing. MOTION: Commissioner Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan approving the closing of the public hearing. Roll call vote: Ayes - 5 – Nays - 1. 5. LAND USE None 6. OTHER BUSINESS A. Andale Mercado Sketch Plan Planner Alex Sharpe presented the staff report. Commissioner Scanlan mentioned that the plan looked like a great new addition and commented that it could benefit from some additional screening of the trucks near the dock area. Planner Sharpe advised that the truck dock is well placed currently as it is near a parking lot of another business. The applicant, Fernando Mellado, introduced some additional information about Andale Mercado. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 9 of 10 Commissioner Schindler asked how extensive the grocery area of the store will be and if there will be more than just the bakery and butcher shop. Mr. Mellado advised that it is a full butcher shop, bakery, a cold deli, and produce area. Items are purchased in bulk and made fresh in house. B. U-Haul Addition Planner Alex Sharpe presented the staff report. Commissioner Diekmann asked what the building coverage for the businesses directly to the east of the site is. Planner Sharpe advised that he did not have the information on hand but would have it for the next meeting. Commissioner Diekmann mentioned that the architecture of the addition would need to be improved. Commissioner Scanlan asked what other properties would be affected if the PD amendment is approved to allow the site to go over the current maximum building coverage of 30%. Planner Sharpe advised that it would be all of the properties within zone PD 254, which is a limited number of properties. He will provide a map at the next meeting showing the properties. C. Review of Upcoming Schedule and Other Updates The next Planning Commission meeting is Wednesday, June 30, 2021, 7:00 p.m. The next City Council meeting is Thursday, July 8, 2021, 7:00 p.m. 7. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further comments from the Planning Staff or Planning Commission, Vice Chair Kurtz asked for a motion to adjourn. MOTION: Commissioner Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan, to adjourn the meeting at 9:21 p.m. Roll call vote: Ayes – 6 – Nays – 0. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 16, 2021 Page 10 of 10 Respectfully submitted, ______________________________________ Breanna Vincent, Planning Department Assistant Approved by the Apple Valley Planning Commission on 7/21/2021 . Jodi Kurtz, Vice Chair I T E M: 4.A . P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:Public Hearings Description: Ordinance A mending R esidential I mpervious S urf ace Coverage Requirements - P C21-21-O S taff Contact: K athy Bodmer, A I C P, P lanner D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department Applicant: City of Apple Valley P roject Number: P C21-21-O Applicant Date: 60 Days: 120 Days: AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: Open public hearing, receive comments, close public hearing. It is the policy of the Planning Commission to not take action on an item on the same night as its public hearing. However, staff finds that the requested amendments are somewhat minor and intended to address how the ordinance requirements are implemented. If there are no outstanding questions or comments from the public or the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may wish to move this item forward. T he following motion is recommended to move the item forward: Recommend approval of draft ordinance amending Sect. 155.350 (C) and (D) concerning residential impervious surface coverage. S UM M ARY: City C ode Section 155.350(C ) establishes the maximum impervious surface area permitted on a residential lot, based on the lot size. T his summer several residents have inquired about making improvements to their property, but have been prevented from moving forward because they would exceed the maximum impervious coverage on their lot. C ity C ode Section 155.350(D) allows a homeowner to exceed the maximum impervious surface coverage on their property by up to a maximum additional 5% provided they install a stormwater mitigation facility that has been reviewed and approved by the C ity. T he ordinance allows increased impervious area, but requires an offsetting stormwater mitigation facility to address the increased impervious surface area. T his amendment will provide a review and approval process for allowing the 5% increase. T he requested amendments accomplish two goals: the ordinance adjusts the impervious coverage lot sizes and provides a means by which the C ity staff can review the requests administratively. T he amendments will allow staff to move forward with a process to respond to requests to increase impervious coverage. B AC K G RO UND : P ast I mperv ious Cov erage Ordinances: T he City first enacted impervious coverage restrictions in 2004. At that time, lots that were zoned "R" (Residential including R-1, R-2, R-3, R-C L, and R-5) and "A" (Agriculture) were limited to 35% maximum coverage. Impervious coverage is defined as a constructed surface of impermeable material that prevents water from naturally infiltrating directly into the soil. Examples include, but are not limited to, concrete patios, asphalt paving, building roofs, sport courts, tennis courts, and swimming pools. A deck is evaluated based on the surface under the deck. Before making an improvement, residents need to review their impervious surface coverage to make sure that they don't exceed the maximum coverage requirement. Using their lot area as a base, they must add up the size of the footprint of the house, the footprint of the garage, the driveway, and any additional coverage from patios, pools, or similar features. T he C ity updated its residential impervious surface requirements in 2018. T he ordinance removed the coverage requirement from the "R" and "A" zoning designations and instead established a new impervious coverage section based on the property's use. All one-family and two-family lots were now under a maximum impervious surface requirement, unless the lot was part of a Planned Development zone that regulated impervious coverage. T he 2018 amendments also established tiers for impervious coverage percentage based on lot size. Lots 9,000 and greater were limited to a maximum of 35% coverage. Additional tiers were created for smaller lots to allow a greater percent coverage, recognizing that smaller lot sizes would need higher coverage allowances. T he third change in the 2018 update was an amendment that allowed a homeowner to exceed their maximum required impervious surface coverage by a maximum of 5% provided they show good cause for the needed additional coverage and that they install a City-approved stormwater mitigation facility. Stormwater mitigation facilities are structures or improvements that help to increase drainage caused by the additional impervious coverage. Examples of mitigation facilities include rain gardens, French drains, and underground cisterns. Summer 2021 I nquiries: T his summer the City has received several inquiries from residents who wanted to make improvements to their property, but are at their maximum impervious coverage requirements. Staff found that a number of residents that were struggling with the impervious coverage requirements were part of Planned Development districts with lot sizes between 9,000 and 9,999 sq. ft. A number of the new single family lots developed south of County Road 42 are between 9,000 and 10,000 sq. ft. Staff recommends adjusting the tier levels so that properties up to 10,000 sq. ft. would be allowed to have 40% impervious coverage, a 5% increase over the previous ordinance. Residents who need to exercise the request to exceed the maximum coverage by 5% will have the means to make the request through the application process that is being established. P roposed Application P rocess: Residents who request to increase the maximum impervious coverage requirement would complete an application form and submit a fee. T hey would be required to execute an agreement that would be recorded with the property deed committing to the long term maintenance of the mitigation facility. A copy of the application form and the agreement template is attached for the Planning C ommission's review. I mperv ious C ov erage and Erosion Control I nfo Sheet: Natural Resources staff prepared a handout that helps to explain the residential impervious coverage requirements in a resident-friendly format. B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A AT TAC HM E NT S: Ordinance Application Agreement Background Material CITY OF APPLE VALLEY ORDINANCE NO. ___ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA, AMENDING TITLE XV OF THE CITY CODE ENTITLED "LAND USAGE” BY AMENDING SECTIONS 155.350 REGARDING DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS The City Council of Apple Valley ordains: Section 1. Title XV of the Apple Valley City Code is amended by revising Section 155.350(C) and (D) to read as follows: § 155.350 DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS. * * * * (C) The maximum impervious surface area on a lot or parcel with a one-family detached dwelling (house) or lots with two-family attached dwellings (twinhome) shall not exceed the following coverage: Lot Size1 Maximum Impervious Coverage Allowed 10,000 9,000 sq. ft. or greater 35% 9,999 8,999 sq. ft. - 7,500 sq. ft. 40% 7,499 sq. ft. - 6,000 sq. ft. 45% Less than 6,000 sq. ft. 50% (1) Actual lot area shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number for determination of its lot size hereunder. (2) (a) Lots located within a "PD" (Planned Development) zoning district on which an one-family detached dwelling (house) or lots with two-family attached dwellings (twin home) is a permitted use shall comply with the requirements above, unless impervious surface coverage is specifically addressed in the ordinance establishing the PD zoning district. (b) Lots zoned for multi-family dwellings on which the dwelling units, attached or detached, comprises the lot of record and the open space or yard surrounding the unit is not exclusively owned by the dwelling unit owner and is instead owned as a CIC or other common property interests, are not subject to this clause. (D) The maximum impervious surface area allowed hereunder may be increased up to an additional 5% upon a showing of circumstances supporting good cause for additional impervious surface area in excess of the limitations herein and upon the installation of a city approved on-site stormwater management facility. An application for a request hereunder shall be filed with the City Clerk upon an application form furnished by the city. The application fee 2 and a performance security escrow, which shall be in an amount established by city council resolution, shall be paid and filed with the application. * * * * Section 2. Filing. A copy of the ordinance shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk. This copy shall be available for inspection by any persons during regular office hours. Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall publish this ordinance in the official newspaper of the City with notice that a printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the Office of the City Clerk. Section 4. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. PASSED by the City Council this ___ day of ________, 2021. _________________________ Clint Hooppaw, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Pamela J. Gackstetter, City Clerk Residential Residential Residential Residential Stormwater Mitigation Stormwater Mitigation Stormwater Mitigation Stormwater Mitigation FacilityFacilityFacilityFacility ApplicationApplicationApplicationApplication To protect downstream lakes and streams, City Code §155.350(C) and (D) limits the percentage of impervious surface coverage permitted on single family and two-family properties in Apple Valley. An impervious surface is defined as a constructed surface that prevents water from naturally infiltrating directly into the soil. Impervious surfaces include building roofs, walkways, patios, driveways, sport courts, swimming pools and similar structures. To determine whether a deck is pervious or impervious, the City will consider the surface under the deck. Paragraph (C) provides the percentage maximum impervious coverage allowed depending upon lot size. Paragraph (D) contains a provision that allows a homeowner to exceed their allowance up to a maximum of 5%, but only under the following conditions: 1. Homeowner must provide good cause for additional impervious surface area. 2. Homeowner must install a City-approved stormwater mitigation facility that offsets the increased impervious coverage on the lot. By completing this application, the property owner agrees that the stormwater mitigation facility (“Stormwater Facility”) shall be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications or specific guidelines in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual, according to the chosen stormwater facility. All Stormwater Facilities shall drain within 48-72 hours. Homeowner must file a copy of the Stormwater Mitigation Facility Application with the property’s deed at the Dakota County Recorder’s office. Evidence of filing will be required prior to the start of the project. Fee Owner: Address: Lot Area: (sq ft) Describe the “Good Cause” need to exceed the allowable impervious surface area allowance: Maximum Impervious Coverage Allowed: (sq ft) (%) Existing Impervious: (sq ft) (%) Proposed Impervious: (sq ft) (%) Requested Coverage (Proposed – Maximum Impervious Allowed): (sq ft) (%) Stormwater Mitigation Facility: Proposed Volume Provided: (cu ft) Volume Requirement*: Requested Coverage (sq ft) x 0.50 in ÷ 12(in/ft) = (cu ft) *The volume requirement is the amount of water that needs to mitigated for the additional impervious surface Owner agrees as follows: A. General Specifications - 1. All work related to the Project shall be completed and be inspected for approval by the City of Apple Valley prior to the installation of additional impervious surface area on the property. 2. The Owner shall permit the City to enter the Property, at any reasonable time with reasonable notice to the Owner, for the purpose of inspecting the Project during and after the installation of the project. B. Project Site - 1. Work shall not occur within any public right-of-way or easement. The Owner shall locate and delineate all easements, rights-of-way, and utilities on Owner’s property prior to submitting an application and proposed project design. The Owner shall contact Gopher State One Call to locate all underground utilities prior to conducting excavation. 2. Stormwater Facility shall not be installed closer than 15 feet from a basement foundation or other underground utilities, or no closer than 5 feet from slab on grade foundations. 3. Projects shall be free of liners which prevent infiltration into underlying soils unless a filtration practice is deemed necessary by Staff. C. Project Specifications - 1. Owner shall install the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the dimensioned site plan attached. Site plan shall show the location of the Stormwater Facility on the property, distance from property lines, and drainage and utility easements. 2. Owner shall construct and maintain the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the stormwater facility installation instructions attached. 3. Owner shall maintain the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the stormwater mitigation facility maintenance instructions attached. 4. Owner shall execute a Stormwater Mitigation Facility Agreement that is recorded with the property deed at the Dakota County Recorder’s Office. 5. In the future, if the applicant wants to revise the agreed upon mitigation facility, you will need to contact the city. The undersigned agrees to abide by the terms of this Application. This Application must be signed and returned to the City prior to start of the project. ___________________________________ ____________________________________ Owner Date Owner Date ___________________________________ ____________________________________ Signature Signature For City of Apple Valley Use Only PLANNING APPROVAL: _________________________________________ DATE: _____________________ ENGINEERING APPROVAL: _______________________________________ DATE: _____________________ NATURAL RESOURCES APPROVAL: _________________________________ DATE: ____________________ PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR APROVAL ________________________________ DATE: ____________________ DRAFT RESIDENTIAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This Agreement is made by and between ______________ (the “Owner”), and the City of Apple Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”). The Owner and the City shall jointly be referred to as the “Parties”. WHEREAS, the Owner is the fee owner of real property located at [Property Address], Apple Valley, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: Lot __, Block ___, [Subdivision Name], according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota (the “Property”). WHEREAS, City Code § 155.350(C) establishes the maximum impervious surface area permitted on one-family detached or two-family attached lots or parcels. WHEREAS, City Code § 155.350(D) allows the maximum impervious surface area to be increased by up to an additional 5% of the established maximum impervious coverage upon a showing of circumstances supporting good cause for additional impervious surface area and the owner has installed a city approved stormwater management facility (the “Stormwater Facility”). WHEREAS, at its meeting of [August 26, 2021], the Apple Valley City Council authorized staff to prepare and approve Storm Water Management Facility Construction and Maintenance Agreements with property owners who apply for the up to 5% increase of permitted impervious surface in accordance with the provisions of §155.350(D). WHEREAS, the Owner requested an increase of __% to the maximum __% of permitted impervious surface on the Property, for a total of __% impervious surface. WHEREAS, the City approved and the Owner is required to install and maintain the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the dimensioned site plan, dated [Site plan date] showing the location and size of the Stormwater Facility on the parcel as depicted on the Site Plan (Exhibit A) and to install and maintain the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the manufacturer’s information sheet, technical guide and maintenance instructions 2 ___________[dated]_______, attached hereto as Exhibit B, Exhibit C and Exhibit D and incorporated herein (collectively the “Specifications”). WHEREAS, the Owner and the City desire to make certain mutual provisions to memorialize the allocation of responsibilities and obligations for the construction and maintenance of the Stormwater Facility between the Parties, on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and the covenants and agreements on the part of each Party to the other, as hereinafter set forth, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Construction and Maintenance. 1.1 Owner shall install and maintain the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the dimensioned site plan, dated [Site plan date] showing the location and size of the Stormwater Facility on the parcel as depicted on the Site Plan (Exhibit A). 1.2 The Owner shall install and maintain the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the manufacturer’s information sheet, technical guide and maintenance instructions __________ [dated]_______, attached hereto as Exhibit B, Exhibit C and Exhibit D and incorporated herein (collectively the “Specifications”). 1.3 Maintenance Obligation. The Owner shall maintain and repair, when necessary, the Stormwater Facility in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. If at any time the Stormwater Facility fails to conform to the standards and the Specifications set forth herein, including, but not limited to, the Infiltration Capacity, the Owner shall immediately correct the non-conformance in accordance with a City-approved remediation plan and schedule. The Owner shall submit to the City a proposed remediation plan and schedule to repair the Stormwater Facility to the standards set forth herein. If the City approves the proposed remediation plan and schedule, the Owner shall perform the remediation in compliance therewith. 1.4 Personal Property or Debris Storage Prohibited. The Owner shall not deposit or store any personal property or debris, litter, snow or other objects within the Stormwater Facility and the Owner shall keep the Stormwater Facility free of any debris, leaves, litter, or other objects. 1.5 Maintenance of Vegetation. The Owner shall maintain and, when necessary, replace the approved plants and vegetation as set forth in the Specifications dated ________, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein and as set forth in the Landscape Plan dated ________, attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein. Notwithstanding normal plant maintenance, such as pruning, dividing or thinning vegetation, the Owner shall seek approval from the City before altering the plants used in the Stormwater Facility. The Owner shall not use any chemicals within the Stormwater Facility unless first approved by the City and 3 only when necessary for the protection of the Stormwater Facility or its vegetation. The Owner shall repair any erosion within or surrounding the Stormwater Facility. 1.6 Maintenance Costs. The Owner shall incur and pay all costs associated with maintaining and repairing the Stormwater Facility. 1.7 Other Required Permits. Property owner shall be responsible for obtaining all required permits that may be needed for this project including, but not limited to, building permit, Natural Resources Management Permit (NRMP), driveway/right-of-way permit and variance. Execution of this agreement does not imply approval of other permits. All permits must be reviewed and approved separately. 2. Inspections. 2.1 Twice a Year Inspections. The Owner shall conduct inspections of the Stormwater Facility a minimum of two times per year, at the Owner’s sole cost and expense, to ensure the Infiltration Capacity and a healthy plant community is maintained. If necessary, the Owner shall repair the Stormwater Facility if the Infiltration Capacity or healthy plant community is not in conformance with the standards set forth herein. Repairing landscape and vegetation to maintain a healthy plant community may include replacement of dead or diseased plants, vegetation or mulch and removal of noxious weeds, litter or other debris. 3. Remediation and Waiver of Rights. 3.1 Remediation Plan. If the City determines that the Stormwater Facility does not conform to the Minimum Infiltration Capacity or any other requirements of the Specifications or this Agreement, the City shall notify the Owner of the deficiency in writing. The Owner shall submit a proposed remediation plan and schedule to the City within thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice. If the proposed remediation plan and schedule are not acceptable to the City, the City shall notify the Owner of the deficiency, and the Owner shall submit a revised plan to the City within fourteen (14) days after receipt of such notice. 3.2 Failure to Repair. If the Owner fails to submit a proposed remediation plan and schedule to the City as prescribed above, or fails to implement a City-approved remediation plan, or if the remediation plan fails to bring the Stormwater Facility into compliance with the Infiltration Capacity or Specifications, then at the sole cost and expense of the Owner, the City shall have the right, but no obligation, to prepare a remediation plan for the Stormwater Facility and complete all work necessary to correct the Stormwater Facility so as to bring it into compliance with the Infiltration Capacity and Specifications. 3.3 Reimbursement to the City. The Owner shall reimburse the City within thirty (30) days after receipt of an invoice from the City for any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with preparing a remediation plan for the Stormwater Facility and all work completed by the City to bring the Stormwater Facility back into compliance with the Infiltration Capacity and Specifications. 4 3.4 Waiver of Rights. If the Owner does not timely reimburse the City, the City may recover its costs by levying a special assessment against the Property. The Owner, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, hereby acknowledges the benefit of such maintenance to the Property and waives any rights to hearings or notice of hearings relating to the levying of any City assessments or the right to contest the assessments under Minnesota Statutes § 429.081. 3.5 Right of Entry. The City shall have the right to enter the Property to inspect and to implement the terms of this Paragraph 3. The City shall not be subject to or liable for any claims of trespass by the Owner. 4. Standards for Performance. Any act of construction, maintenance, or repair to be performed under this Agreement shall be performed in compliance with the Specifications, pursuant to sound engineering practices and in compliance with all applicable governmental requirements. 5. Amendment, Release or Termination. No amendment, release or termination of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be effective or may be filed of record unless the City consents to the amendment, release or termination. Such consent must be evidenced by a resolution duly approved by the City Council, or successor body. The Owner, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, expressly acknowledges and agrees that the City has no obligation whatsoever to approve or act upon any proposed amendment, release or termination, may withhold or delay consent for any reason or no reason whatsoever, any may condition consent upon such terms as the City deems desirable. The Owner, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, further agrees and covenants, consistent with this acknowledgment, not to institute any legal proceedings against the City on the grounds that the City failed to respond appropriately to a proposed amendment, release or termination and to indemnify the City against any expense, including litigation costs, which the City incurs as a result of any violation by that party of this covenant. The City may, at any time, give up the right to approval granted hereunder, said action to be evidenced by City Council resolution or other format approved by the City Attorney. 6. Duration. This Agreement shall constitute a covenant running with the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties, and any and all of their successors and assigns. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, if the total impervious surface area within the Property is permanently reduced to the amount in existence as of the date of this Agreement and if the removed impervious surface is replaced by pervious material acceptable to the City, then this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. 7. Recording Agreement. The Owner shall record this Agreement against the Property with the Dakota County Recorder's Office within thirty (30) days of full execution and shall provide the City with verification of recording within ninety (90) day of full execution of this Agreement. The Owner shall not construct or install the Stormwater Facility, or commence any work related thereto, until this Agreement is recorded with the Dakota County Recorder's Office. 5 8. Governing Law. The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern the interpretation, validity, performance, and enforcement of this Agreement. [SIGNATURE PAGES TO FOLLOW] 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Stormwater Mitigation Facility Construction and Maintenance Agreement effective as of the date of execution on behalf of the City of Apple Valley. Property Owner Property Owner By: _________________________________ By: _________________________________ Its: _________________________________ Its _________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ____________) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________, _____, by _____________ and ________________, the Property Owner(s). __________________________________ Notary Public CITY OF APPLE VALLEY __________________________________ By: Matt Saam Its: Public Works Director This instrument was drafted by: City of Apple Valley Community Development Department 7100 – 147th Street West Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 (952) 953-2575 What are examples of impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include, but are not limited to: building roofs, walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots, concrete or asphalt paving, sport courts, tennis courts and swimming pools. According to City Code, decks shall not be considered an impervious surface if: the surface under the deck is pervious; or the surface water run- off from the deck surface is not controlled by a drainage system, such as gutters, diversion plates. (See City Ordinance §155.003) What’s the big deal about “impervious surfaces”? When it rains, water can’t soak into impervious surfaces like rooftops, driveways, sheds & roads. Instead, it runs off into streets and storm sewers creating stormwater. From our streets to our streams, stormwater picks up nutrients, dirt, salt, fertilizers, pesticides, oil, bacteria, and garbage. Reducing runoff is critical to minimizing the impact our yards and gardens have on the surrounding lakes and streams. There are many ways to encourage rainwater to soak into the ground, or you can capture rainwater for use in your yard. The goal is to keep our lakes and rivers clean! (Source MPCA) What are the City requirements for impervious surfaces? To protect downstream resources, City Ordinance §155.350 limits the percentage of hard surfaces, or impervious surfaces, a homeowner can create on their property. (See ordinance or contact the City for additional information, but below is a quick breakdown) Call the City’s Building Inspection division at 952-953-2588 to help locate a survey on file. If you are unable to locate a survey, you can ESTIMATE the measurement of the impervious surfaces digitally at https://gis.co.dakota.mn.us/DCGIS/ site, just be sure to include all types of surfaces as defined above. Understanding Impervious Surfaces How can I calculate the impervious surface on my property? Check if you already have a survey for your property, such as when your home was constructed or when previous improvements were made on the property. This survey may have information on the impervious surfaces constructed on your lot. You can also measure the size of all the impervious areas on your lot with a tape measure. Lot Size* Maximum Impervious Coverage Allowed Regardless of lot size if area is within 1,000 feet of Shoreland** 25% 9,000 sq. ft. or greater 35% 8,999 – 7,500 sq. ft. 40% 7,499 – 6,000 sq. ft. 45% Less than 6,000 sq. ft. 50% *Actual lot area shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number for de- termination of lot size **Shoreland Code also looks at building setbacks from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) Level of the Lake – contact Staff to determine the OHW What are my options if my proposed project exceeds the impervious surface percentage limit on my property?  Avoid and or Minimize: Remove other impervious surface you no longer need. Example: Remove excess patio or pool decking Swap other impervious surface on property of same size. Example: Remove old shed to add new patio All stormwater management projects must conform to the following requirements: Be located on private property Be located outside of the right-of-way and any drainage and utility easements Infiltrate within 48-hours Limit significant tree loss unless authorized as part of planning and review stages Be subject to a standard maintenance agreement, approved by City Council & recorded on the property with the deed at the Dakota County Recorder’s Office. Native Swale (Source MPCA) Raingarden Pervious Pavers Additional Considerations for Your Project Planning Are you making changes to the driveway? Replacing, adding, expanding or modifying a driveway may require a Driveway Right-of-Way permit. Contact Public Works at 952-953-2400. Are you removing trees? See Ordinance §152.46 •If you are removing trees, you may be required to replace the significant ones. Will it involve grading, filling, or other land disturbing activities? See Ordinance §152.16 •If your project will disturb 3500 sq. ft. of land or 20 cubic yards of soil, you will need to apply for a Natural Resource Management Permit with the City. The purpose of this permit is to ensure that you contain all soils on your construction site, and measures to control erosion and protect significant trees are maintained throughout the project. Does buffer zone apply? See Ordinance § 152.57 (B) Some projects may trigger the installation or replacement of protective vegetative buffer zones; these areas are typically around wetlands, ponds, & lakes. Does it have wetlands? See Ordinance §152.56. •Determine whether you have any wetlands on your property and whether you intend to impact. •Scroll to property at https://gis.co.dakota.mn.us/DCGIS/ Click > Maps > Map Layers > Environment > National Wetland Inventory Have you checked setbacks and easements? See Ordinance §155.332-3 •Some structures may require building setbacks. If your lot is located within 1000 feet of a shoreland (Alimagnet, Long and Farquar or your lot abuts Keller Lake) you may be subject to the City’s Shoreland ordinance, which requires additional building setbacks, and further restricts the impervious surface area allowed. Has it been platted? See Ordinance §153.02 •If your lot has not been platted, you may need to hire a surveyor to survey the property and outline any right of way and/or easements. Platting requires coordination with the City and the County recorder’s office. Please contact Community Development at commdev@applevalleymn.gov Native vegetated swale Raingarden Pervious or permeable pavers Must include a rock storage system or raised underdrain (City specification can be provided) •Shoreline Buffer •Double the required buffer width •An approved alternative method •Options – green roof, large under- ground cistern, plant trees, etc. •All alternatives must be approved by city prior to installation  Manage the additional stormwater runoff by installing a stormwater management practice. Options include: Did you know you can learn a great deal about your property without even leaving your desk chair? Whether you are merely curious, or you are planning your next project, Dakota County GIS (Geographic InformaƟon Systems) is a great tool to learn about your property. Below are a few helpful hints to navigate the website. How to Learn More About Your Property—A Guide to Dakota County GIS Website Begin by visiƟng: hƩps://gis.co.dakota.mn.us/DCGIS/ and finding your property. You can “Search” by address or “zoom” to the area you wish to invesƟgate, by using the wheel on your mouse. Next click “Select” which will bring up Details in the middle of the screen. Scroll down to find: Total Lot Size (useful when adding impervious surface , such as a paƟo) Plat Documents: Click “View” to view plat documents for your lot. Your plat will show: exisƟng easements, lot dimensions, & subdivision name. Next click “Map Layer” to explore and add different layers onto the map. Click the to explore opƟons. And check the boxes to turn layers on and off. You can find: Wetland informaƟon (under environ- ment, NaƟonal Wetland Inventory) ElevaƟon Data Historic Aerials (under “Basemap” >Aerial Photo Map) And much, much more! You can also measure areas and distances— Click “Measure” to explore your opƟons Please note that this informaƟon is for planning purposes only and does not replace actual onsite survey informaƟon. Existing Structures Length (feet) Width (feet) Total (square feet) Buildings/Structures: House and Attached Garage (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Detached Garage (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Shed (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 1:___________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 2:___________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Driveways & Landscaping: Driveway (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Sidewalks (within property) (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Parking Area (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Garage apron (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Patio (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Pavers (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 1:__________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 2:__________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Sum of Existing Impervious = (sq ft) Proposed Structures Buildings/Structures: House Addition (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Garage (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Shed (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 1:___________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 2:___________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Driveways & Landscaping: Driveway (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Sidewalks (within property) (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Parking Area (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Garage apron (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Patio (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 1:__________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Other 2:__________ (ft) x (ft) = (sq ft) Sum of Proposed Impervious = (sq ft) Total Lot Area (sq. ft)* = ____________ Sum of Existing impervious + (sq ft) Total with New impervious = (sq ft) Percent Existing Impervious: Sum of Existing Impervious / Total Lot area = (%) Percent of Total Impervious: Sum of Total Impervious / Total lot area = (%) *Information can be found on Dakota County GIS see User Guide for more information. Lot area should not include areas occupied by water Impervious Surface Calculator (use this as a guide or worksheet) Other 3:___________ Other 3:__________(ft) (ft) x x (ft) (ft) (sq ft) (sq ft) = = Note: Lot Area must be entered to calculate percentages I T E M: 5.A . P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:L and Use / A ction I tems Description: E agle Pointe - P C 21-05-S B S taff Contact: T homas L ovelace, City P lanner D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department Applicant: J . D avid Management, L L C and J oel Watrud P roject Number: P C21-05-S B Applicant Date: 3/17/2021 60 Days: 5/15/2021 120 Days: 8/13/2021 AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: If the Planning C ommission concurs, staff is recommending the following actions: Recommend approval of the Eagle Pointe preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Final plat approval shall be contingent on the approval of the Eagle Pointe Wetland Permit A pplications. 2. Park and ponding dedication shall be in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 155.29 of the C ity's subdivision control chapter and all other applicable city ordinances. 3. A blanket drainage and utility easement shall be placed over and across all of the Lot 77. 4. Dedication on the final plat of a ten foot (10') wide easement for drainage, utility, street, sidewalk, street lights, and tree plantings along the portion of Lot 78 abutting the public road right-of-way. 5. Dedication on the final plat of a five foot (5') wide drainage and utility easement along all common lot lines of Lot 78. 6. Right-of-way for 140th Street West and Garden View Drive shall be dedicated, which should include enough right-of-way for a right-turn lane on the north side 140th Street West at the private street intersection. 7. An easement or right-of-way shall be dedicated to allow for installation of eight-foot bituminous trail along the north side of 140th Street West. 8. Installation of pedestrian improvements in accordance with the C ity's adopted Trail and Sidewalk Policies, to consist of an eight foot (8') wide bituminous pathway along the north side of 140th Street West. 9. Dedication of one foot (1') wide easements which restrict direct private street/driveway access to G arden View Drive. 10. Dedication of one foot (1') wide easements which restrict direct private street/driveway access to from 140th Street West, except at a C ity approved location. 11. Submission of a final grading plan and lot elevations with erosion control procedures, to be reviewed and approved by the C ity Engineer. Recommend approval of the site plan/building permit authorization to allow for 23 detached villa homes and 49 townhome dwelling units subject to the following conditions: 1. Issuance of any building permits shall be contingent on the approval of the Eagle Pointe Wetland Permit Applications. 2. Issuance of any building permits shall be subject to the approval and recording of the Eagle Pointe final plat. 3. Construction shall occur in conformance with the site plan dated J uly 8, 2021; subject to the addition of a pedestrian connection from the Street D D cul-de-sac to the 140th Street West pathway, an eight-foot wide bituminous pathway that will run parallel to the pipeline easement and intersect with Streets BB and D D for utility maintenance use, and pedestrian connections along the north and south side of Street A A. 4. All streets within the developments shall be signed "N O PA RKIN G". 5. Construction shall occur in conformance with the landscape plans dated J uly 8, 2021, (including sodded/seeded public boulevard area up to each street curbline); subject to submission of a detailed landscape planting price list for verification of the C ity’s 2.5% landscaping requirement at the time of building permit application. 6. Additional landscape screening shall be installed in the rear area behind Lots 14-28 and 51-56, and the side area adjacent between Lot 76 and 140th Street West. 7. No trees shall be permitted in public easements or right-of-way unless approved by the City Engineer. 8. No trees shall be permitted below the 100-year High Water Line. 9. Additional landscaping screening shall be installed of above the 100-year High Water Line. 10. Construction of the villa homes shall occur in conformance with the elevation plans dated April 22, 2020; subject to the condition that exterior materials met the requirements set forth in Section 155.346 (4) (c) of the city code. 11. Construction of the townhomes shall occur in conformance with the elevation plans dated J anuary 27, 2021; subject to the condition that exterior materials met the requirements set forth in Section 155.346 (4) (c) of the city code. 12. A final grading plan shall be submitted, which shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits. 13. Site grading shall occur in conformance with a Natural Resources Management Plan (N RMP). 14. Final utility plans shall be submitted, which shall be reviewed and approved by the C ity Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits. S UM M ARY: T he applicant submitted an initial request to: 1. Subdivide 22.2 acres for the purpose of creating 82 lots that will consist of 27 single- family villa lots, 53 townhome lots, one (1) single-family lot, and one (1) lot for common open space for private streets, guest parking, and storm water ponds; and 2. Approval of site plan/building permit authorization to allow for construction a 27 villa dwellings, and one 3-unit, ten 4-unit and two 5-unit townhome buildings. T he applicant has revised their plans and are now requesting: 1. Subdivision of the 22.2 acres for the purpose of creating 78 lots that will consist of 27 single-family villa lots, 49 townhome lots, one (1) single-family lot, and one (1) lot for common open space for private streets, guest parking, and storm water ponds; and 2. Approval of site plan/building permit authorization to allow for construction a 27 villa dwellings, and one 3-unit, nine 4-unit and two 5-unit townhome buildings. T he property is located at 8661 140th Street West and is the site of the former Apple Valley Golf Course. Adjacent uses include single-family residential to the north, single-family, two- family and multi-family residential to the west and south, and multi-family to the east. T he site has rolling terrain with the exception of a couple of more prominent elevation changes near the second and ninth greens, and along the northern and eastern edges of the property. T he site directly abuts single-family residential to the north and west, and two community collector streets to the south and east. B AC K G RO UND : Comprehensiv e P lan: T he property is currently designated "LD F" (Low Density Flex) residential, which allows for a range of three (3) to eight (8) units per acre, subject to the following: In areas near single-family and two-family dwellings it would seek to match uses and types on parcels being redeveloped nearby. A land use response would be at the lower end of the cited range. On parcels with sufficient space that also abut higher volume roadways that are forecasted to continue to increase in volume, a density at a higher end of the cited range that could also provide a buffer next to adjacent lower density. It encourages the design integration of natural site conditions such as wetlands and elevation changes that may be unique to the site. Zoning: T he zoning ordinance is used to create zoning districts and identify uses that are allowed in each district. It also identifies area standards and performance standards that regulate such things as the minimum lot area, size and location of a building or structure, building setbacks from property lines, building height, lot coverage, and maximum impervious surface within a particular zoning district. T he property is currently zoned “LD F” (Low Density Flex). T his zoning designation allows for a variety of housing types that would include one-family detached dwellings, two-family dwellings, detached one-unit townhomes, and attached townhomes at a density of 3-8 units per acre. N o building can exceed two stories or 35 feet in height, which is consistent with the current single-family, two-family, and "M-1, "M-2", "M-3", and "M-4" multi-family zoning districts. T he distinction of this proposed zoning district from other typical residential zoning districts are: Only one-family and two-family dwellings may be constructed on parcels directly abutting existing one- or two-family dwellings. T he density may be increased in areas not directly abutting existing one- and two- family dwellings as long as the overall density does not exceed eight (8) units per acre. Uses within this zoning district include: Any permitted use in the R, single-family district as regulated therein; Two-family residential dwelling; Single-family detached townhome; and Townhome dwellings, provided they are serviced by public sanitary sewer and water systems and provided no single structure is in excess of 12 dwelling units. Conditional and permitted accessory uses are currently allowed in the "R" zoning districts. Area requirements within this district would be consistent with established residential districts in the city. T he proposed plans show a single-family dwelling on a .5-acre lot, 27 villa homes, and 53 attached townhome dwellings. Twenty-three of the villas will be on 46-foot wide lots and four units will be on 56-foot wide lots. T he townhomes will consist of one 3-unit, ten 4-unit and two 5-unit buildings. C orner units will be on 35-foot wide lots and the interior units will be on 32-foot wide lots. When determining lot area and density for a project such as this one, the common open space lot is included in the calculation. T herefore, the unit lot area will be 11,456 sq. ft. with an overall density of just under four (4) units per acre. T he required building setbacks for the proposed dwellings are identified in the the table. Single-F amily Detached Townhome Attached Townhome D welling L ot Width 40 feet - Min. Building Setbacks (in feet) Along Community/Neighborhood Collector Street 40 40 Along all other public streets 30 30 Along priv ate streets and driv es 25 25 Side yard 30 30 Rear yard 30 30 B etween buildings 10 15 Liv able C ommunities I mpact: T he C ity participates in the Metropolitan C ouncil's Livable C ommunities program, which identifies housing goals for the community. T he proposed development is consistent with the C ity's goal of providing a range of different housing styles to provide more life-cycle housing within the community. P reliminary P latting: Approximately 14 acres of the 22.2-acre site is unplatted, with remaining property platted as outlots. Right-of-way for 140th Street West and Garden View Avenue occupies about 1.4 acres of the property. T he applicant's original proposal was to subdivide the property into lots that would consist of 27 single-family villas, 53 townhome lots, and one single-family lot; with the remaining lot (Lot 82) being common open space that would be the location of private streets, guest parking areas, and storm water ponds. T he applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat that will have 27 single-family villas, 49 townhome lots, one single-family lot and one lot (Lot 77) that will be common open space and the location of private streets, guest parking areas, and storm water ponds. T he owners of the villas and townhomes will have common interest ownership of Lot 77, which will be maintained by a homeowners association. Outlot B, C obblestones I will be replatted into a single-family lot that will meet the requirements set forth in the "R-3" ( Single-Family Residential) zoning designation. It will have street frontage and direct access off Hollins C ourt, an existing public street. Drainage and utility easements will be dedicated around the perimeter of the lot in accordance with the City's subdivision requirements. Sanitary sewer and water service to the lot will be provided by existing utility lines located in the Hollins C ourt right-of-way. All villa and townhome lots within the proposed subdivision will have access from 140th Street West via an intersection that will be aligned with 138th Street West. Of the 22.2 acres, 2.21 acres (9.95%) will be used for the villa home lots, 2.60 acres (11.7%) for townhome lots, .5 acres (2.25%) for a single-family lot, and .86 acres (3.87%) for public right-of-way. T he remaining 16.03 acres (72.2%) will be open space and the location of the development's storm water ponds, private streets, guest parking spaces, and driveways. T he following shall be included with the subdivision: A blanket drainage and utility easement shall be placed over and across all of the Lot 77. Right-of-way for 140th Street West and Garden View Drive shall be dedicated, which should include enough right-of-way for a right-turn lane on the north side 140th Street West at the private street intersection. An easement or right-of-way shall be dedicated to allow for installation of eight-foot bituminous trail along the north side of 140th Street West. An easement shall be dedicated that restricts vehicular access from Garden View Drive. An easement shall be dedicated that restricts vehicular access from 140th Street West, except at a C ity approved location. Site P lan: T he original site plan identified 27 single-family villa lots, 53 townhome lots, one single-family lot and a lot that will be the location of the private streets, guest parking areas, and storm water ponding areas. T he revised plan has eliminated a four-unit townhome building at the southeast corner of the site to allow for a storm water pond. Access to the villas and townhomes will be via a private street that will intersect with 140th Street West. T his intersection will be placed directly across from the existing 138th/140th Street intersection. No other access will be allowed to the site. T he private street intersection will have a three lane configuration with a raised median. One lane will be used to gain entrance to the site from 140th Street West. Two exit lanes will be constructed, one of which will allow for right turns only with the remaining lane designated as a through and left turn lane. T he proposed private street shall have a minimum street width of 28 feet as measured from the face of the curb. T he street will cross over an existing 80-foot wide Northern Natural Gas C ompany pipeline easement at three locations, which will require approval from the gas company. T he private street shall be adequately designed to accommodate a fire truck and other larger vehicles. T he applicant has provided an off-site maneuvering/fire access plan that shows that the private street's turns, curves, and cul-de-sacs will accommodate a fire truck. Twenty-one of the single-family villa lots will be adjacent to the existing single-family homes along the north and west edge of the site. T he remaining three villa lots will be located just north and south of the pipeline easement. T hese lots will have a depth of 75 feet and lot widths of either 46 or 56 feet, depending on the number of garage spaces. T he townhome lots will vary in size, depending on the number of units per building. T he plans shows one 3-unit, nine 4-unit, and two 5-unit buildings. T hirty-three units will be located on the northwest end of the site, between the pipeline easement and 140th Street West. T he remaining 16 units will be located at southwest corner of 140th Street West and Garden View Drive. All lots will meet the minimum setback requirements set forth in the "LD F" zoning ordinance. Dwelling units shall be set back 30 feet from the property line that abuts existing single-family lots, with a ten-foot setback between the villa homes and 15 feet between the townhome buildings. Both 140th Street West and Garden View Drive are classified as collector streets. Buildings adjacent to the the two roadways will be set back a minimum of 40 feet from the street right-of-way line. Buildings will be set back a minimum of 25 feet from the private street, as measured from the top of curb to the building elevation. T he C ity code requires that each single-family dwelling provide two parking spaces in addition to any garage unit and townhome dwellings provide 1.5 parking spaces and one garage space per unit. Each villa and townhome unit will have a minimum of two garage spaces and two spaces on the driveway. Forty-three guest parking spaces will be distributed throughout the site, which exceeds the minimum code requirements. P ipeline E asement: As stated previously, an 80-foot wide Northern Natural G as pipeline easement is located on the property. T he applicant is proposing to construct a street that will cross over the easement at three locations. It is the pipeline company's philosophy to prevent encroachments, when possible, by working with agencies and developers to design projects outside the pipeline easement. Many of Northern’s easement agreements prohibit encroachments and Northern will enforce applicable provisions in its easement agreements where it believes the continued safe operation and maintenance of the pipeline could be threatened. Where Northern determines that an activity can be undertaken without jeopardy to the pipeline system, they will require an encroachment agreement or issue an encroachment permit depending on the type and scope of activity proposed. Some examples of activities/work that may occur in the easement include: Street and road crossings Fencing, retaining walls and terracing Landscaping and planting of trees Residential water lines Residential television cable Small diameter drainage or sewer lines Residential electrical lines Fences that do not cross the pipeline Residential sprinkler systems Residential driveway Other activities subject to an encroachment agreement are determined on a case-by-case basis. Finally, their ideal subdivision layout would be to have the entire easement width reserved as an open space trail or green belt. Use of the existing pipeline will be addressed as part of a development proposal. T he applicant should have approval of the development from the pipeline company prior to approval by the City. Wetlands: T here are currently three wetlands, totaling 1.67 acres, on the subject property. A wetland delineation report was submitted on J uly 25, 2018, and was approved by the A pple Valley C ity C ouncil on September 27, 2018. T his report is valid for three years, with an end date of September 27, 2021. T he applicant's wetland consultant has determined in the wetland application, that the Eagle Pointe project will require 49,985 square feet (1.1475 acres) of permanent impact to isolated wetlands when developed in a manner consistent with the developer's proposal. To offset the impact, the applicant is proposing a wetland replacement, which includes the purchase of 99,970 square feet (2.2950 acres) of Standard Wetland Credit. T he applicant has submitted two wetland applications and is requesting: Approval Request of Incidental Wetlands Onsite and a Wetland Replacement Plan Initial Submittal, dated May 26, 2021, revised submittal dated J uly 12, 2021. T he revised submittal is currently under review. Delineation Extension Request and No Wetland Determination (No Loss), dated May 26, 2021. T he C ity C ouncil, as the Local Governmental Unit (LG U), is responsible for administering the Wetland C onservation Act (WC A ) and will need to approve the WC A items . Attached with the report is a memo from the C ity's Water Resources Specialist that goes into additional detail on the wetland administration process. Any final approval of the land use application should include conditions regarding approval of the WC A applications. Grading and Storm Water Management: A final grading and drainage plan shall be reviewed and approved by the C ity Engineer. Final locations and sizes of storm sewers shall be reviewed with the final construction plans and approved by City Engineer. Grading within Northern Natural Gas easement may require an encroachment agreement between the applicant and N orthern Pipeline. T he preliminary grading and drainage plan and storm water calculations have been reviewed by the City Engineer and his comments are included in his attached memo. Elev ation Drawings: T he elevations for the villas and townhomes show a exterior finish consisting of a combination of LP Smartside, a type of wood composite siding, and vinyl siding, with 48-inch high stone face on the front elevation of the villas and and a stone face that will vary from 42 inches to nine feet high on the front elevation of the townhomes. Multiple residential buildings adjacent to R zones or occupied M zones shall have a vertical exposed exterior finish consisting of at least 50% non-combustible, non-degradable and maintenance-free construction materials (such as face brick or natural stone but excluding such construction materials as sheet aluminum, iron or concrete block of any kind or similar), with the balance being a non-manufactured natural construction material such as plank cedar or redwood. L a n d s c a p i n g : T he landscape plan indicates a variety of deciduous ornamental and overstory trees and evergreens, T he applicant will need to meet landscape requirements within the C ity’s zoning ordinance, which requires that residential developments in multiple family zoning districts install landscaping (live plant material excluding sod) that will have a minimum cost of 2.5% of the estimated building construction cost based on Means Construction Data. T he applicant will need to submit a landscape plan that labels the plants and a detailed planting list for review and approval by C ity staff prior to issuance of a building permit. For developments having a construction value in excess of $1,000,000, the plan shall be prepared by a landscape architect registered and licensed in the state. T he minimum cost of landscaping materials for the plan shall be equivalent to 2.5% of the estimated building construction cost based on current Means Construction Data. T he applicant's landscape estimate does not meet the C ity's criteria and will need to be adjusted. Additional trees should be planted in the rear area of Lots 14-28 and 51-64. Additional landscaping should also be placed around the storm water ponding areas. T here are a total of 267 trees currently on the site. T he applicant is proposing to remove 192 trees which equates to 3,344 caliper inches. T his will require the replacement shall be equal to 10% of the total caliper inches removed. Av ailability of Municipal Utilities: Sanitary sewer and watermain utilities are currently located adjacent to the site. D evelopment will include the extension of sanitary sewer and watermain lines to serve the proposed dwelling units. Also, hydrants and valve locations will be evaluated during final design to ensure adequate fire protection. T he C ity Engineer has reviewed the utility plans and his comments are included in his attached memo. Street Classifications: T he site abuts Garden View Drive on the east, 140th Street West on the west and Hollins Court on the north. G arden View D rive and 140th Street West are major collectors, which are designed to collect traffic from neighborhoods and employment centers and distribute it to the City arterial system. Hollins C ourt is a local street, whose primary use is to serve local transportation needs such as gaining access to the property bordering it. A private street, 28 feet wide, will provide access to the units within the development. T he street shall be signed "N O PA RKIN G ". Traffic I mpacts: T he C ity's traffic consultant indicated that the original proposal would generate 602 trips per day, which equated to approximately 7.5 trips per unit. T he revised plan has eliminated one 4-unit townhome building, which will reduce the number of trips by 3 0 . T he C ity's traffic consultant has reviewed traffic for the development based on the 602 trips and findings are included in an attached memo. T he 30-trip reduction should not have any significant impact to the consultant's conclusions. P edestrian Access: A bituminous trail, constructed to C ity standards, shall be installed on the north side of 140th Street West. T he C ity has not generally required sidewalks in developments with private streets or drives unless they are part of a larger planned development, such as C obblestone Lake. However, we are recommending that sidewalk or bituminous trail connections be made from the site to the future trail on the north side of 140th Street West. Staff initially recommended a pedestrian connection to the existing trail on the west side of Garden View D rive, however, the grades along the east side of the development will not lend itself to a connection. T he applicant will also be installing a eight-foot wide bituminous pathway that will run parallel to the pipeline easement and intersect with Streets BB and D D. T his will provide an internal pedestrian connection and will used an access by the City maintenance personnel to the north storm water ponding area (Pond #5). Finally, sidewalks should be installed on the north and south side of Street A A, which should connect to the 140th Street West pathway. P ublic Hearing Comments: A public hearing for the proposed subdivision was held on J une 16, 2021. T he hearing was opened, testimony taken and the hearing was closed. T he following is a synopsis of the comments received and staff's response to those comments not included in the J une 16, 2021 meeting minutes. A resident asked if the traffic study was completed during the pandemic. Staff response - The City Engineer stated that the projected numbers were taken prior to the pandemic. A question was raised if the traffic study took into account the maximum of six cars per lot. Staff response - The number of projected trips comes f rom the Institute of Traf f ic Engineers (IT E) manual, which identif ies the number of trips that will be generated by the use, not by the number of cars that may be on a property. A concern was raised about having no control devices along 140th Street West for pedestrians wanting to cross the road to get to Sunset Park. Staff response - The C ity Engineer stated that the traf f ic projections are at f ull buildout and the roadway does not meet MN D O T standards that would warrant a traf f ic control device. A question was raised asking if two access points should be required in case of e mergenc ie s . Staff response - It is not a requirement. The City's emergency personnel have reviewed the proposed development and suggested to ensure adequate access within the development f or emergency purposes, the private streets should be signed "N O PARK IN G". This request will be a condition of approval. A resident requested that the C ity provide a definition of a pond and wetland. Staff response - The Water Resources Specialist has provided that inf ormation, which is part of her J uly 16, 2021, memo. A comment was raised regarding the definition of a significant trees. Staff response - A signif icant tree is def ined as any healthy deciduous tree measuring eight inches or greater in diameter, or any conif erous tree measuring six inches or greater in diameter, at f our and one-half f eet above grade. A request was made to see how the proposed villas would fit on the lots. Staff response - The applicant has provided revised plans that show the f ootprints of the villas over the proposed lots. All villas will be contained within the lots and will meet the minimum required setbacks. A comment was raised about accessibility to public parks. Staff response - Please see the attached memo f rom the Parks and Recreation Dept. A questions was raised about what will happen to the ten-foot easement located off 135th Street West. Staff response - Staff is unaware of any easement at that location. There is a ten-f oot wide outlot that is owned by Mr. Watrud that will be replatted as part of any redevelopment of the golf course property. A comment was raised about the loss of greenspace. Staff response - Any development project that includes buildings, streets, parking, driveways, etc. will result in loss of greenspace. As proposed, this development will likely have up to 70% open space. B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A AT TAC HM E NT S: Memo Memo Memo L ocation Map C omp Plan Map Z oning Map Preliminary P lat Plan S et C ross-Section Drawing L andscaping P lan Elevations Memo CITY OF MEMO Public Works TO: Tom Lovelace, Planner FROM: Brandon S. Anderson, PE, City Engineer DATE: July 14, 2021 SUBJECT: Eagle Point Preliminary Plan Review General 1.All work and infrastructure within public easements or right of way shall be to City standards. 2.Provide a narrative of how the buildings will be constructed and any impacts. The narrative shall include the following: •Shoring (if applicable) •Protection of public utilities within existing drainage and utility easements shall be protected at all times. •Material Storage. •Haul routes to and from the site. •Phasing 3.No construction work shall begin prior to a preconstruction meeting conference with a Public works and a Building Inspections representative. 4.Public Work Department (952-953-2400) shall be notified a minimum of 48 hours for any required water main shut downs and/or connections. 5.City of Apple Valley Water Department shall operate all valves on public owned mains and valves connecting private lines to public owned mains. 6.Sheet C1.0, benchmark should identify vertical datum. 7.Grading within Northern Natural Gas easement may require and encroachment agreement. Additional clarity is required to show landscape requirements within easement area. Permits 8.A public infrastructure project is anticipated for the proposed sanitary sewer and water services. Plans and specifications shall be completed by the City of Apple Valley. A private installation agreement may be necessary for construction of public infrastructure by developer or the developer can have the City of Apple Valley publicly bid the improvements and provide assessments back to the property. 9.Provide a copy of the executed Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Met Council, Department of Labor and any other required permits prior to construction. 10. A right of way permit will be required for all work within public easements or right of way. 11. A Natural Resource Management Permit (NRMP) will be required prior to any land disturbing activity commences. 12. Since the site will be disturbing more than 1 acre and creating more than 1 acre of new impervious. The applicant will be subject to the requirements of the State NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit. The applicant must provide proof of permit. Site/Traffic 13. Streets shall be signed NO Parking. 14. All retaining walls over 48” from bottom of footing to the top of wall shall be designed and certified by a structural engineer and submitted to building inspections for final approval. Retaining walls over 4’ will require a fence above the wall. Provide additional details and/or specifications for retaining wall block. Retaining walls shall be privately owned and maintained. Retaining walls are not allowed in drainage and utility easements without an approved encroachment agreement. Retaining walls cannot encroach onto adjacent properties. 15. Sheet C2.0 Preliminary Plat: • Right of Way acreage should be updated to reflect the additional dedication along 140th Street for turn lane and trail dedication. Turn lane length, width and taper should be include dimensions. • Site plan should show “trail by others” extension to connect 8’ trail to public ROW from Lot 14 to 135th Street West • Additional sidewalk and trail connections to 140th Street is required at main entrance road and Street DD cul-de-sac. • See attached TIS from Bolton and Menk dated 6/10/21 for traffic related review. Storm Sewer, Grading. Drainage, and Erosion Control 16. Final Grading Plans shall be reviewed and approved by City Engineer. 17. Final Storm water Management Plan shall be reviewed and approved by City Engineer. 18. Final locations and sizes of Storm Sewer shall be reviewed with the final construction plans and approved by City Engineer. 19. Provide storm sewer calculations for storm water requirements. (Rational method including Hydraulic grade lines). 20. The site is located within the Alimagnet Lake Watershed. Alimagnet Lake is currently listed as impaired for Excess Nutrients. In accordance with 2018 Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP), several storm water policies would need to be addressed for new or redevelopment of the site: • Policy 6.1 The City requires compliance with all applicable post-construction water quality criteria for new and redevelopment activity adopted by the Black Dog Watershed Management Organization and the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization, as described in the BDWMO Watershed Management Plan (2012, as amended) and VRWJPO Standards (2016, as amended). • Policy 6.2 The City requires that all new, redeveloped, or expanded commercial, industrial, multiple residential, or institutional development provide infiltration for a volume equivalent to 0.5 inches of runoff over the area of the development. • Policy 6.3 The City requires that new and redevelopment activity of 0.2 acres or more shall be required to achieve no-net-increase in average annual total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP) loading compared to the pre-development condition of the site. • Policy 6.4 The City may require additional treatment measures as needed for any development or re-development activity to protect downstream receiving waters, including, but not limited to, additional measures in TMDLs or WRAPS watersheds plans. • Policy 6.5 of SWMP: Ensure there is 3 feet of separation from the bottom of the infiltration basins and the seasonally saturated soils. 21. The site is also located adjacent to where areas of localized flooding has occurred during the 10- and 100-year, 24 hour storm events: • Holyoke Path and Holyoke Lane • Garden View Drive just south of 140th Street W. 22. In accordance with SWMP policy 1.5, the city requires that new development and redevelopment activities do not increase peak runoff rates relative to pre-project runoff rates for the 1-year, 2-year, 10-year and 100-year critical storm event. The City may impose more stringent rate control requirements if the capacity of the downstream system is limited. 23. The downstream system (AL-P5 and AL-P6) from the site is limited in storm water capacity and any new or redevelopment will require more stringent rate control requirements. 24. City Ordinance 152.55(B): Maintenance agreement for the proposed storm water management areas will be required and must be recorded. 25. City Ordinance 155.350(C): Maximum impervious surface will be limited, see ordinance for more information. 26. Sheet C3.0 • Provide greater detail on infiltration/filtration basin as part of final plat (material composition, depth, infiltration information, underdrain, etc.) • Infiltration should be protected with silt fence during site grading and road construction • Include inlet protection on south and west side of 140th Street 27. Sheet C4.1/4.2/4.3 • Maximum driveway grade shall be 10% • Label the cul-de-sac radii • Include signage plan in final plat submittal • The lowest floor (including basement) shall be: • at least 1 feet above the estimated 100-year water surface elevation • at least 3 feet above the seasonal high local groundwater elevation • The lowest opening shall be: • at least 3 feet above the estimated 100-year water surface elevation • at least 1 foot above the storm water facility emergency overflow elevation • The following lots need elevation adjustments to meet HWL/lowest floor/opening requirements: • Lots 1-8 • Label all EOFs on the site with routing arrows and elevations. • Provide additional spot elevations between homes and townhomes to ensure proper drainage in these areas. • Minimum greenspace grades should be 2% minimum. Verify that all swales meet this requirement. • NURP Ponds should have a mean depth of >4’ but not exceed 8’ in depth from the OLE. 28. Sheet 6.1/6.2/6/3 • Minimum cover on pipe in street shall be 3’, 2’ in greenspace. Check all areas and ensure proposed grading works. • A sump and/or SAFL is required in structures within the street prior to discharging into ponds and shall be clearly shown and labeled • A skimmer structure is required on all pond outlets to protect downstream water from floatables. • Additional geotechnical investigation should be performed at the location of the infiltration basin. Soil boring 1 indicates P200 value of 40.5%. • Include more information on performance and design of infiltration basin with final design. An underdrain may be required and incorporated into hydraulics of system. • Additional CB is required between Lot 57 & 58 due to large sub-drainage area contribution. City policy is no more than 4 lots without CB. This also allows rear yards to have drain tile connection. • Additional spot elevations are required and/or additional CB for lots 21-28 due to year to front drainage pattern. This also allows rear yards to have drain tile connection. Sanitary Sewer and Water main 29. Final locations and sizes of sanitary sewer and water main shall be reviewed with the final construction plans and approved by City Engineer. 30. According to City records, services have not been provided for Lot 82. Hollins Ct will need to be cut in to in order to provide service. 31. Remove all unused service stubs back to the main (Street DD and 140th Street). 32. All 8” water main shall be per City Standards (DIP). 33. Additional Gate Valves will need to be shown to limit number of homes per “zone” to 20. Landscape and Natural Resources 34. No trees will be permitted in public easements or ROW. 35. No trees will be permitted below the 100-yr HWL. Additional screening of ponds above the 100-year HWL is encouraged. 36. Provide additional screening in rear/side yards of lots 14-28 and 76. 37. All trees shall be planted at least 15’ from the road right-of-way to reduce future traffic sight line issues and maintenance of adequate clear zones to trail. 38. Provide tree ID numbers on the preliminary tree plans. It is hard to see what trees match the point numbers. July 13, 2021 RE: Technical Memorandum Eagle Pointe Development Review – City Hydraulic Modeling Apple Valley, MN Project No.: 0N1123836 Background The proposed development is situated in the Alimagnet Lake subwatershed, which not only is known for poor water quality and significant algae blooms but contributes stormwater discharge to a residential corridor that is known for flooding. The City updated a regional, hydrodynamic model for the Alimagnent Lake subwatershed in 2018 which included the following details. • Modeling of the wetlands on the subject property. • Storm sewer contributing to the wetlands from the northern residential development. • The culvert connections between the site wetlands. • The outfall storm sewer connection at the intersection of 140th Street West and Garden View Drive. • The connected stormwater ponds and storm sewer downstream of 140th Street West to Alimagnet Lake. Current Conditions on Subject Property The wetlands on the subject property manage drainage area from approximately 40 acres, approximately 13% of the total subwatershed area to Alimagnet Lake, of open space (previously golf course) and residential areas. The wetlands mitigate discharge rates prior to the 140th Street West storm sewer connection. During large rainfall events, stormwater surcharges from the storm sewer at 140th Street West and back flows into the wetlands. The following exhibit shows the reverse flow from the street drainage into the wetland during the initial storm surge. The tail of the hydrograph shows the second peak from the wetlands that ultimately moves downstream. This surcharge into the wetlands is reducing the flood risk at the intersection of 140th Street West and Garden View Drive. Eagle Pointe Development Review – City Hydraulic Modeling 07/13/2021 Page: 2 S:\Public-Works\Private\Projects\Private Building & Site Plans\2021\Eagle Pointe - AV Golf Course\Engineering Review\07-21-21 PC review\Storm water Management - City Model Technical Memo - 07122021.docx Developer Proposed Conditions The developer originally submitted a preliminary site plan with stormwater calculations (HydroCAD). The modeling results showed a decrease in discharge to the City’s storm sewer but did not account for discharge at 140th Street West and Garden View Drive, nor the downstream controlling conditions. The assumptions in the model were reasonable but required additional sensitivity to the adjacent drainage conditions. After adjusting and expanding the potential surface storage areas in the City’s SWMP model, several suggestions were made to the developer’s engineer to expand and/or relocate ponds to expand surface storage. The developer agreed to remove 4 lots to expand the pond at 140th Street West and Garden View (Pond 8) and connect a surcharge pipe to the eastern most catch basin on 140th Street West. Developer Proposed Conditions in City Regional Model To properly account for the adjacent discharges and connection to the City’s storm sewer, the proposed development conditions were added to the City’s regional model. The updated City model also showed a decrease in discharge from the subject property into the storm sewer at 140th Street West, but also showed an increase in flood elevations in the intersection. The surcharge and back flow into the existing wetlands are critical for mitigation flooding at the 140th Street West and Garden View Drive intersection. The developer’s engineer provided updated calculations, which were incorporated into the City’s SWMP model for regional results. These modifications included the following. Storm surge from 140th Street West into wetlands. Discharge into 140th Street West from wetlands. Eagle Pointe Development Review – City Hydraulic Modeling 07/13/2021 Page: 3 S:\Public-Works\Private\Projects\Private Building & Site Plans\2021\Eagle Pointe - AV Golf Course\Engineering Review\07-21-21 PC review\Storm water Management - City Model Technical Memo - 07122021.docx • Construct backflow/surcharge basin in NW quadrant of 140th Street West and Garden View Drive (Pond 8). The basin will provide 42,500 cubic feet of dead storage and 114,000 cu ft of active storage. • Connect to City storm sewer with an 18” pipe. • Consider providing additional curb cuts at 140th Street West and Garden View Drive to encourage additional surface flows to enter the surcharge basin during large rain fall events. • This option could lower the discharge into the neighborhood south of 140th Street West by approximately 10 to 15 cubic feet per second for the 100-year rainfall event (7.4” of rain in 24 hours). Alternative Option A second alternative was considered to reroute the proposed pond outlets away from the neighborhood south of 140th Street West. The preliminary alternative includes the following key considerations. • Keep the currently proposed development ponding configuration. • Reroute Pond 8, Pond 7 and Pond 1 outlets in to a new 36” outlet that runs along the north side of 140th Street West. This could be constructed during a future trail connection project. • Divert the Garden View Drive storm sewer into Pond 8. Utilize a high capacity (wide throated) catch basin inlet to maximize the overland flow capture. The inlet could be depressed, or angled off the in-place curb line, to capture nearly all of the overland flow that would otherwise discharge to 140th Street West. • Connect to the catch basins on 135th Street West. There are two catch basins at 135th Street West and 140th Street West that should be lowered and the pipe upsized to 36”. • Upsize trunk storm sewer discharging west toward Holyoke Lane to 36” and lower upstream invert. • This option could lower the discharge into the neighborhood south of 140th Street West by approximately 20 to 30 cubic feet per second for the 100-year rainfall event (7.4” of rain in 24 hours). Sincerely, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Timothy J. Olson, PE, CFM Principal Water Resources Engineer H:\APVA\0N1123836\2_Preliminary\C_Reports\2021-06-10_Traffic Review.docx MEMORANDUM Date: June 10, 2021 To: Brandon Anderson, P.E. City Engineer Apple Valley, MN From: Bryan Nemeth, P.E., PTOE Casey Kaucher, P.E. Subject: Eagle Pointe Traffic Review I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 43354 June 10, 2021 Bryan T. Nemeth, P.E., PTOE Reg. No. Date Introduction A high-level traffic review was conducted on the proposed Eagle Pointe development in the City of Apple Valley. The purpose of the review was to identify potential traffic impacts and/or additional considerations. The results do not indicate any transportation concerns due to the development on the roadways nearby. Adjacent Site Features and Access Review • The proposed Eagle Pointe development is located northwest of the 140th Street (MSAS 104) and Garden View Drive (MSAS 115) intersection on the existing Apple Valley Golf Course. • 140th Street is classified as a major collector roadway with a 45 mile per hour speed limit. It is a four-lane undivided roadway with curb and gutter along both sides and a paved multi-use path on the south side. A multi-use path is planned for the north side of 140th Street with the proposed development. • The property currently has one vehicular access point on 140th Street approximately 210’ east of the 135th Street and 140th Street intersection. The proposed development is proposing a change to access at 138th Street W. 138th Street is located approximately half-way between the signalized intersections at McAndrews Road and Garden View Drive. Sight lines are considered to be acceptable due to no horizontal or vertical curves within the sight triangles, but site landscaping on the north side of 140th Street will need to be pulled back from 140th Street to provide the adequate sight line triangles. • With the roadway designated as a collector in an urbanizing area, the current access spacing for full access intersections is 1/8 mile. Holyoke Lane and 138th Street are located at 1/8 mile spacing. The current spacing of 135th Street to Holyoke Avenue is less than 200 feet but is allowable as they were in place before the access spacing guidelines. Additionally, the left turns do not overlap (left turns from opposite directions on 140th Street do not cross each other) between the intersections. Based on the current accesses, another access would not be allowed between Holyoke Lane and 138th Street. o A potential access off of DD Street just southeast of Holyoke Lane would not meet the access spacing guidelines and would result in left turn overlap for vehicles on 140th Street which is a safety concern. Safety Review • Two crashes have been reported at the intersection of 140th Street and 138th Street in the past ten years. One crash was a head-on collision during icy conditions in 2013. The other occurred in 2017 and was a rear-end crash into a motorist that was slowing down to make an eastbound right turn to 138th Street. Site access should consider a right turn lane for improved safety. Trip Generation • The ITE Trip Generation 10th edition manual was used to estimate the trips generated from the Eagle Pointe development. According to the proposed plan there are 82 residential units (villas and townhomes). ITE code 220, Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) is the most similar category to describe the development. The calculated trips generated from the site are 46 in the AM Peak Hour, 55 in the PM Peak Hour, and 602 trips during the average Weekday. • The existing travel patterns for adjacent neighborhoods were evaluated and then applied to the proposed trips generated from the proposed development where traffic will distribute to the roadway network and access the site. ENTERING EXITING Total WB Right EB Left SB Right SB Left AM Peak Hour 7 6 14 20 46 PM Peak Hour 20 13 9 14 55 Weekday 187 114 123 178 602 Turn Lanes • Right turn lanes are recommended when a development generates over 100 trips a day or as justified based on the number of lanes, roadway speed, and volume. Dedicated turn lanes increase traffic safety by removing turning vehicles from the mainline traffic. An estimated 187 westbound vehicles turn right from 140th Street into the development per day, resulting in the recommendation for a right turn lane. • Left turn lanes may be justified based on traffic volumes in each direction, the number of lanes, and the number of left turns during the peak hour of the day. The trip generation and distribution analysis indicates a left turn volume of 13 vehicles during the PM peak hour. At that time of the day, the traffic on 140th Street is approximately 10% of the daily volume with a directional split of about 60/40. Based on 13 turning vehicles, a left turn lane is not justified but would be justified if the number of left turning vehicles is 17 or more. A left turn lane could be justified based on a slightly different traffic distribution into the site during the PM peak hour or if the number of trips resulting from the development is higher than the average trip rate from the ITE Trip Generation Manual. • The number of lanes on the access into and out of the development site should consider the volume turning out of the access, the volume on the cross street, and the storage length available. The storage length as identified in the latest site plan indicates a storage length of approximately 40 feet. This is enough space to fit one to two vehicles depending on vehicle length. Based on the traffic volume and the potential for long delays associated with a left turn or crossing thru movement, and the potential queues compared to storage available, a separate lane for left/thru traffic and right turn traffic is recommended. A median on the access drive would also better guide vehicles into the site, keep vehicles from over-tracking on the outbound lanes, and provide improved sight lines. Public Roadway System Impacts It is anticipated that the development traffic would be primarily dispersed to 140th Street and Garden View Drive. The existing trip distribution of the area was applied to the new trips. The traffic increase from the development (600 trips per day) to other roadways and intersections is anticipated to be minimal as defined below. Roadway Segment Existing Daily Volume Volume Increase from Development Proposed Future Daily Volume % Change in AADT Daily Roadway Capacity* Max Volume to Capacity Ratio 140th St, South of McAndrews Rd 10,900 240 11,140 2.2% 28,000 0.40 140th St, East of Garden View Dr 10,300 120 10,420 1.2% 28,000 0.37 Garden View Dr, South of 140th St 2,650 190 2,840 7.2% 10,000 0.28 Garden View Dr, North of 140th St 4,700 50 4,750 1.1% 10,000 0.48 *Daily Roadway Capacity Range based on the City of Apple Valley Comprehensive Plan, which is based on Highway Capacity Manual procedures for the lanes, area type, surrounding land uses and access, and type of roadway. Generally, a volume to capacity (V/C) ratio should be less than 1.00 with a goal of less than 0.85 to allow for increases during special events and other special conditions. All of the corridors discussed above have V/C ratios less than 0.85. The change in traffic volume is also lower than 5% for all locations except south on Garden View, which is likely due to access to both CSAH 42 to the south and Apple Valley High School. The increase in traffic is not anticipated to increase congestion or mobility on the adjacent roadways. • The proposed volume using the access to 140th Street is 46 in the AM, 56 in the PM, and 602 daily. By comparison, the following are the estimated existing volumes for nearby accesses to 140th Street. o 138th Street (south side): 33 in the AM, 44 in the PM, and 416 daily o Holyoke Lane: 22 in the AM, 29 in the PM, and 274 daily o 135th Street: 17 in the AM, 23 in the PM, and 218 daily o 134th Street (north side): 20 in the AM, 23 in the PM, 256 daily • The total volume using 138th street with the development is approximately 79 in the AM, 100 in the PM, and 1,018 daily. Operational analysis indicates that all of the intersections would have acceptable service levels both today and into the future based on forecasted future traffic volumes. Pedestrian Accommodations A multi-use trail is proposed along the north side of 140th Street with the proposed development. Uncontrolled pedestrian crossings of 140th Street are not recommended based on the guidance from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Minnesota Local Road Research Board. 140th Street is a 4-lane undivided roadway facility, with a 45-mph speed limit, and an average daily traffic volume of 10,900. The wider the crosswalk the more exposed the pedestrian is to conflicting traffic. Studies show higher vehicular speeds increase the possibility of a fatal crash in pedestrian/vehicle crashes. The installation of a pedestrian crosswalk is not recommended on 140th Street adjacent to the proposed development, especially given the 4-lane roadway design, which requires four lanes of traffic to stop for a pedestrian. There are adjacent signalized intersections at McAndrews Road and Garden View Drive that can provide for pedestrian movements across 140th Street. McAndrews Road is approximately 1,900 feet to the northwest of 138th Street while Garden View Drive to approximately 1,300 feet to the southeast. Garden View Drive is the most accessible location, being closer to 138th Street and having access by the multi-use trails on both sides of 140th Street. This route serves the same origin-destination pair and is deemed to be the most appropriate option for pedestrians to cross the corridor. Conclusions • The adjacent roadways (140th Street and Garden View Drive) have capacity to handle the proposed traffic generated from the Eagle Pointe development. o The proposed access would serve more traffic than the current adjacent accesses. • Construction of a westbound right turn lane to serve the development is recommended. • Construction of an eastbound left turn lane may be appropriate. • The access drive should be configured with two outbound lanes (left/thru and right), a median, and one inbound lane. • The installation of a pedestrian crosswalk is not recommended on 140th Street adjacent to the proposed development. • An additional access into and out of the site is not recommended between 138th Street and Holyoke Lane. • The proposed trees near the access to 140th Street at 138th Street may need to be moved to provide adequate sight line triangles for 45 mph traffic speeds. Average Pressures (psi) –Based on Maximum Day Demand Figure 1 PRV serving Middle Zone from High Zone Available Fire Flow (gpm) at Residual Pressure of 20 psi –based on Maximum Day Demand Figure 2 PRV serving Middle Zone from High Zone CITY OF MEMO Public Works TO: Tom Lovelace, Planner FROM: Samantha Berger, Water Resource Specialist DATE: July 15, 2021 SUBJECT: Eagle Pointe Development – Wetland Questions and Administration 1. Response to Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Comments At the June 16th Planning Commission meeting, commissioners and members of the public raised a question regarding wetland credits and the difference between stormwater ponds and wetlands. The Minnesota Board of Water Soil Resources (BWSR) has created very useful fact sheets on wetlands that help address some common questions regarding wetland regulation. The following fact sheets are attached: •“Stormwater Ponds and WCA” •“Wetland Replacement Credits” •“Wetland Replacement: Banking vs. Project Specific” A summary of the Wetland Conservation Act and the submitted applications are provided below. City staff will continue reviewing the application according to the WCA timelines and process until a Notice of Decision is recommended by the TEP or WCA decision timelines have expired. 2.Wetland Conservation Act Background: Pursuant to City Ordinance 152.56, Resolution #1994-39, and MN State Statute 8420, the City is the Local Government Unit (LGU) responsible for administering the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The Wetland Conservation Act was enacted is 1991. Through this role, the City reviews wetland applications associated with delineations, wetland types, replacement plans, no-loss, and exemptions within the City. Applications are reviewed for completeness by City staff and are shared through a Notice of Application to the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) according to established WCA timeframes. The TEP provide technical expertise, advice, and make recommendations to the LGU on WCA compliance. The TEP includes the LGU, Board of Water Soil Resources (BWSR) wetland specialist, the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD), the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization (VRWJPO), and when applicable, the MN Department of Natural Resources (DNR). After a satisfactory review from the TEP, the LGU issues a WCA Notice of Decision through formal action at the City Council level. 3.Summary of Submitted Applications Two applications have been submitted as part of this project: •Approval Request of Incidental Wetlands Onsite & a Wetland Replacement Plan Initial Submittal May 26, 2021; Revised Submittal July 12, 2021—Submittal from 7/12/21 is Currently Under Review •Delineation Extension Request and No Wetland Determination (No Loss) dated May 26, 2021—Council Consideration at 7/22/21 meeting Approval Request of Incidental Wetlands Onsite & a Wetland Replacement Plan The applicant submitted a revised application for Approval Request of Incidental Wetlands Onsite & a Wetland Replacement Plan on July 12, 2021. The revised application addresses initial comments received from the TEP. The application is currently under review and will go through the TEP for comments, then ultimately a Notice of Decision at the City Council level. When wetlands are onsite, applicants must delineate wetlands according to the Wetland Conservation Act. Three wetlands have been delineated onsite and were approved via a Notice of Decision on September 27, 2018. As part of the development, the applicant can choose to avoid the wetlands or can go through a WCA process to impact, restore, or replace the wetlands. The applicant’s July 12, 2021 submittal outlined impacting 1.1475 acres of wetland and purchasing 2.2950 acres wetland replacement credits to make up for proposed wetland impacts. This is based off a 2:1 replacement credit ratio, which is determined by WCA guidelines. Informative sheets on wetland replacements are included as attachments. The proposed updated wetland impacts are summarized below and shown in attached Figure 3 (excerpt from 7-12-21 submittal): The wetland impacts have been updated from the previous submittal (impact of 0.8254 acres) based off comments received from the TEP (See attached TEP findings and recommendations form). Based off review of historic aerials, the TEP concurred that there is not enough evidence to support that portions of the wetlands were excavated in upland and are therefore incidental. Review of the aerial photos show wetland signatures present within the delineated incidental areas. Delineation Extension Request and No Wetland Determination (No Loss) An application for the Delineation Extension Request and No Wetland Determination (No Loss) dated May 26, 2021 will be considered at the July 22nd Council meeting. The request asks to extend the delineation expiration, expand the site boundary to include a secondary single family home parcel off Hollins court and to concur that no wetlands are present on this parcel (PID #01-18150-00-020). Figure 3 - Proposed Plan and Wetland Impacts Eagle Pointe (KES 2021-064)Apple Valley, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 250 Feet Legend Storm Sewer Project Boundary Wetland Wetland F ill Preserved Wetland Wetland Expansion Source: MNGEO Spatial C ommons Wetland 1 Wetland 3 Wetland 2 1 4 0th St W 138th St W SedimentPond Ex isting s ewe rto remain withre-route Wetland ID Size (ac)We tl and 1 0.5581Wetland 2 0.0947Wetland 3 0.4947 BWSR TEP Findings & Recommendation Form - October 2019 1 Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Technical Evaluation Panel Form This form can be used to document TEP findings and recommendations related to WCA decisions, determinations, enforcement and pre-application reviews. Local Government Unit: City of Apple Valley County: Dakota Landowner/Applicant: J. David Management LLC Agent/Representative(s): Matt Olsen, Brandl Anderson Melissa Barret, Kjolhaug Environmental Project Name: Eagle Pointe Project No. (if any): Project Location: NW Corner of 140th St and Garden View Drive, Apple Valley, MN 55124 Purpose of TEP Findings/Recommendation - check all that apply and describe ☐ Pre-application review ☒ Application Review (related to WCA Decision) ☐ Local Government Road Wetland Replacement Program Eligibility ☐ WCA Determination Request ☐ Other (specify): Describe: Meeting Type – check all that apply and specify dates as applicable ☐ In-Person Meeting(s), Date(s): ☐ Electronic Exchanges (email, skype, etc.) ☐ Onsite Review(s), Date(s): ☒ Other (specify): Virtual 6-15-21 Findings and Recommendations Members of the TEP (listed below) met virtually to review a wetland application request for incidental wetland concurrence and a wetland replacement plan. The application requested that portions of Wetland 1 and 3 be considered incidental. Based off review of historic aerials, the TEP concurred that there is not enough evidence to support that portions of the wetlands were excavated in upland and are therefore incidental. Review of the aerial photos show wetland signatures present within the delineated incidental areas. The application detailed that Wetland 2 impacts have been avoided by incorporating the wetland into the footprint of a proposed stormwater detention pond (Pond 5). The applicant should provide additional detail to document that the conversion into a stormwater pond will not be a permanent wetland impact. This could include providing spot elevations of the bottom of Wetland 2, a cross-section of the existing and proposed Wetland 2 ponding area, soils information to document the historic wetland bottom, historic grading plans, etc. The application included minor errors: the 1964 aerial is offset and should be shifted to the west; Table 4 Replacement Ratios should all read 2:1. The TEP recommends that the applicant revise the application to address the comments above, including revising the replacement plan ratios (as appropriate), including additional detail on wetland 2 impacts, and providing an updated narrative based on the most recent set of plans. ☐ Attachment(s) (specify): BWSR TEP Findings & Recommendation Form - October 2019 2 DNR Protected Waters and Shoreland Protection Zone Will the project/activity affect DNR public waters, DNR public waters wetlands or wetlands within the shoreland protection zone? ☐ Yes ☒ No If yes, DNR representative is a member of the TEP. Signatures ☒LGU TEP Member: Mark Ryan, Vermillion River Watershed JPOAgree with Findings & Recommendations: ☐ Yes ☐ NoSignature: Date: ☒SWCD TEP Member: Dave HolmenAgree with Findings & Recommendations: ☐ Yes ☐ NoSignature: Date: ☒BWSR TEP Member: Ben CarlsonAgree with Findings & Recommendations: ☐ Yes ☐ NoSignature: Date: ☐LGU TEP Member:Agree with Findings & Recommendations: ☐ Yes ☐ No Signature: Date: 6/22/2021 6/22/2021 6/22/2021 Samantha Berger, City of Apple Valley 6/22/2021 x pg. 1 Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Topic of the Week Stormwater Ponds and WCA March 1, 2021 WCA topics of the week are a series of informal fact sheets that provide practical information on WCA program implementation in a question and answer format. They are intended to better clarify and summarize certain aspects of WCA implementation and should be considered as supplemental to WCA statutes, rules and any associated BWSR guidance and policy. Information in these fact sheets are subject to change over time. Question: What is a stormwater pond? Answer: An artificial pond or catch basin designed to collect water that runs over impermeable surfaces such as parking lots, roads, and buildings. It is managed for specific purposes such as preventing flooding and water quality protection. Stormwater ponds are also referred to as wet retention basins implying a relatively permanent pool of standing water. This contrasts with dry retention basins (temporary water pool after storm event) and infiltration basins (designed to direct stormwater to groundwater through permeable soils). Question: Are stormwater ponds wetlands? Answer: Dry retention and infiltration basins typically do not have sufficient hydrology (depth and duration of saturation/inundation) to be wetlands if properly designed and managed. However, many stormwater ponds meet the definition of a wetland because they have wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and support or are capable of supporting hydrophytic vegetation. Question: Does WCA regulate stormwater ponds that are wetlands? Answer: Yes, if the stormwater pond was created in a wetland. If a stormwater pond was created in upland, then the resulting wetland is considered “incidental” and does not fall under the scope of WCA regulations. Question: How do you determine if a stormwater pond was created in wetland or upland? Answer: Usually you can tell by looking at the web soil survey to see if the underlying soils were hydric and indicative of wetland (see appendix example). In highly urbanized settings the soils information may be inconclusive because of historical disturbance dating back prior to soils mapping. In those instances, using aerial photos and other clues such as topographic position in the landscape can help make the determination. pg. 2 Question: What does WCA allow with regard to maintaining or manipulating stormwater ponds that were created in wetlands? Answer: Maintenance activities such as sediment removal, culvert repairs, etc. are generally compliant with WCA regulatory provisions. Although recommended, municipalities are not required to obtain approval for these common maintenance activities in WCA wetlands. Modifications to stormwater wetlands that involve filling, draining, or excavation (beyond sediment removal) within the boundaries of the wetland generally would require WCA approval and may necessitate a wetland replacement plan approval. Question: Does WCA allow new stormwater ponds in wetlands? Answer: Stormwater ponds proposed in wetlands that involve filling, draining, or excavation in the semi-permanently and permanently flooded areas of type 3/4/5 wetlands almost always require the approval of a WCA replacement plan. A replacement plan may not be required if stormwater is simply routed to a wetland without filling, draining, excavating. However, sediment-laden stormwater may result in incremental filling of the wetland over time, which is considered an impact. Pre-treated stormwater that first runs into a forebay or primary cell before flowing into the wetland can avoid incremental filling and impact over time and thus would typically not require the approval of a wetland replacement plan. Question: Since stormwater ponds provide some of the same functions as wetlands (floodwater attenuation, downstream water quality protection, etc.), why doesn’t WCA allow them to be constructed in wetlands without replacement? Answer: WCA seeks to protect and enhance multiple wetland functions including those related to wildlife/fisheries habitat and aesthetic/recreational aspects. Maximizing flood storage and water quality functions for a particular basin often compromises these other functions that wetlands naturally provide. Therefore, WCA regulations apply to wetlands when they are used for stormwater storage and treatment. pg. 3 Appendix- Examples of Stormwater Ponds Created in Wetlands and Uplands Dorset-Two Inlets Soil Unit Hydric Soil Rating: None Probable Determination: Incidental Wetland Seelyville-Markey Muck Soil Unit Hydric Soil Rating: 100% Hydric Probable Determination: Constructed in Wetland Stormwater Pond pg. 1 Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Topic of the Week Wetland Replacement Credits July 8, 2020 WCA topics of the week are a series of informal fact sheets that provide practical information on WCA program implementation in a question and answer format. They are intended to better clarify and summarize certain aspects of WCA implementation and should be considered as supplemental to WCA statutes, rules and any associated BWSR guidance and policy. Information in these fact sheets are subject to change over time. Question: What is wetland replacement? Answer: Wetland replacement is any action in WCA rule that replaces the wetland area or the public value of wetland functions lost due to a wetland impact. It is often used synonymously with wetland mitigation. However, mitigation literally means “make less” and encompasses both wetland replacement and wetland impact avoidance/minimization. Question: What actions are allowed to replace wetlands? Answer: Eligible actions include wetland restoration, creation, and preservation; wetland buffer establishment/preservation; and permanently protecting wetlands previously restored via conservation programs. Each action has associated requirements and credit amounts (see appendix). Question: What is a wetland replacement credit? Answer: A wetland credit is a unit of trade used to offset loss of wetland function from a wetland impact. Wetland credits represent the gain in wetland function generated from an eligible replacement action. This is referred to as functional lift. The more functional lift provided by an eligible action, the more credits generated. Question: How are wetland credits determined? Answer: The amount of wetland credit generated depends on the area (acreage) affected by the replacement action and the difference between the existing wetland functional level before versus after the replacement action is completed (functional lift). Precise quantitative measurement of functional lift is not possible with current functional assessment tools. Therefore, WCA sets credit limits for each action based broadly on the ability of those actions to produce functional lift. Credit limits are expressed as a percentage and multiplied by the area affected by the action to produce a credit yield. For example, an action with a credit limit of 50% that affects an area of 15 acres would potentially yield 7.5 credits. pg. 2 Question: How is functional lift factored into credit amount? Answer: The different credit actions (restoration of partially drained wetland, wetland creation, wetland preservation, etc.) and associated credit ranges (0-50%, 50-100%, etc.) are based in part on the degree of functional lift. For example, restoration of a completely drained wetland (no wetland hydrology) will typically generate more functional lift than restoration of a partially drained wetland (some wetland hydrology). Functional lift is assessed qualitatively by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) within the credit ranges for each replacement action based on the condition of the wetland at the time of restoration and the improvement in condition after restoration. Question: When and how are credits released for use in replacing wetland impacts? Answer: Credit amounts are estimated at the beginning of a project and are based on achieving certain measurable outcomes typically related to wetland hydrology and vegetative condition. These outcomes are referred to as “performance standards” and provide the basis for credit releases. Performance standards associated with incremental credit releases during the development of a wetland replacement project (typically 5 - 7 years) are referred to as a “credit release schedule” which is the mechanism for releasing credits for a wetland bank. Released credits are deposited into a wetland bank account where they can be sold to or otherwise used by applicants proposing to impact wetlands that require replacement. Project-specific replacement does not involve credit releases, but requires that the replacement project provide the number of credits necessary to satisfy replacement plan requirements by the end of a specified monitoring period. Question: How many credits are needed to replace impacts to a wetland? Answer: The number of credits needed to replace a wetland impact depends on the size of the impact (in acres) and the required replacement ratio. A wetland impact of 2 acres can be replaced by 2 credits if the replacement ratio is 1:1 (meaning one acre of impact is replaced by one credit). If the replacement ratio is 2:1, then 4 credits are needed to replace 2 acres of wetland impact. The replacement ratio is based on several factors including the method of replacement (wetland bank vs project-specific) and the location of the wetland impact relative to the location of the replacement area. Question: What if someone legally drains a wetland under an exemption and then proposes to restore it? Answer: WCA rules do not allow someone to utilize an exemption and then restore a wetland for replacement purposes within 10 years of conducting an exempt activity if it effects the eligibility and credit allocation for replacement. If the existing condition of the wetland prior to the exempt activity can be reasonably approximated, the TEP and LGU may base credit allocation on the pre-exemption condition. In some instances exempt activities in certain wetlands may have no effect on the credit allocation and this restriction would not be applicable. Question: Are there other considerations beyond credit actions and amounts for evaluating replacement projects? Answer: Yes. Replacement wetlands must be sustainable, not result adverse impacts on adjacent landowners, and be restored to natural conditions to the extent practicable. These requirements are part of the review process and, if not met, may result in the project being denied, project re-design, additional land acquisition/easements, and/or decreased credit amounts. pg. 3 Appendix – Summary of WCA Actions that Generate Wetland Replacement Credits Credit Action Percent of Acreage Receiving Credit Key Requirements Establish buffer adjacent to a wetland. Up to 10, 25, or 50 • Must be associated with a restored, created or preserved wetland generating replacement credits Restoration of a completely drained/filled wetland. Up to 100 • Is currently a non-wetland • Was historically a natural wetland • Must restore hydrology and vegetation Restoration of a partially drained/filled wetland with cropping history. Up to 100 • Is currently a wetland • Was planted or in a crop rotation at least 10 of the last 20 yrs. • Must restore hydrology and vegetation Restoration of a partially drained/filled wetland w/o cropping history. Up to 50 • Is currently a wetland • Must restore hydrology and vegetation Vegetative restoration of a farmed wetland in BSA’s 2, 3, or 4. Up to 90 • Is currently a wetland • Was planted or in a crop rotation at least 10 of the last 20 yrs. • Cannot have existing hydrologic alteration due to drainage (e.g., tile or ditch) Vegetative restoration of a farmed wetland in BSA’s 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10. Up to 50 • Is currently a wetland • Was planted or in a crop rotation at least 10 of the last 20 yrs. • Cannot have existing hydrologic alteration due to drainage (e.g., tile or ditch) Protection of a wetland restored under expired conservation easements. Up to 75 • Was previously restored. • Landowner has the right to drain/fill wetland upon termination of the conservation easement Creation of a wetland Up to 75 • Is currently a non-wetland and was not historically wetland • Must meet certain design criteria if part of a water quality treatment/storage system Restore a wetland with exceptional natural resource value Variable • Must include a restoration component • TEP must determine eligibility per criteria in WCA rule and BWSR guidance Preserve a wetland Up to 12.5 • Located in a >80% presettlement wetland area of the state • TEP must determine eligibility per criteria in WCA rule and BWSR guidance. pg. 1 Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Topic of the Week Wetland Replacement: Banking vs. Project Specific September 15, 2020 WCA topics of the week are a series of informal fact sheets that provide practical information on WCA program implementation in a question and answer format. They are intended to better clarify and summarize certain aspects of WCA implementation and should be considered as supplemental to WCA statutes, rules and any associated BWSR guidance and policy. Information in these fact sheets are subject to change over time. Question: What is wetland replacement? Answer: Wetland replacement is a WCA term for replacing the public value of a wetland that is lost due to an impact. Wetland replacement is called compensatory mitigation in the federal mitigation rule that governs impacts and replacement under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Restoring, preserving, and/or creating a wetland are typical methods used to replace wetland impacts. These wetlands are referred to as replacement wetlands. Wetland replacement can be accomplished via use of wetland bank credits or project-specific replacement. Question: What is wetland banking? Answer: Wetland banking is a regulatory process to establish replacement wetlands prior to wetland impacts that it will be used to replace. Replacement wetlands are issued “credits” based on the area of wetland (and buffer) and the amount of functional lift (increase in important wetland functions). Each credit can be used to replace one acre of wetland impact. Wetland banks are proposed, reviewed, and approved though a wetland bank application process prior to implementation. Once a wetland bank is constructed and protected with a conservation easement, credits are released incrementally over time based on specific performance standards related to functional lift. An important defining characteristic of wetland banking is that it involves generating replacement credits that can be used for unidentified and future wetland impacts. Because the wetland impacts that the bank credits will replace are not known, the standards for the wetland bank are relatively high to assure that replacement of public values will be accomplished. Question: What is project-specific replacement? Answer: As the name implies, project-specific replacement involves the establishment of a replacement wetland or wetlands to replace a specific, identified wetland impact or set of impacts for a project. An applicant can propose to restore, perserve, or create a wetland for replacing a wetland impact for his/her project. Project-specific replacement is approved in conjunction with a replacement plan application whereby the wetland impacts it is proposed to replace are identified in the plan. In contrast to wetland banking, project-specific replacement involves replacement for specifically identified and approved wetland impacts. There can be more flexibility in the standards for project-specific replacement as the wetland impacts it is replacing are known. pg. 2 Question: Can banking and project-specific replacement be combined on a project? Answer: Yes. The same replacement wetland can be used to both replace a specific wetland impact and to generate bank credits for use in replacing unknown future impacts. Such projects are required to follow the wetland bank approval process as opposed to a project-specific replacement plan application. Credits generated from the replacement wetland are first used to replace project-specific impacts and additional credits are deposited into a wetland bank. Question: Are there advantages of using wetland bank credits versus project-specific replacement? Answer: Yes, wetland bank credits are already established and can be simply used/purchased upon replacement plan approval. The applicant fulfills his/her replacement obligations immediately. In contrast, project-specific replacement must be constructed prior to or concurrent with approved wetland impacts. Such projects involve up to 5 or more years of monitoring, and it takes applicants years to fulfill their wetland replacement obligations. Question: Under what circumstances would project-specific replacement make sense? Answer: When an applicant has both the financial means and access to a restorable wetland in the same area as a wetland impact he/she is proposing to replace. Also, project-specific replacement may be the only replacement option if there is a scarcity of available bank credits in a particular area of the state. Question: Can project-specific replacement wetlands be converted to wetland bank credits? Answer: No. Applicants intending to bank wetland credits must go through the wetland bank approval process. Project-specific replacement is approved in the context of a specific project and may not meet the requirements for wetland banking. There are some very old wetland replacement sites approved under different rules that allowed for “excess credits” from project-specific replacement plans to be banked. For those projects, banking of credits is allowed provided there is documentation of this type of approval. Question: Can project-specific replacement be constructed prior to the wetland impact? Answer: Yes, but the project-specific replacement plan must be approved before construction starts. Question: Can a wetland bank be constructed prior to approval of a wetland bank plan? Answer: No. Wetland bank sites will not be approved for credits if any restoration or creation activities are started before bank plan approval. In rare circumstances some minor activities may be allowed by the WCA Local Government Unit (LGU) and Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) if a bank plan is in the review process and the field evaluation has been substantially completed and documented. B B C C A A D D PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE EXISTING TREE LANDSCAPE CROSS SECTION B-B POND 140TH ST WEST EX UTILITY EASEMENT EX UTILITY EASEMENT 80' POND PROPOSED HOMEPROPOSED HOME 'CC' STREET LANDSCAPE CROSS SECTION C-C PROPERTY LINE EX UTILITY EASEMENT PROPERTY LINE EX UTILITY EASEMENT 140TH ST WEST EX CURB AND GUTTER POND 80' PROPOSED HOME EXISTING TREE 'BB' STREET LANDSCAPE CROSS SECTION A-A EX UTILITY EASEMENT EX UTILITY EASEMENT PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE POND 80' PROPOSED HOMEPROPOSED HOME 'BB' STREET 140TH ST WEST EX CURB AND GUTTER LANDSCAPE CROSS SECTION D-D PROPERTY LINE RETAINING WALL'BB' STREET AT CUL DE SAC GARDEN VIEW DRIVE POND BEYOND PROPOSED HOME City of Telephone (952) 953-2500 7100 147th Street West Fax (952) 953-2515 Apple Valley, MN 55124 www.applevalleymn.gov Home of the Minnesota Zoological Garden June 2021 Memo to the File The City of Apple Valley is approximately 18 square miles and boast 891 acres of city owned park land found in 51 different parks around the City. An accepted national standard is trying to provide a public park within a ½ mile distance from where people live. According to the Trust for Public Land (www.parkserve.tpl.org) 91% of Apple Valley residents live within 10 minutes of a park. Apple Valley has done an excellent job in providing parks to cover this service area shown on the following diagram: A developer is proposing to develop the former Apple Valley Golf Course site located at 8661 140th St W which is approximately 21 acres. These new residents are currently served by existing parks located at Sunset Park serving 1,059 people and Wildwood Park serving 2,053 people. I T E M: 6.A . P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:Other B usiness Description: Orchard P lace C ommercial Phase I I - S ketch P lan R eview of a P roposed 12-Acre C ommercial Development S taff Contact: T homas L ovelace, City P lanner D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department Applicant: HJ Development, L L P and R ockport, L L C P roject Number: Applicant Date: 60 Days: 120 Days: AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: It is recommended that the Planning C ommission not state specifically whether or not they would approve or deny the request, but rather, identify the specific zoning questions or issues they might have with the proposed project. S UM M ARY: For your consideration is a request for sketch plan review of a proposed development that would include 6,000-sq. ft. veterinary clinic, 5,350-sq. ft. convenience store with fuel sales and car wash, 40,000-sq. ft. medical office building with potential 20,000-sq. ft. future expansion, and a 3.5-acre lot for future development. T he 12-acre site is located the northwest corner of 155th Street West and Pilot Knob Road and is part of the 400-acre A pple Valley Sand and Aggregate mining operation. Adjacent uses include sand and gravel mining to the north and west, single-family residential and health care facility to the east, and retail development to the south. Access to the site will be via the extension of English Avenue north from 155th Street West. T he plan also shows a right-in only access from 155th Street West in to the convenience store property. T his access will likely not be allowed. B AC K G RO UND : Comprehensiv e P lan: T he site is currently guided "MBC " (Mixed Business C ampus) on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Mixed Business C ampus areas are intended to be high-quality settings for office campus, office with light industrial, office with biomedical manufacturing, health care facilities, health care training, general office, corporate office, and other higher-intensity employment uses. Mixed retail and commercial uses that serve the campus and adjacent neighborhood will be limited in area and to activities that support the employment objectives of the "MBC" area. Some examples of supportive uses include lodging, restaurants, daycare, banking, and other retail uses that may support the campus directly as well as the adjacent neighborhood. Such uses should generally be located along C ounty Road 42. T he C omprehensive Plan provides the following breakdown on the mix of uses in the 164- acre "MBC " designation area: 55-65% office (90-107 acres) 10-20% light industry/manufacturing (16-33 acres) 10% office warehouse/showroom (16 acres) 5% commercial and retail uses (8 acres) Also included in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan is the Orchard Place C oncept plan, which identifies potential uses in the mining area. T he subject property, which is located in the area labeled "H", identifies commercial retail uses, office, hotel, and medical. Zoning: T he site is currently zoned "S G" (Sand and Gravel), which allows for the excavation, extraction, hauling, mining, stockpiling or processing of sand and gravel deposits; and buildings and equipment, including concrete and asphalt plants as conditional uses. T he applicant has indicated that they would like to rezone the property to "RB" (Retail Business). Retail Business districts are areas which are centrally located to serve the need for general sales. Permitted uses within this zoning district include: Freestanding retail buildings; Banks, savings and loan offices, offices for doctors, lawyers, real estate and similar uses to serve the adjoining residential area; and Animal hospital or clinic when contained within a building. Permitted conditional uses include: Motor fuel sales; and Car wash operations in conjunction with and accessory to a motor fuel sales operation. Site P lan: T he site plan shows the following: 5,350-sq. ft. convenience store, with a car wash and eight motor fuel pump islands, on a 2.65-acre lot. Proposed access would be from a right-in only driveway off 155th Street West and a shared access off English Avenue. T he west side of the lot will be the location of a storm water pond. 6,000-sq. ft. vet clinic with a outdoor dog run on a .83-acre lot. Direct access will be via a driveway off English Avenue that will be shared with the convenience store to the east of the clinic site. 40,000-sq. ft. medical office building on a 5.09-acre lot. Access will be via two driveways off English Avenue. T he site plan shows a 20,000-sq. ft. future expansion area to the west of the proposed building. 3.48-acre lot for future development. All access driveways shall be spaced in accordance with the C ity designed construction plans for English Avenue. Driveway access off 155th Street West shall be prohibited. T herefore, the proposed right-in/right-out access for the convenience store will not be allowed. Cross access easements will need to be established, to allow vehicular access from Lots 1 and 2 within the development. As stated previously, animal hospitals or clinics when contained within a building are permitted uses. No existing animal hospital/clinics in the city have dog runs. P arking Requirements: T he proposed site plan shows 33 parking spaces for the convenience store operation, 23 for the vet clinic and 329 spaces for the medical office building. T he minimum number of spaces for each use is as follows: Retail store - one parking space for each 150 square feet of floor area up to a total floor area of 20,000 square feet; thereafter, one space for each 200 square feet of floor area. Veterinary clinics - one space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area. Medical or dental clinic - three parking spaces for each staff doctor practicing on the premises at any one time or one space for each 150 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. T he convenience store and vet clinic will meet or exceed the minimum number of required spaces. Based on the code's minimum parking requirements, a minimum of 400 spaces are required for a medical clinic. Building E lev ations: No building elevations have been submitted with this sketch plan request. All buildings shall have an exterior finish consisting of 100% noncombustible, non- degradable and maintenance free material such as face brick or natural stone. Materials such as sheet or corrugated aluminum, iron, or concrete block of any kind or similar shall not be allowed. Landscaping: An approved landscape plan shall be required. T he minimum cost of landscaping materials shall equal 2.5% of the estimated building construction cost, which will be based on current Means construction data. B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A AT TAC HM E NT S: L ocation Map C omp Plan Map Z oning Map Site P lan Site P lan 41.5'28.0'34.5'18.5'9.5' 18.5'9.5'18.5'9.5'45.0'24.0'34.5'18.5'24.0'40.0'24.0'40.0'24.0'40.0'24.0'18.5'8.5'15.5'9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 9.0'9.0'18.5' 24.0' 18.5 ' 24. 0 '24.0'18.5' 24.0'24.0'24.0'12.0'6.5'18.5'24.0'18.5'6.5'38.9'9.0'125.7'165.3'126.0'80.0' 113.3'47.3'24.0' 18.0'9.0'9.0'18.0'18.0'20.8 ' 36.1' VET CLINIC ± 6,000 SF CONVENIENCE STORE ± 5,350 SF FUEL CANOPY CAR WASH MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING 2 STORY ± 40,000 SF FUTURE EXPANSION ± 20,000 SF FUEL STORAGE TANKS TRASH ENCLOSURE LOT 1 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA 155TH ST. WPROPOSED ENGLISH AVE.(BY CITY)PILOT KNOB RD.DOG RUN TRASH ENCLOSURE SHARED ACCESS FOR LOTS 1 AND 2 DROP-OFF/PICK UP AREA SERVICE/TRASH AREA (INTERNAL) EMPLOYEE PARKING AREA PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE 15' PARKING SETBACK 50' BUILDING SETBACK 25' PARKING SETBACK25' PARKING SETBACK50' BUILDING SETBACK50' BUILDING SETBACK50' BUILDING SETBACK15' PARKING SETBACK5' BUILDING/PARKING SETBACK 5' BUILDING/PARKING SETBACK PILOT KNOB RD.LOT 1 ±2.65 AC LOT 2 ±0.83 AC LOT 3 ±5.09 AC LOT 4 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ±3.48 ACPROPOSED ENGLISH AVE.(BY CITY)RIGHT-IN ONLY. SUBJECT TO CITY AND COUNTY APPROVAL This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.SHEET NUMBER 2018 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114PHONE: 651-645-4197WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COMK:\TWC_LDEV\AVR - Orchard Place\HJ Development - N of 155th\3 Design\CAD\Exhibits\2021-0623 Sketch Plan Exhibit\Sketch Plan.dwg June 28, 2021 - 12:39pm©BYREVISIONSNo.DATEPRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPREPARED FORSKETCH PLANEX-1ORCHARD PLACE- N OF 155THHJ DEVELOPMENT,LLPAPPLE VALLEYMINNESOTAPROPERTY SUMMARY TOTAL PROPERTY AREA 12.05 AC EXISTING ZONING SG - SAND AND GRAVEL PROPOSED ZONING RB - RETAIL BUSINESS PARKING SETBACKS PILOT KNOB = 25' 155TH ST = 15' ENGLISH AVE = 15' INTERIOR = 5' BUILDING SETBACKS PILOT KNOB = 50' 155TH ST = 50' ENGLISH AVE = 50' INTERIOR = 5' LOT 1 BUILDING AREA ±5,350 SF LOT 1 REQUIRED PARKING 32 SPACES LOT 1 PROPOSED PARKING 33 SPACES LOT 2 BUILDING AREA ±6,000 SF LOT 2 REQUIRED PARKING 15 SPACES LOT 2 PROPOSED PARKING 23 SPACES LOT 3 BUILDING AREA (INCLUDING FUTURE)±60,000 SF LOT 3 REQUIRED PARKING 310 SPACES LOT 3 PROPOSED PARKING 329 SPACES TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING 357 SPACES TOTAL PROPOSED PARKING 385 SPACES NORTH I T E M: 6.B . P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:Other B usiness Description: B uller P roperty S ingle F amily Sketch P lan - P C21-X X-X X X S taff Contact: K athy Bodmer, A I C P, P lanner D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department Applicant: J MH L and D evelopment, and R andy and Carolyn B uller P roject Number: P C21-X X X-X X X Applicant Date: 60 Days: 120 Days: AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: No official action is required. T he owner wishes to introduce the project and receive feedback from the Planning C ommission prior to submitting a formal land use application. It is recommended that the Planning C ommission not state specifically whether or not they would approv e or deny the request, but rather, identify the specific zoning questions or issues they might have with the proposed project. When the project moves forward, the petitioners are expected to request consideration of the following actions: 1. Subdivision by Preliminary Plat to subdivide the existing property into six single family lots for construction of five new single family homes. S UM M ARY: T he petitioners request review and feedback on a sketch plan to develop the three Buller properties on the northeast side of Farquar Lake, 13009 Diamond Path. T hey propose to develop the 7.9-acre site for six single family lots for construction of five new single family homes. T he existing Buller home would remain and would be updated. T he northern bluff would be incorporated into the northern lot with the existing home and remain undisturbed. Two shared private driveways are proposed to provide access for the six lots. T he properties are located in the "R-1" (Single family residential, 40,000 sq. ft. min. lot) and "SH" (Shoreland Overlay) zones. T he S H zone is a zone-on-zone designation which overlays the R-1 zone and provides additional requirements to help protect the C ity's designated protected waters. Farquar Lake is designated by the MN D N R as a Recreational Development Lake. Where zoning standards conflict, the more stringent of the district requirements applies. T he Dakota C ounty Plat C ommittee reviewed the sketch plan and confirmed that the northern driveway would likely become a limited access drive, restricted to right-in, right-out movements only, when Diamond Path is updated to an urban section (urban design) in the future. A study of the future construction of Diamond Path is planned in the next few years which will guide the future construction of the road. Dakota C ounty stated that the southern driveway access will need to align with Evermoor Parkway. T he C ity is in the process of updating its Shoreland Overlay zoning district to bring it into compliance with the most recent D N R model ordinance language. T he C ity A ttorney notes that the S H district has not had a major update since it was last updated in 1988. A draft has been prepared and initial comments have been provided by the D N R. T he public hearing to consider the ordinance amendment is expected to be held late summer. Preliminary C ity C omments: Fire - Driveways that exceed 150' in length require a fire truck turn-around or a fire safety solution. Engineering - T he sketch plan illustrates the building pads as the only disturbed areas on the lots. However, tree removal and grading will likely be needed to facilitate drainage between the lots. A cohesive, but preliminary grading plan, will be needed. T he City Engineer states the grading plan "would need to show at a minimum driveway grades, finished floor elevations, stormwater features elevations, drainage patterns (to ensure that stormwater capture is high percentage for treatment from new impervious), and sanitary sewer grades." Natural Resources - Farquar Lake is classified as an impaired water body and a wetland has been delineated on the site. Buffering of the lake shoreland area and around the wetland will be important considerations. A Natural Resources Management Permit (N RMP) will be required prior for any tree removal or site disturbing activities. Beaches would need to be installed in accordance with C ity C ode requirement of C hapter 152. B AC K G RO UND : N/A B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A AT TAC HM E NT S: L ocation Map Site P lan Site P lan LONG LAKE FARQUAR LAKE SITEAPPLE VALLEYROSEMOUNTD I AMO N D P A T H DIAMONDPAT HPILOT KNOB RDEMMERPLDULUTHDR DOVER DR 132ND ST W E MBRYW A Y DO M INICAW A YDORY AVEELKWOOD D R1 2 9T H ST W DENMARK AVEDUNBAR W AY DOWNEYTRL127T HSTW DORC HE S TERTRLEC H O LN128TH ST WDURHAMWAY EVERMOOR PKWYEDINBROOKPATHEASTVIEW CTEDGEMO N T C U R V ELDERBERRYCTBULLER PROPERTY µ AERIALLOCATION MAP ^ 934936934932930936924926928930932934922924926928930928926930936938940950952954956958960 93092892692492290090290490 4904 93493 49109209 0 2 9 0 4 906908912914916918922924926928DIAMOND PATHWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWAT WATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATS S SXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXT S S MAILE S S POH X X X X X X GASGASGASGASPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHXXXXXXXPOHPOHPOH XXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXPOH GASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASSTOSANSANSAN SANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSAN SANSANSANSANSANSAN POHPOH POH E G Ponding Easement per Doc No. 3063625 Drainage & Utility Easement per Doc No. 3063622 Drainage & Utility Easement per Doc No. 3063623 Drainage & UtilityEasement per DocNo. 3063623 Ponding Easement per Doc No. 3063624 OHWLOHWL1234561DIAMOND PATHDIAMOND PATH146,587 sf114,432 sf48,759 sf46,589 sf11,090 sf42,798 sf43,465 sfOHWLOHWL75' OWHLSETBACK (MIN.)DELINEATEDWETLAND40' BUFFER ADJACENTTO WETLAND16.5' BUFFER ADJACENTTO LAKE75' OWHLSETBACK (MIN.)75' OWHLSETBACK (MIN.)OHWLWOGF=920.0BF=911.0WOGF=926.0BF=917.0WOGF=918.0BF=909.0WOGF=928.0BF=919.0WOGF=928.0BF=919.0RAIN GARDENRAIN GARDENRAIN GARDENEXISTINGVEGETATIONEXISTINGVEGETATIONSHEET NUMBER:VERTICAL SCALE:DATE:PREPARED FOR:OFHORIZONTAL SCALE:DRAWN:CHECKED:DESIGNED:INITIAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:Phone(952) 937-515012701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300Fax(952) 937-5822Minnetonka, MN 55343Toll Free(888) 937-5150DATE:LICENSE NO.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY MEOR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWSOF THE STATE OF MINNESOTAN:\0025743.01\DWG\0025743.01C-SITE-SRM3.DWG 125743.01APPLE VALLEY, MN06/24/21...© 2017 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.BULLER PROPERTYR1 - SITE EXHIBIT650 QUAKER AVENUEJORDAN, MN 55352108/05/20.XX/XX/XX...XX/XX/XXJMH LAND DEVELOPMENTXX/XX/XX..NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCommon Ground AllianceCall 48 Hours before digging:811 or call811.com50.000029'10' OR 5'0'50'100'150'1" = 50'######################################## Buller Property Apple Valley, MN Concept Sketch Plan Phone (952) 937-5150 Fax (952) 937-5822 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive Minnetonka, MN 55343 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. I T E M: 6.C. P L A NNI NG C O MMI S S I O N ME E T I NG D AT E :J uly 21, 2021 S E C T I O N:Other B usiness Description: Review of Upcoming Schedule and Other Updates S taff Contact: B reanna Vincent, Department A ssistant D epartment / Division: C ommunity D evelopment Department AC T I O N RE Q UE S T E D: N/A S UM M ARY: Next P lanning Commission Meetings: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. Public hearing applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, J uly 7, 2021. Site plan, variance applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, J uly 21, 2021. Wednesday, August 18, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. Public hearing applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, J uly 21, 2021. Site plan, variance applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, August 4, 2021. Next City C ouncil Meetings: T hursday, J uly 22, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. T hursday, August 12, 2021 - 7:00 p.m. B AC K G RO UND : N/A B UD G E T I M PAC T: N/A