Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000.10.10 PACKET r r • CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AGENDA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2000 7:30 A.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of September 12, 2000 EDA Minutes 4. Business Items A. Project Updates B. 5th Street Ventures C. Calendar D. Flume Phase 2 E. Annual Report F. Marketing Plan Review • Database/Mailing List • Post Cards • Print Ads G. Aerial Photos H. Realtor's Meeting Manufacturers Trade Show 5. Miscellaneous Business Items 6. Adjourn Next Meeting Date: November 14, 2000 1111 K:\Economic Development\EDA Packets\2000\Agendas\October.doc r ! City of Cottage Grove • Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator /J/,QtAJ Date: 10/04/00 Re: Project Updates Item 4A Attached is the list of active projects. Staff will provide a verbal update at the meeting. • Attachment • F:\GROUPS\PER_ECON\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Proj Update.doc ACTIVE LEADS QUERY EDA PACKET 10/6/00 Proposal lD . Project.Description `#� _ ; . F1Aores Needed • ED-00-10 Office/Distribution facility 5-6 acres ED-00-19 Manufacturing 90,000 sf/ 10 acres ED-00-22 Office Warehouse 45,000- 50,000 sf warehouse, 4,000- 5,000 office ED-00-28 Distribution Center 380,000 sf/25-30 acres ED-00-31 Grove Plaza NA ED-00-32 Hotel & Restaurant 70,000-80,000 sf ED-00-33 Manufacturing 15,000 sf/2.2 acres ED-00-34 Stamping facility 155,000 sf/30 acres ED-00-35 Post Office 33,659 sf/5 acres ED-00-37 Manufacturing 400-500,000 sf/26-33 acres ED-00-40 Light Manufacturing 100,000 sf/5-10 acres ED-00-43 Distribution Facility 80-90,000 sf/11-15 acres ED-00-44 Manufacturing 75,000 100,000/4.6-6.6 acres ED-00-50 Engineering facility 10,000 sf/1-2 acres ED-00-51 Manufacturing 20,000-60,000 sf/2-5 acres ED-00-56 Cable/Fiber Optic Co. 50 - 100,000 sf/4-8 acres ED-00-58 Distribution Center 20-30,000 sf/2-3 acres ED-00-60 Headquarters facility 15,000 sf/2 acres ED-00-61 Retail/Mixed Use ED-00-62 Office Development 40-5-acres ED-00-64 Manufacturing/Distribution 8-10 acres ED-00-65 Build and Lease facility 90,000 sf • ED-00-69 Manufacturing 450,000 sf/45 acres ED-00-70 Retail Business 23,500 sf/3.84 acres ED-00-71 Wood Manufacturing 100,000 sf/6-10 acres ED-00-72 Restaurant ED-00-73 Steel Manufacturing 20-40,000 sf ED-00-74 Manufacturing 50,000 sf ED-00-79 Manufacturing and Office 286,000 sf ED-00-80 Mixed Use Commercial 56,575 sf/9.42 acres Page 1 City of Cottage Grove i Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator�� Date: 10/05/00 Re: Fifth Street Ventures Item 4B Representatives from 5th Street Ventures, LLC, have requested to be placed on the agenda for the October 10 EDA Meeting. 5th Street Ventures has applied for a comprehensive plan amendment to allow a mixed-use development; a zoning amendment to change the zoning from B-3, General Business, to PUD, Planned Unit Development; a preliminary plat for 132 residential units and four commercial lots; and a • site plan review. This proposed development would be located on the vacant land north and west of Menard's. At the September 25, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, staff recommended approval of the request. The Planning Commission approved the project. It will be placed on the October 18 City Council meeting. At the August 8, 2000 meeting, the EDA approved a motion to not support the above proposal. The excerpt from the minutes is attached for reference. Attachment • \\CG_FS1\SYS\GROUPS\PER_ECON\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 5th Street.doc Economic Development Authority - Minutes 1111 August 8, 2000 Page 3 4.1. PLANNING REVIEW: 5TH STREET VENTURES The Planning Commission had requested EDA comments on this proposal, which is for residential development in a site zoned and guided for commercial development. Denzer stated that it has always been the EDA's stand to keep commercial property for commercial use. Kleven agreed. Kleven moved that the EDA not support the 5th Street Ventures proposal. Pederson seconded. Kleven did not see any reason to give up commercial land for housing, while Pederson remarked that this mistake had been made in the past, and that the City should not repeat it. Motion carried. 4.J. AERIAL PHOTO UPDATE Once prints had been received from the photographer, they would be reviewed and a decision would be made as to placement of an order. Copies could then be sent out with the Annual Report and other advertising correspondence. 4.K. INDUSTRIAL PARK CONCEPT PLANNING Schroeder outlined some of the concerns with stormwater and buffer zones in the Industrial Park. 4.L. CALENDAR This was an informational item included with the packet. 4.M. MARKETING UPDATE This was an informational item included with the packet. Wolfe said they were pleased with the last ad in City Business. 5. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS ITEMS Luden commented that Louann Tobritzhofer had been hired as the new office manager at the Chamber of Commerce. 6. ADJOURN Wolcott moved to adjourn. Weingartner seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Feil Belscamp Economic Development Secre ary City of Cottage Grove Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator Date: 10/05/00 Re: Calendar of Upcoming Events Item 4C EDA Meeting October 10 Chamber Board Meeting October 12 • Chamber Silver Plate Dinner October 15 Chamber Business Luncheon for October is cancelled Chamber Board Meeting November 9 EDA Meeting November 14 Chamber Business Luncheon November 22 EDA Meeting December 12 • \\CG_FS1\SYS\GROUPS\PER_ECON\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Calendar.doc • City of Cottage Grove • Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members �,,�,c� From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator n�T�_ I' ' Date: 10/05/00 Re: Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements: Flume Phase 2, Storm Water Ponds, and Sanitary Sewer Item 4D City Council recently accepted the feasibility report and adopted a resolution ordering the preparation of plans and specifications for Industrial Park 2001 Improvements. Attached is the agenda item. Staff can answer any questions you have about the planned improvements at the October 10 meeting. • Attachment F:\GROUPS\PER_ECON\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Flume.doc REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # ( DATE 9/20/00 Gia ilk '41;c. r PREPARED BY: Administration Ryan Schroeder P�"�1 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST: Consider accepting the feasibility report for the Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements: Flume—Phase 2, Storm Water Ponds, Sanitary Sewer; and consider ordering the preparation of plans and specifications. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the feasibility report, and adopt a resolution ordering the preparation of plans and specifications. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: ® MEMO/LETTER: Memo from Karen Wiemeri, BRAA, dated 9/13/00. ® RESOLUTION: Draft. ❑ ORDINANCE: El ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Feasibility Report. ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS: This project is proposed for winter construction with the expectation of upcoming development approvals. If such does not appear imminent the bid stage will be delayed or aborted. t(i S 1 City Administrator Date COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED 0 DENIED ❑ OTHER S C:\WINDOWS1Desktop\Flume Cover.doc Bonestroo Bonestroo,Rosene,Anderlik and Associates,Inc is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned Rosene Principals:Otto Bonestroo,P.E •Marvin L Sorvala,P.E .Glenn R Cook,P.E.• 1111 Robert G.Schunicht,P.E.•Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. Anderlik & Senior Consultants:Robert W.Rosene,P.E.•Joseph C.Anderlik,P.E.•Richard E Turner,P.E.• • Associates Susan M.Eberlin,C.P.A. Associate Principals:Howard A.Sanford,P.E.•Keith A.Gordon,P.E.•Robert R.Pfefferle,P.E • Richard W.Foster,P.E.•David O.Loskota,P.E •Robert C.Russek,A.I.A.•Mark A.Hanson,P.E • Engineers &Architects Michael T.Rautmann,P.E.•Ted K.Field,P.E •Kenneth P Anderson,P.E.•Mark R.Rolls,P.E • David A.Bonestroo,M.B.A.•Sidney P.Williamson,P.E,L.S.•Agnes M.Ring,M.B.A.• Allan Rick Schmidt,P.E. Offices:St.Paul,Rochester,Willmar and St Cloud,MN.Milwaukee,WI Website:www.bonestroo.com September 13, 2000 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Cottage Grove 7516 80th Street South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Re: Glengrove Industrial Park 20001 Improvements File No. 48-00-123 Dear Mayor and Council: • Transmitted herein is the Feasibility Report for the Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements. The project consists of the phase 2 construction of the flume; storm water ponds identified in the Storm Water Management Plan; and trunk sanitary sewer improvements. This report is intended to serve as a guide as development continues in the Glengrove Industrial Park. Layouts of the proposed improvements are presented. Discussion about design details, implementation schedule, cost estimates, and funding sources has been incorporated into the text of this report. Respectfully submitted, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOC., INC. 16.46*. L. t44‘.41.44 Karen L. Wiemeri, P.E. S 0 CD City of C.ottag� e Grove a Feasibility Report Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 40; Flume — Phase 2 Storm Water Ponds Sanitary Sewer Cottage Grove, Minnesota September 2000 File No. 48-00-123 1110 PROJECT SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The fundamental reasons this project is being considered at this time are: 1. The eminent development of the industrial park, 2. Favorable timing considering the lead time necessary to complete the proposed infrastructure improvements prior to commencement of the subsequent industrial site development, and 3. Current opportunity to achieve most favorable costs. PROJECT SCOPE The Glengrove Industrial Park Improvements consists of 3 separate sub-projects. These projects are: 110 1. Glengrove Industrial Park Drainage Flume — Phase 2 2. Storm water pond improvements adjacent to the flume in the industrial park (pond identified as TG-P 14, TG-P16 and TG-P18A), and 3. Sanitary sewer improvements consisting of: a. New sanitary sewer extension (stub under flume only) to serve the industrial park property to the south of the flume, and b. Rehabilitation of existing trunk sanitary sewer. Figure 1, at the back of this report, illustrates the location and scope of the 3 projects in the industrial park. PROJECT APPROACH A large portion of the industrial park lies over limestone bedrock that is very near the surface. As such, the construction of the flume, the ponds and sanitary sewer require rock excavation. • Rock excavation in itself is very expensive if done by the typical method of excavating the rock Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 2 and removing the rock off the project site. However, rock excavation costs can be significantly • lowered if conditions can be created to allow a contractor to produce crushed limestone gravel from the bedrock excavated. The project costs would be reduced to approximately one-fifth the cost by using the project approach proposed herein. Specifically, rock excavation costs can be reduced if: 1. A sufficient quantity of rock excavation is provided to support a crushing and processing operation; 2. A working space near to the rock excavation is provided to process the rock into gravel; and 3. Sufficient time is allowed to remove the gravel stockpiled at the project site as market forces dictate. For this reason we recommend that: • The project include the flume, ponds TG-P16 & TG-P18A and the sanitary sewer improvements to create a sufficient quantity of rock to make crushing and marketing of 410 the gravel economically viable, • A space be provided near the project site to crush the rock and store the gravel, and • Time be provided (until end of October, 2001) to remove the gravel from the site. PROJECT TIMING The construction and removal of the gravel from the site will require approximately 9 months. Much of this time is necessary to complete the removal for the gravel. We recommend that the gravel become the property of the contractor to enable the contractor to market the product to the widest available market to speed the removal time. . The proposed construction duration could likely conflict with marketing and development efforts of the parcels adjacent to the project. To minimize the time required to complete the crushing and hauling operations we recommend that construction be scheduled allowing for mining and crushing to occur over the winter and spring. We recommend the work commence this winter with expected completion of removal of the gravel by the end of the 2001 construction season. S. Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 3 • ESTIMATED COSTS The table below summarizes the estimated project costs. These costs include construction and 30% for indirect costs. The costs are based on current construction costs with no factor for inflation. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS Item Total Cost Flume Construction $392,000 Pond Construction —TG-P16 & TG-P18A $245,000 Sanitary Sewer— New Trunk $27,000 Sanitary Sewer— Rehabilitation of existing $151,000 Total Base Project $815,000 Option — Pond Construction —TG-P14 $116,000 FINANCING The work herein could be financed by a combination of area charges and sanitary sewer operating funds. The following is a summary of proposed allocations of costs to funding sources. SUMMARY OF REVENUE SOURCES Storm Water Sanitary Sewer Sewer Utility Area Fund Area Fund Operating Fund Flume $392,000 Ponds TG-P16 & 18A $245,000 Sanitary Sewer New Trunk $27,000 Repair Existing $151,000 Total Base Project $637,000 $27,000 $151,000 S Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 4 RECOMMENDATIONS • The following summarizes the recommendations of this study. • Adopt this report as the guide for development of the proposed improvements. • Construct phase 2 of the flume as illustrated on Figure 1. • Construct Ponds TG-P 16 and TG-P18A as shown on Figure 1. • Construct a 12-inch sanitary sewer crossing the flume to serve the south portion of the Glengrove Industrial Park. • Replace or slip line the existing 18-inch sanitary sewer as shown on Figure 1. Alternative recommendations of this study are: • Construct future sanitary sewer (location and extent shown on Figure 1) in conjunction with this project. • Construct TG-P14 in conjunction with this project. • Construct interim ditch improvements on property east of Jamaica Avenue and create a •1 cul-de-sac and road closure on Glendenning Road. PROJECT DISCUSSION FLUME DESIGN The design cross section of the flume is illustrated on Figure 1. The design consists of: • A 50-foot wide channel. • The center 15 feet of the channel is at a lower elevation to control typical rainfall events. • Side slopes of the flume are 3:1 except 4:1 where a future trail is located. • A berm is needed along the north side of the flume to prevent flooding of the adjacent property. Borrow material from phase I construction is available to construct this berm. • The entire flume above the normal water level will be topsoiled and seeded. • Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 5 POND CONSTRUCTION As part of the storm water management plan, three ponding areas have been identified along the flume phase 2 construction. These three ponding areas TG-P14, P16 and P18A are shown on Figure 1. These ponds are designed as water quality/detention ponds. Because ponds TG-P16 & TG-P 18A are located in bedrock, the construction of these ponds should be included with the flume construction to take advantage of the cost advantages of the gravel production operations. Pond TG-P 14 is not in bedrock and the project could be accomplished with future site grading. ROCK EXCAVATION Natural bedrock is known to be in the area. Test hole excavations were made to determine where rock excavation would be necessary. Rock was found in the area of the flume west of IPJamaica Avenue for an approximate distance of 1500 feet. We estimate there will be approximately 30,000 cubic yards of rock excavated. Because there was not enough rock found during the construction of the first phase of the flume, the rock excavated on phase 2 will be crushed and used as riprap for the upper channel of the flume. The bottom of the flume in the rock excavation of Phase 2 will not be rip rapped but left as a natural bedrock bottom. The excavated rock that will not be used for riprap will be removed from the project site. There are two options for removing the excess rock. The first option is to have the contractor remove the rock from the construction site as soon as it is excavated. The contractor would have to load the rock onto trucks and haul the rock to an off site location. The construction cost for this option would be approximately $36 /cubic yard. The second and recommended option is to allow the contractor to set up an on-site rock • crushing operation to crush the rock as it is excavated and stockpiled it on-site. With this option land must be made available for the contractor to set up a crushing plant and stockpile the Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 6 material. An area adjacent to the flume would be the best location for the plant and stockpiling. Once the material has been stockpiled, the contractor would remove the material as market conditions permit. This option is significantly less expensive. Costs to remove the rock in this manner is estimated to cost$5/cubic yard. SANITARY SEWER Because the flume construction will be adjacent to the existing trunk sanitary sewer the following items should be considered: • Because the 18-inch trunk sanitary sewer is old and deteriorating, the pipe should either be replaced or slip lined. • To provide sanitary sewer service to serve the area south of the flume, a new trunk sanitary sewer crossing of the flume should be installed to provide future service to this area as shown on Figure 1. • As an alternate to constructing only the flume crossing, the trunk sanitary sewer shown on Figure 1 as "future 12" PVC sanitary sewer" could be constructed as a part of this •i project to take advantage of the cost savings of the natural bedrock removal. Approximately 213 acres of commercial and industrial area south of the flume will need to be served by sanitary sewer. The amount of flow generated from this area will be approximately 1.182 million gallons per day. Instead of crossing the flume each time a connection is needed to the sanitary sewer to the south, it is proposed to construct one crossing of the flume to serve this area. At approximately 600 feet west of Jamaica Avenue, a manhole would be constructed over the existing 21-inch sewer. A 12-inch sanitary sewer would be extended south under the flume from the new manhole. In the future the 12-inch sanitary sewer would be extended to the intersection of Ideal and 97th Street to serve the development to the south. In 1995 a portion of the 18-inch concrete sanitary sewer from Jamaica Avenue west to Ideal Avenue was replaced with a 21-inch PVC sewer. It was more economical to replace the 18- inch with a 21-inch instead of constructing a parallel pipe. As part of the flume project the rest of the 18-inch sanitary sewer should be reconstructed. If the 12-inch sanitary sewer were extended to the south, then the 18-inch concrete sanitary sewer and manholes could be replaced with an 18-inch PVC pipe. Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 7 • _ I • OTHER IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS If not in conjunction with this project, then at some future time the City will need to consider implementing the following improvements: • Jamaica culvert crossing • Interim improvements to property east of Jamaica and Glendenning Road • Trail and landscape improvements Jamaica culvert crossing Currently a 36-inch storm sewer at the intersection of 97th Street and Jamaica Avenue will intercept the water from the flume phase II and route the water through a pond located south of 97th Street. From the pond, excess runoff will be conveyed under Jamaica Avenue to the property located east of Jamaica. Once the industrial area begins to develop, this pipe will not be large enough to handle the flows from the flume. In the future a 6' X 6' concrete culvert crossing will be needed at the intersection of Jamaica Avenue and the flume. The installation of • the box culvert is not necessary at this time. Interim improvements to property east of Jamaica and Glendenning Road Until the box culvert and flume improvements are made east of Jamaica Avenue, some interim improvements on the property east of Jamaica Avenue are recommended. The improvements would include creating a temporary ditch to convey the runoff to the pond east of Glendenning Road. As part of these improvements, it is suggested that Glendenning Road to converted to a cul-de-sac south of the compost site. Figure 1 illustrates these interim improvements. It is recommended that these improvements be included with this project or implemented under separate contract in the near future. Trail and Landscape Improvements To enhance the use of the flume a bench will be included on the north side to accommodate a future pathway. A 30-foot utility easement will also be included along the north side of the flume • for a meandering trail alignment and slope construction. This pathway will be part of a larger trail Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 8 system. To enhance the trail system a landscape master plan for the Glengrove Industrial Park has been developed. These trail improvements are not necessary at this time. PROJECT SCHEDULE Council receives Feasibility Report September 20, 2000 Orders the preparation of the Plans and Specifications September 20, 2000 Approve Plans and Specifications and set Bid Date October 18, 2000 Ad for Bid Published October 25, 2000 Project Bid Date November 9, 2000 Contract Award November 15, 2000 Construction Begins December 2000 Construction Completed June 2001 1110, 411 Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements 9 BONESTRQO ROSENE ANDERLIK3 lia 6516361311 09/14/00 11 :24 '' :02/02 N0:017 T�_I_ l 1 711 1 71• I• ' i ' . —-- IIi / •1 i /I/1:.7'13 • I 11 , I i I .1 1... 1 ' I C .....,,-. ; , Ir. : T 1 1 II I :' 4. H ` 15 1 1 11 I . M IK i1? 7'w , l Ca n, r'`,_ I 14 -M..- 1 ; , I , r--- _. ;• -$ -`,., ia. ! 0 I 1 Future Ide01 ,Ave_ — _ I •S�mC�,'4 IY' 8a ! !IIYI' ' - 14 i S 1 • ill °12":\- 1 li! ki i 11_,,I, t. ii ,y F -E !b ;I M 141 • 'pi ,. r.43 - r ' P ¢iS ' �I I / tip' �. c e ' ia$ill - 'Id1 ill• i ._ A siii ,.,,t I 1) II1 Iit i it l,, I ``iJii,1A. aica Ales ' / 1 ,. ,,,, i 1,,i7.- ,_:::,, , i---.--,,;:t ,i,„... .) , , , . , . , / , a, -...1-7 !, -.!4, --,.. , P.\ H, .,,, : .. i l/ . , , , i LI,.Glender4nt : Ave. / III , .. t , liiii: /' ,,c-?,-.. ilk t 1, I .., .1— ..- -- --i /,'2' . �Yy -.-. COTTAGE GROVE. MINNESOTAAmy. _ . 7.LE'IGKJVE INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAINAGE P%IJ C PW 2 1 mom/ _ _ ..2 -4.""" w ' __� tot r• rrpv[r[MR Mn � —w 1 f' i M -• , nous( isw�•..r.� (ter. �...w r ... _..�,. ._y RESOLUTION NO. 00-XX • RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE GLENGROVE INDUSTRIAL PARK 2001 IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the City Engineer was authorized to prepare a feasibility report for the Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements, which is proposed to improve the following: Flume—Phase 2 Storm Water Ponds Sanitary Sewer NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota, that the Feasibility Report for the Glengrove Industrial Park 2001 Improvements as prepared by the City Engineer is hereby received; and the engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates is hereby designated as the engineer for these improvements. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements. Passed this 20th day of September 2000. • John D. Denzer, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk City of Cottage Grove • Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator IrAv Date: 10/05/00 Re: 1999 Annual Report Item 4E Included in your packet is the 1999 Annual Report. As you know, we delayed preparation until the strategic plan was completed, and we changed the format this year. The change in format will make future Annual Reports much easier to prepare, and provide longer "shelf life" as a marketing tool. It is our goal to have the 2000 Annual Report completed for review at the February 2001 EDA meeting, followed by • printing and mailing that same month. If you have any comments to keep in mind for the 2000 Annual Report, please advise. Enclosure • \\CG_FS1\SYS\GROUPS\PER_ECON\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Annual Report.doc r City of Cottage Grove 111 Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator Date: 10/6/00 Re: Marketing Plan Review Item 4F Staff wanted to update you on the status of our 2000 marketing efforts. The main areas of focus in 2000 included the following: ➢ Print Advertising ➢ Direct Mail promotions ➢ Annual Golf Tournament ➢ Attendance at the International Manufacturing Show ➢ Outreach to local businesses In order to facilitate planning for 2001, we wanted to review some of our current efforts with you, and ask for your feedback. In addition, we are analyzing the results of our site selection survey. Those results will assist us with preparing a 2001 Marketing Plan. For this discussion, we would like to focus on print advertising and direct mail promotions. PRINT ADVERTISING As you recall, there was a great deal of discussion earlier this year about our print advertising plan. Ultimately, we decided to change the plan that we had been following for the past couple of years, when our entire advertising budget was spent on print ads in the Minnesota Real Estate Journal and their Leasing Guide. In 2000, we have had a more diverse mix of print advertising. Our strategy has included the following: ➢ 3 issues Midwest Business and Industrial Properties (Regional publication, ads in issues with a Minnesota focus) ➢ Ads in the four MNREJ Leasing Guides. ➢ Chamber of Commerce Map ad, and Chamber of Commerce Directory ad • ➢ Seven ads in City Business (guided by focus topics) K:\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Marketing.doc Earlier in the year, while still finalizing our advertising plan, we ran a few ads in the Minnesota Real Estate Journal, and also had the front and back of a TAB in the Leasing Guide. The plan for 2001 is four Leasing Guide ads, 3 Midwest Business & Industrial Properties ads, 7 City Business ads, Chamber Directory ad, and 1 ad with Site Selection (a national publication, in the issue with a Midwest focus.) We have included samples of ads designed this year. The first five sheets represent ads placed in City Business. With the success of the post card promotion, we started incorporating a similar theme to our ads. Coming up on October 9 is a Columbus Day ad, which is the first of the samples shown. Also included are four ads that we have used in the MNREJ Leasing Guide, the ad we've used in the Midwest & Industrial Properties, and the Chamber Directory. Staff would like some discussion with you about the direction our ads will take in 2001. DIRECT MAIL PROMOTIONS At this time, we have 575 names on our mailing list. This includes commercial brokers, bankers, general contractors, accounting firms, consultants, and others. In addition, we have the mailing list of subscribers to the Minnesota Real Estate Journal, another approximately 550 names. We mail our Annual Report directly to this list. In addition, we have sent three post cards this year. The first was an aerial photo of the Industrial Park, with "Happy New Year" and EDA information on the back. The second was the "Picnic in July" post card. The third and most recent was "We'll help you avoid the traps of poor site location decisions", which was mailed out just a few weeks ago. • We have received very favorable responses to the post card mailings. Included in your packet is a composite of other ideas we have for future post cards. Comments and suggestions are welcome. We are planning our next post card for November. Originally, we planned on quarterly post card mailings. These have been so successful, however, that we have been sending them every two months. We will be discussing the schedule for 2001 over the next month or so. Enclosures: Ad samples, post card/direct mail possibilities. • K:\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Marketing.doc LiAC:,aka t(xtfk a:rrYFY z. � czrr l,.Df1vLk FA#i3,'. Starhuck.M+rMIayor R nald l:)isr�t.rel agreed •I hMinnesota Investment Funtf is an Ohio Director adding, "`The funds pro ided by I:3TE ) ecce€o me Cleve}tyI?meat tsacsl used to create 'It€trle it.h€rrt�l�N,C.'clrhi€t have enabled a}t?ung; grt?wiu company lait;h•quatity cit?s<acrr}a ti€tne a>ta,Ll"I'i;i 6\meric4n LIekur c:Po c°r tet pro per'an e parts "Phis is t:xtr'nun use.' the rc'ou:rcc4 of start° overnment to I tncilt?y,C)t•I Im p€?rtattt fi?t•thy:city or Stan ek lac cttuse h ei s fester rt husiness clima€t that boosts 419-425-7503>Fax419-425-7571 tsf t}tc new jcah it cr€�atee', it a1;*0 shows that economic development in ev r�r. ica€t ssf Ohio Director private btusiness and state government eau the state. Janice SI I:<ipseomh C sty(iIndustria f' 'illc?u hhv cottagq Grove I Park 'illefsughh. t)N 44(..c)5:;„it:i§)1. f,ttY:4,40,953-4167 Ohio Director Ides N. `ipr€ ue.PE.. Buckeye Vowel, Inc., f't?lt€ttxl+us,C)tI': 614-846-57' l�1-8t6-5757. nix 614-M6 7ltt : Sout(h"h'�Ir)t()kfIf3eirtctaaceertsfldt irxn:ittrnttr?r rtu. ' ::"..4w".:1'4, , '''''''''.\\,,,,,, .F tso%ernor l)cvc:lc?paatcnt • 6O :t-:tt32.t z x f,t;5, F,S3-:;257 meg.; South.t)ak€?tat l)irec or I rt I Ott l�� . Focus.Watertown 't mu.rtca n SI) f 4 'tcaasin I)Irxtt>r 3€cr€tlat 3lartchar'€l Vv't,,ei..iitsiti Department(If l7c3€nttnere Mti(f#et)€i..IN,I z: 608-267-0753,Fax(1.( "s''26(' :14'47' t'4riseu fzt Gln>cti z BUILDING NG ON SUCCESS! Bruce F.Kepner A1lia€rtEnergy Cult Michelle Wolfe to expkwe dour gr€t t#t t ppartunities: Madison,u'l C5'1 X58.2882 608,252-5753, Fax bila-252.-347x3 Cul!Ridge 7"efilley pity of alFa: B- ?c - 3 `t) Cottage Grove for AA'AEDC member Minnesota discounts to adverb e. City of Cottage Grove Economic Development Department 7516 80th Street South,Cottage Grove,MN 55016 e subscription,check out mwbi f.cciirt e rtail:rityadmi€ t cottage-grcave,org or fax 1651)458-2897 a BU=SINES AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES•rnwb p.a<€tm MM.ARCHIAP"I II_,2000 . t • Leasing FEATURE GuidePaid Advertising Feature 0:x wP OFFICE United Properties , - Page 6 GOLDEN HILLS q.. 11 MINNEAPOLIS CBD Map 1 �. YIIII FEA 0➢FAIi.i 20 MINNEAPOLIS N/NW SUBURBS - Map 2 """—"" "`°"`"""r 32 MINNEAPOLIS S/SW SUBURBS - Map 3 LAND 55 ST. PAUL CBD - Map 4 123 MINNEAPOLIS N/NW SUBURBS Map 1 60 ST. PAUL N/NE SUBURBS- Map 5 127 MINNEAPOLIS S/SW SUBURBS- Map 2 65 ST. PAUL S/SE SUBURBS- Map 6 130 ST. PAULN/NE SUBURBS- Map 3 72 VENDOR RESOURCES 133 ST. PAUL S/SE SUBURBS- Map 4 INDUSTRIAL GREATER 91 MINNEAPOLIS N/NW SUBURBS - Map 1 MINNESOTA 101 MINNEAPOLIS S/SW SUBURBS - Map 2 139 GREATER MN PROPERTIES 112 ST. PAUL N/NE SUBURBS - Map 3 153 GREATER MN LAND 118 ST. PAUL S/SE SUBURBS - Map 4 • CalIZICOTTAGE GROVE INTI)USTRIAL PARK A COMMUNITY WITH MORE TO OFFER 600 Acre Industrial Park Available • Skilled available workforce • Located at Highway 61 and Jamaica Ave. S. 0-- " • Rail service with CP Rail and Burlington Northern • Financial Incentives Available • Only 4 miles so. of I-494 and 6 miles so. of I-94 • Most utilities available • Diverse housing stock a • 15 miles from Mpls./St. Paul Int'l Airport '�. • Land costs 1.50/square foot 0 (651) 458-2882 Michelle A. Wolfe 7516 80th Street South Assistant City Administrator Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Minnesota Leasing Guide February 2000 5 ADDRESS Square Feet Acres Dimensions Agency Contacts) Price per S.F. Price per Acre List Price Phone The Waters 553,765 12 Welsh Companies Inc Bill Ritter $2.75 $1,522,854 (612)897-7700 Dirk Koentopf • The Waters 916,681 21 Welsh Companies Inc Bill Ritter $2.50 $2,291,703 (612)897-7700 Dirk Koentopf Farmington Co Rd 50 1,251,043 28.7 Irregular Edina Realty Inc Jim Emond Sr. $0.40 $17,410 $500,000 (612)892-7000 Hastings 33rd St 18 CB Richard Ellis Inc David Kirkland $2.475,000 (612)924-4600 Chuck Caturia Inver Grove Heights 7805 Cahill Ave 12 950 x 590 Kassan V Properties George Kassan $5.00 $2,500,000 (651)455-0047 Babcock Tr 687,812 15 Varies J H Callahan&Associates James H Callahan $1.25 $54,450 $782,000 (651)455-8858 Babcock Trail 15 United Properties,LLC Dan Gleason $1.25 (612)831-1000 Highway 55 and 70th St 15 The Schoening Group Shannon Rusk $4.00 (612)920-1266 Hwy 52&Concord Blvd 2,308,680 53 Welsh Companies Inc Chris Simmons $5.00 $11,500,000 (612)897-7700 Dan Brastad Lafayette Freeway 1,527,896 32 1370 x 1220 Spectrum Properties Group Charles R He nrich $3.00 $130,680 $4,283,690 (612)375 8800 Bob Welle Robert St&Lone Oak 1,742,400 40 Edina Realty Inc Ernest Peacock $1.50 $2,613,600 (612)927-1100 • 53 COTTAGE GROVE INDUSTRIAL PARK ® Highway 10/61 and Jamaica Ave. Contact: Michelle Wolfe "z y f� m4� � t CG Economic -f' ` � ,ter It , 1 } Oka ♦'l ,, 441. ,..., i v,g Development Department ` F '44 3 4 (651) 458-2882 Total size (sq. ft.)' EEL 11 gm— Price per Sq. Ft. $1.60 - Major Tenants: Renewal by Anderson Upnorth Plastics, 3M • Amenities: Skilled and available workforce,extensive transportartion network(Highway, rail, air,barge) Minnesota Leasing Guide February 2000 135 -:--',,,A- -----,-4,,,,:-;L,t.,,,,.;,,,...,,,,,,,' :._,..,,,,,,,,_,,, • 4.1''' . o �� .,. .'.meq ' Cit of Co_ ttage Grov i v, D �, Economic Development Authority '----.. ,-• , `1:.';,v:It''.1''''' OWTH PARTNERS -,-' ,5 ', e r sw. .a 3 :4 tiCIen�. � - ;; axile,',P;'''''. `e � N S 1 a'r 1Srlt'S C.rpa:ate read a .e 3;arufact g facddy • '4 _i - , . , ,_,.-, - .---. ...... , , J' 4 4- 7 } t l �4 1 i , Building on „, 3M ,. Success . _ , ” a' Call Michelle Wolfe to explore your i Growth Opportunities at 651-458-2882 City of Cottage Grove • t Economic Development Department 7516 80th St. S. Cottage Grove, MN 55016 email: c9tyadmin@cottage-grove.org • CITY OF COTTAGE Saint Paul kiiiimmominnin GROVE INDUSTRIAL 0 „, ,,,P:,,,RK, . cc ` '9 A 49is• *7. si. t... ger pi 1ilRTH 4, © ' . : rr„tsTic 5 6'7 1 $7th Strati G ..; . 3MI ' t • renewal BY ANDERSEN "We are proud of 3M's tradition of `After an extensive search, we select- community support. Our invest- ed Cottage Grove as the site for our BlJII D LNG ment in capital, as well as training new Renewal by;Andersen”' mann- ONand equipment, helps us maintain factu7ing facility because it offered the our leadership position and positions best overall features—a construction- CES! us for future growth. Annually, 3M ready site, good truck accessibility construction- SUCCESS! invested more than $30 million and a strong labor pool." Call Michelle Wolfe to explore in our Cottage Grove location. your growth Charles\X.'Schmid,Senior Vice President opportunities at: Fred Luden, Site Manager Window and Patio Door Business Group (651) 458-2882 I 3M Andersen Corporation :` ,w., • City of Cottage Grove Economic Development Department b ( 7516 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, MN 55016 e-mail: cityadmin(4)cottage-grove.org t � (651) 458-2882 , . ADDRESS Square Feel Acres Dimensions Agency Contacts/ 1 - 1.... . . Price per S,P. Puce per ACM LAI PnPhone 1 95th St S 9,583.200 220 weish Companies LLC Craig Lien . 51.00 $43.560 $9,583.200 i651)585,5393 Dick Zehood ,.f. ,age Grove indrstriai Park 1,645,300 600 City of Cottage Grove Micneee wfoite .51.80 52,632,000 (651)458-2883 i..;.'". ;,.. Eagan i35eLone Oak Rd' 653,978 15 1160'along 135E J M stooe a Associates James M Grebe 55.00 5217,800 53.270,000 /952)942-9771 Cedar Aveftliff Rd 743.751 ,7.1 963 x 829 x 991 x 731 Hiller/es/Devmprnen1 Gary lankenot 5.03 53741.000 1512)371,0123 Hwy 55 958.320 22 '*eclrum Prop Group Charies R Henrich ' 1 $3,25 $141,570 53,114,540 i8121 375-8800 494 pm east af NW A1irline H .219.680 28 Varies J M Oral*&Associates James M Grob. $2.75 $119,790 53,354.120 ;952)942-9771 Hastings t 33rd St 18 CB Rionard Offs Inc Gavin Kirk/and $2:475.060 (952)924-4600 Chuck Caturia Inver Grove Heights Arbor Pointe Land 1,718.712 39.5 Welsh Companies LLC Chris Simmons 58.593.909 (952)897-7700 Dan Brastad Robert St.8t Lona Oak 1,74Z400 46 40 acres Edina Realtylr..c Ernest Peacock 4 51.50 52,613,600 1962)327-1100 Lakeville 16x xx Kenyon 780M00 17.9 566x1165x662412.20 International Realty Plus Don Coen 51 35 558,806 51,055,000 16121 860-6856 21001 St.5 Co Rd 70 827.000 19 848 x 932 x 890 x 360 Calc saoker Burnet Steve Horsman $4.82 $210,526 55.500,000 /551)452,5950 4110 , .,,.‘ .. ... .,.............„„.I...,,...,:- • -Nite:-..i....,....„ COTTAGE GROVE INDUSTRIAL PARK Highway 1.0/61 and Jamaica ,•&\..ve. „,..... Contact: Michelle Wolfe - . ''-:".....:‘ .',., .., .::,....'..,.„.'-,:".., r'..1.?,'`...,41.2'. . - - '••:•!..!'ii ,.,.::.r.•..-,.,...1•:....•.:::: -, •-.•-:....f,.:...'.. ::. . . •.: .....,Aii . , . . .. ... ,..• N..,'...---...„-, - . . •,....!..:::: :,..,*!:.., CG Economic .,.. ..,. ..., . . -,,,,„.,... . ,,,,,....• ., ....„.. ...,.:::: ,..., .. Development Department 77,.-. - - .-:•:-,;'.p4".'''...i.......,,,,...<:::,-..„... „ir •..-,----,•.... J,..,,,,,:,..,-,.:-,.;.-,...-:..:.,-,-;:-:,-,;'-'• -- (651) 458-2882 ...: ::...p, ..-,..- •.-.,-,,,. : ,,.. -,.-•.:t. . , ., , Total size (sq. tt.) L645.000 Acres 600 plus --3 (D. , • - • .• ,. „. List price $2,632,000 . .....0. CD...%,...,,..- , ..-. —I Price per Sq, Ft. $1.60 ....„:. -,........,. Major Tenants: Renewal by by Anderst)n,Upnorth Plastics.3M, — CCE Techrir)logies. Z = Amenities: CD te) Skilled and available workforce,e.ntensive tran.sportat-tion - • , network (Highway. rail,air, barge). ...01. 0 LeiLlitlg(;aide Aug-tiN,,2000 I25 . ,. ' V Q 411 010 •�_ a) 0 co 0 4 ca c e! T it � Ch i u.. co M J 0 �n � ..- co 4 A IA ZNL cn — Mcco � • LnLo 002- MI Q G C)� C) i m17 (0 (0 > ' A ZIt) Q) l0 so O G) Trm a� � L -1g y � V co to t (111) r o y /0 > T x '/� T T cV C an Y T T /O v O I.V a CID m v' QD C W •� 612 OD CCe A 2 Rh1 ! flub ! O �w1 w 00 i . 0 4 M17 C x i:::;. 4) � 0 � � x O co N 'o O ca i" TI i 1.0 Lo co , ._ CC T co LoNov a- Qi � ZC000 = p) � Z9 3 2000 E t$ 45 g yui In 0 a � >• m ch ch LO R w =2 Lo C > 2 � Lo H y C_ 8 O to co ! !:::1 !0 cu-0 _ � • 2 • co -DC'3cocof- PIP DA swao co b O K C O N 6 O > p as 0 (13_ O iC co O 0U. i a oOa V Oa �iO -.---------- ~ �`� �• 743. �- O am,0.1_ ilk...,..: a. LI W * 4 ro(. 6, F O ice . alid 2 ci, — $'c,,,, :ice w3.0 O O _i O ZWs �=› Q o = ,� 4.Q c-1 tomiii 3 � 1 8, V h1J U p2. oQO .- a a � aWoa Tr 00 ao l *I': -?:. k! 1 co 0 u O O C r T L .1:4all litlf:41-j '‘ co to c7) Q a Ui w • • • i r � k'-' o C30Tzrrn � a . • . -. � , n 3 .41 : • .i444VeY1 .six '' o ,,-. Jy.,.,,,„,,i ,,-:t - --- gi—i. 0 , % ¢y.(�' '� dNk M fi n°, cn 0 C 0 -,-.z._."`,4,- C) O ^ Ft',.,, CD C yA n O G 0 O m 5 ,.7 .O. 4 'C aro i `L.«-4' >rs 0 n no I Da as Cr4,,,,,_,I _ z / . 1 42 nf cn I T ° a Li m °° o O°^o ,VAV '0 [o n a' 0. rn . . cp i' oyxy^ori sm d �, V In ►r �w 43 o'C w oa so v ° A4.(� Amo p �r �u- W., `2, i A N *.. m o t7 h 0.y w o ci g rD n ,- �'- 4. tg a$ �!o•P.: yON y F,e ao �c ►a y 1 C p ,i 2 < O-rt.,...O n �ti�`aM1 "9 O'er N d ro to 7 O n re Q y w • rTA I o ,, g-:...,. 0, o• �� , CD ° /:1'`i �, 1°` H 4., 0 Pi 1/1 ° w y O p w w y H fD r v .• o b O n G. t-'y� co y r,`C 3�! r 0.rro , • M. 0 In a m S 0n C EL— - n O r' .CD 0. s ','',',.-'4'...‘:‘4'‘"'''''� .. �,. l • • co CD - F = 0 -=-8 2. :4_-__: R. , ! crai :7::::::::::::: m - aer 7 • r gg = K -9 i O 7'-0 a_ N `V a 9 o W o • a C rn n Y LI. 3 C 0 B _ p.� ' 4. e c�c (p T O co Q Q- 3. o A 3-< o •A FH ) W Q c�D -< fD O m Uc 0 o a m ; ^ g gA C SCC `' — p C c nn C�• n m e o _ s _ n � a „ 0 o N < T � � a ' `Y t<3 ,. _ 'to AO N aOS O —I• ..a"-5 a ' a,.; N A T .. A Na; O Q ST CQ i..5, p - a O n -. C Q CT Q . }:H - • ax a,w' +�1--•- fh 'y s�• - -� �aK P a\a A a _,',-,v.. mint �-�'- 4-E-7,. . �`Nck `�' �iy!� a%5 F` R,�-,�,a�n ,r^-�r �x,- "�, s- .v � ,F m � x. azC�`. `- ,S�y,'. 'la3al�. ,a4'K'a y vx"'�F fir- ro->5x' W Y� i kgs �� .; '1'1 „. ti. 44,*1.....,:L;-, '°,,...r,, a � _,^x" O -` _ 5".` 4\ ,x'vc.,.. '`,r, C4 oxo-` _ _!` *' J::,, = s `M#w.� s; 7 4a' 4 � tC H = •r- .: .?"z„. g !wo,ate,, 4 77: ( O .�.' �; t1 a .� z'x„a„mac ' ar., ' : ,'U '"" t, z tr 1 Si) wmy �, „.., s .tea -..' �� et&'b � A. � �aw y� � s� ��'� JFx"�j �q�, � �v. O �',va, ,�� � 40.13::-:, t �� �.�-i � s '£� ,ez �444 fi� �>F'� °��.�r� �� •-.., �s ,� l 1 , � ��� ��.� tea'.r,,, , as M � 4,`"z 4 " 4 # ••'- �q x e>= :>4 "' �4' ,, , I t i"l * r ,�. t :' T• 4 .ex�.,. 0'42711"*.' ' a 0 ti ,„1:3 s Cy as w S c O o ° s x w \ Q . tN- 'CJ • 9 w0'E ",, ti.4.N G. 'f'kt yy #1445,0:447-4t fill O x n "0° o'a° y �, 3 °, 44441440, 1x' \ q�l l.m.'�.nve. M� 14 3 111L J • w%'' • w � a xN d•o o o � NtEit � CO> P �.vy opy ° ^•" 9 '7o H y Fa w • M T ��.O�yS w fV Y. '�' w C G O 7 Rte, �f ) F WO �� ``% /V • 07 rd AMy �P�.d n o w ,.,x n s0 n ,0' �F-sx O n /� T .n V r n 0 7 :2-...4--- � ..<P.m ... �_,�s y1j c4 A y^ 8 5 fR y a C O w a� y G o "I'''. c rt o' 4f,,,: P" ti O , g IX �� C`° a -`° n oq n xF�,\� d� • r iri.b ; a : a o w /W-7-41-7,74,, ,�,, .leo • \! V. G rt 7 < 7 • O O G ^ yy ' IP ,.+ .c3 O .Oi Q• 04 X'n n`� 3� rD.. . v�\1 ON IljMO I • CO co r z . . vs, y el- C tel 114 eftall possl CI *1 tiri gcniri g. to RI 0-1 cn etas -10 5.Oilh O y p d'4Cpp CD° ti tz q o4t KQ' r°N . P.,. 0 4 z F•+ co ... ,..... " . . NM- fit. 40.• = i . a d * 4 "ICI t;11.1°11.11 CI (III) .,g ir tit,i7. fit ::,_, ..,.... ...!. .:...... ...:::-,. ,,,.:. ...1 0 0 ii tr 03 el— l.* ...r oit< .-i ;•:'.: ::•.; 6 .•••• •:•••• ..-• .'-''.- '.LS.% - K .`,.'"..'..,:`, ..,....- :::! ..* : ...L % 7, ..".• '.. el 0 ono) ,, 2, oto oc xi ,...,. --= ...... „ .:,.. ..,. ..-..: ..,.. ..:. ..,......- 7, ,... ..., .:,.. _ .: :::. :......', ,:-.. :7, :::: :, ,..-,- (t) :kfel gmo. ,y „:.:1 ,....... -..., ...,.... :::: 7 .i7 ..: ...,. PI . alai) 0 t '.i'' -.... ' > .7:: •..?..• . :.r:. :-.: .,..... -....- - rif) ttlj 4iii lit tok oiit tie, 7.- f-...). ,`,,t' •-• .::- -.'...'.. i...: :r.,...' ',...,. ,.i'... i.5 116. 1:1 gil . . .. `'.•« = ..,...:5., ..Z ,..: '...'...... ....:.: ::, ;7. .._. ......- .4 '‘,7 ..., ';x.-., ',... ',,ci i,"" '..'... '''',. '..t. •.;:' '''• iC> tilliii CI) 40: g 0'41 t;I) 'Ilni _ ,.... -. ....,a1 el ..-•:. • ''.. ,,,. ',..' '......r. ;1 C) leek 0 = ..,N.. - rill ., . ta 41';;'''''-: 44. .... 4... .9 ...:: ..4 .::::... 7 '....• ...•••• es ti) ::::-. .•.f -2,` 4., 0 ..7. .:- :, ' "....: ';:, :•••41. 11114 trig* fttli — . ..: tu ',7+. .., •,. ...r.. t,...$ ',:,' •',..;.. .r..: 7 ;r.... -.: ''• 7.', ..: :?;- '.-• .1 :..',C = „„....... .. cr.: r'". -"t ?•••.. = ...:.: •.,.. . .,. t•-•.• •-- '''. ;:••-• z:••••• ...,-.......... •-- :,.•,,•-• t: •,.:, ,,,,,, _ ,,,t. -,..,.. ....... ••••• •A tfi 4": = ...., > g: •:7..... . ,.. ro. iiiiiiihmarq:i.:4• . ••• XI ....•••••. ••;•.: .. •... •Ak _ -,.. -.• .-z'' ' •••". .•. ••* •••••••••••••••.:•••••••••.:::::::::*,..t.iii:.::::::••••• • • .........,....... .......„...........,. •.• • .c,„ ,•,. t..,,, •:,.., ,.. ---. •r, .-•,"•-,• r.,- •••:-. 11) .'-:....1 •,,.-4 7,',"' - zf., '••••••• ...•:.. '....-'; ,eddiVe .., -,7,.1 -.., 7..! .: ...:"' .7, "tt - , - ..,.. .,..., , , 2:, < ''''. ....•:-.:.. .• ..,..',.• .« .........7,, ,..7'.' :°.:', ;::" :.:: i::.:,.J:::;:q::: -.?.• '•,i. ,.. • 1',:ii.i1:::':i'if:igt%, ... ...mgor,• • •••••:...,..,..:. rri . .r: 7'... ........ ...., ..s;.' I-,.....:..i....?...:..;i:.. .''.';',.:''. . __-.... r. --. :.:',.4 ''' ..•:• , :,.....:.:.:,..,, ..,.. ••:,:,.......;,.. .'.. . .. ... .,'..li.., ,... ::•••••••••,.. ...:%:••., .-.• ---, ...„,„••.,,,3•. • • ..• • -..•..:•.:i,: ..r'•'• _., •,,,,, :A el, F. .. .'. -.---- -— . ,,,..::::„...,iliF;::. . - .-.....-..i....:•.:•:.- ,..r.`,.• „,, -.; q•I ."*..., '': '.'ir-......:.. e"1 ,-...... ;::, 1-'1..-t.,' .. ........ , ,...:.:: , :•.-, ?' ........— ...:x '' .... ,..4) .'. ,,,,'.....,:,.' .............:,. ....i!.......!!gf:............ . ''''V::. ''''' 1,:;. ,..... ...,, .:.:': a, ..---• , . . .. . . .. , . : . . . .. , . .*:]. r. . ..„. . '' . V = .C;N,.*•,'1%i'll•!111.:!.X•i.:::::.:::: .-:. ., .?..4111!1::.1'.'.i]:,..'.f?.il • •.. — °"t ..t ':''',*'.t'..4.....1'.,-..". '.:,f: ' ... - •,..-,--,..........,,: . : .% . .. . . . m .......::,.::::': --...: . : ,..,..S...ir...........;......-...... :. . i .Q. : •„„.,I;; "....!.:.:::',::411.:•:::. .'•fi....,,,..,i.iwitise•ej:i';›,:: •::::.;.:',,...7:::::' HA3 i 1 • ,...,., ,,7,,,. 4 . 9. • ,,„. .y.,.. tilt • 1•4, ,,,,T,,:•,..V....••,:?i".;-,.::':;1;:.:;!].;:ij.":::,.-....,..-•,'''„„i„„ ,..„,--, .:, •,#.:::'„ ;:•...".„.::,;.:,:':•:,1 • • Z ,A. "= '''''' •*, /I --I •Te• > •'"'"•., -.k. .?...':....r . 4 i4.,,,,,,..!],,,,...4.-4,,,..4:.'„,„?.,..• ,---,............--, ..--::§i,i,.-.1:::-:',.:,:.---.::,',.......,..,, : i: ,,,:...; S a -..-:-.. g,. .kl. .'.-...-''' ..z 6 'f-4 .-Z t"'•a li •ra) . to *SI*Mi..'Z:;., ,.!1:!...--......-'. - ... ...4.:!.:c>li...:..,......:.;:.:.:-.::'4...irt 0 ... i t z. 4. !.., ;1" ,c/,' .‘•T",',• '6,•• OK • ••• Er Willag...:...,...P....,,...r...••::''''' ', .. • -:::...'.]:,::::',':',..]:i..,:,i,....:.-:,,.;V:.:,, • ! 1 n . .. > ro '6, 5 ;it : .!:i -,n' q 0 0 13 ..1--:',...s.-• -4::'...! .. . : 4..,,.,,..„-:„.:.... I x , ,, i g ,2,::, ::.,,,..: . : • w.. P '=4',', '6' T.',. .,,t 4' <'•",r 1,R . . ..3. •1 :: .,,...:.,. .:,.11.,0*t,,. .11,1:',',.:',.. i et:1 oc,-, : o `',°',,, = :. ,...*, g ,.,,, ,,"' -.;-:,, -.;',•,....i'' ..i.i,i... „,..-,' .e: ..E,a. .„„„1 - ....1-. ....ell 1............. ......... :',-,,. 711°'-,.,.:::::::::::::"1,,,,,...::'....:::ii.:]•,.i .:::.... i "'11. : i 11- .-7= g; ',5*-,—,..5,- g "-.?.- S i',.. l't".. ,s..4' .,,, elkw,. 0. 1"") :,:.'",s; i ig.::::::::MI.:1$.1!tR,..-...:„..... .........::•.• '.'....,'.---....,.,,1:::-.....:,.......:::.,: i (0 . ....4 • i ii lik z., },...., ...s.1> ,.‹ Fi. ' . -L.,,, 0 '• • '.. •% ,- a (%), ',,:,-• • . rolij ..,,,, . tit:',:'.44i.till "...'.!.:]]]':;',. .,.!.:::". :'''.......,..:'::::;'::::::: .. = ' 4'::.•. :t E.:, ..',t' :c.':i'. •,;.:;1 •,',..::',''t .."--`-' ,-. .4.. 1;It . . .0 1: '...;1'..:14;ii!':;:ti%Z.X.::::....X. :.:'.[:.:-. '''' . .-..:'''::::.:: ::::',........, .:i ' **** .. 1 1:':i = s.,.,,p1,fry; :...,,,, ....-, :....„, ..4., - r....),_ :,,--, ...".'4... 'CI ,:'. ...1.*i1S4i,i...'4.4d4.,:::::.•.4'''.'"'""' ... . •, ,.. .'. ' . . ' . et.., .03'......'0. L 4,,,,*,.. 0 ,....,44.4 S'ai '.•,'"'''.— 'T.., 4 <V ..::,,r3 '•:••1,..,, n pli) . 4,6 •••............,4'.-. ,.N..,,,,...,.....4„*. ... ,.• - --..-..,.......- i O. ..., — , •c)• ,-* -0 -, r.,-..t. 0 P.j -,;=4 .,,, ,.- ,.....,-i **V '. ..,,v: .tit..„„..... .::::.i..,.,'.•..,:..,-..-.:... ....,.. ., ..-'..:-.,..,...,. i. 0 € .ii::. "-- =',,,.,) p ••*t ' i< z c :....,-.,:: .'t >'..4,1i ,,-•,.. 1.1?;# . ..-- R. -:,.. ....,ii.,,i,".......,:. -...,: ..:..... ......,..,... i , ,.., rilir.11141 4, (.,0 o ...... , v..- ,,,I) ,,,,,, -.,... „_:-, - .•:, i!::.:r .:::••,•'.;.: 4ows '"'" 0 ''''''''''' ::z.-": 5 .--4 "e, 'N V., 5 ••'..! 5" ,,..,,,.= 4,,,,4'''''' owl • •I!'., ......:g:inzJi•a:•;`,....:•:•.•-]-:.-•::•'.•:,]•,••:•-••::,•::.:"....i:-...1,....:•:•:. • . zel,,, > .....?.. 0••,,,,'4 .13 '-' ..,..'...;' -,,,:::..,.. '15., a 1,,,, e,-,., ,„, .. -- ,,,,-. ..:7-,,, ...... . .. .. .f4ot 1...... .:„..-.-.......,,,!.1,1,43,1.,,,,....::.s.,...'.. :....,..:.:'....-....::::,•,...i....'.4.,.,i...... .. —.., . !.: ...i4-..: '"--3- 2, . a ' •-• i".'A''' ,:'''.' ''''''' .,,--- _..,•,-,, P-- ,<) VI 0 .n.l• !.....• :0Z11*..','k•••••••..:-..-:::.:•.:E•::..: .•:••-:•.•:::-,-..:•:-:.:.•....;...:,..:i..:•.. i . . 27 ! ".....i, '' .''',''' f•D 5 5' b ". .'5A, ...'" f•e• - . i' ....i:':'.4'....,Z.']...: .?.. .:.... ..--,,,. ',..- .,•*1 , i':',.: --:, a' =• ' ..rti- *kr*. . IX). '',:.,:i,...:...:.c.i:.-1: '••., . ..•":.--7,,...-?..... _., i ,:'.... ..z.... i.„.., ....d. ,-..,,, F •, - ,• ,,-,, ' ti):. * ,-' o t.„.. z.,F f•-•':,. 'V iltlif ' . w. . ...:::. . .: . '''-''''','i:. :,:-.'f.'..-"'::',.•••••:. M -,,,ic . f•i:..i' -. , ,.... ,-,.. - — .,,,' 7... # tr 3 .1-....- ,......„.• ,-,-,... > s : " ............„......,,,,:. . . . : :... ::,,:...: <z:-. .. 7 .-••• F.i.‘ 1 ,'..i.:• w ::•,, '1*4... _iiig. .. c.. . !•,..':' ...-..-,g.i.,!,,,, ....,.:::.-..,,,,.:::;:.,,,,, ..rri , ,i ,!i,:,.. ,:i• - ,,, :5, ;,-, 0 .. .9„ :i ..... ....... . . ...',.1.: ..,-..,..-, ..... . 1 t ,,.„ , ii ,F,:,.. .;.?;:. - u ,,, m tv• • :,-i••••••.i............':.::.:. .:.i]. -•....".ot. ... 1-....r.. -_-..-i •. .1„.sr; *1 ':'• •.:;.i.,•:,,,,,••'''' .: •..',....::::::: '..•.,... .. '.. ,..••:::.. 4110 r7 S.'. 7,6,. '. k;r1 eo V i• .•:I. .•Ii.,''''",.. . :VI 1 $.::.i kr...',.,p'• „„.., := tv 0 i.,-**' •i........., .: 'i 1i. .-t,„ - ,r4,, , , - I........ •i i. ,. ....,.., t..., , ... ... . : :: ,„ <,,,,.. o:;) 't? e, 3.,.....,.... ... , r, ". .. ,''',, • - "- .„- . .. . . , '0 fl,..1 44, W . .' 'i .... 0 ....d. t,:,., ‘.."' 4d. „,,,,,. . . .. . illii Or 0 pat* fit, : at e) 0 ;1,0 ii. a 0 0 — (#111. :si toti g 6 0 Iii la lit Eli 4 t: C, {{ 4 ,..L..., .:::::„............4e........... 'RAMI A wF f. t.',,...:::::',.,`�- x U.i `'1 Mr * 33._T.,c ii( E,- Psi 2 R. I. w• N i dK , t 5 C 2 AF h.... * • •w s * • s C A• :w til I. .M .::•...= ^b .w.i ,yam. `a` n`y '°6, ^.`,e •• yj 7 ~'�"f f rn r r M ;t _. 1 a 2e � d a \si °^' r , ' ' ' wad . ' ct zip' q, ox Y€., I 40 "Cottage Grove has the Perspective on your Prospective Industrial Development." "We'll Help you get the Angles" "Right Angles, Right Attitudes, Right Locations...Bring your architect and let's talk" ' '''''' '''''''''' ' Rer ,c, -1 ,1 , _ _ ., ,... lc w t.il $ d'I , '. ....i., 3 1 st 11 • .,r__ �.41' ° ice+ ;:w xPur :' .+, f . "Ready to Announce you're new groundbreaking!" • "We may give you a speech, We may give you the keys to the City, and if you qualify, We may give you the Land" r t j e fk 4.40.1011411111111111.1, • 0 "Want the Scoop on a great Industrial Location?...Check Us Out at www.cottage- grove.orq" "Looking to move some dirt? We can dig it!" "Looking for a new Start?" "This Columbus Day, Discovery Your New World In Cottage Grove" S "We've got your new Industrial Development Site spotted" Y R$2 _r.:..--,-...,,,,,,,,,!,,,,,-....--,,,,.,'" „3,.om,.=r x " a ' a Y:. ,..,air c x "" -a `"':� a + "ec ,,{,��y°' res« e 'b'{` . . x,: ,. to —.,.� �P: Ali" sy i 't4 ": Mn` r:. t" h ..•t Gn_ .,„.1...,.„,,,,,„T,.... >- � >�., hYs.i ..<, .32 ,1w.3 "`' § rIM' �vry .t �.. iiw i a; � � �- II 2` A Y 4,..‘ ....'''.:'74F°.: 5 n ..,.';'::,,,',,,,,..!:?1:','•:':,':',.:'• ���� hsj" .L,�,, 4` {��� Lv�t43 wash: ass, , .,, , r S -y� • "We'll help you find. what you're looking for in Cottage Grove" "Fishing for a new ndustrial Site?, Come to Cottage Grove" "Our staff will keep you're development plans on par" "No ifs, ands or putts about it, Cottage Grove is a great place for your industrial development" (Also, next few pictures part of montage — "We do everything in Style here in Cottage Grove") ' , \ j i II • 411 , a , -,,,,,,„ --,.. ,,,, >FE' 3 w } a \ f A ttry� O C d "2 ae fie .: t ` • "The only thing missing is you" "This luxuries facility could be yours, 41 let us show you how" "You could be next" "Three Guys, a Girl and an Industrial Park" "Watch you're Business grow in Cottage Grove" • "Plant you're Roots in Cottage Grove" "The Cottage Grove Industrial Park is Blooming with new growth" v p • w ' fr ," yE > 41"Y Rua ,'14 "-41''...,sri"' 4 I n,‘_........4.$ t ' , M k ty w } )i y oil .., _...._, ,,., • 40- "Reserve you're spot in. Cottage Grove" "Five Star Servce and Industrial Location,,,,,,s,„-11,n,,-..-,C„, ott:: inCottage Grove" c � sP 31.- -§ „ R oil y t 3 fs s - yY �f" � . . z'y..�.a. ; s +s 33� 3 r�� 'c 'rt '� y.� b as��' fi L,44,'' 4t4'4' 1 \ ,..1,,,,.:.,,=:.,=.4.4r14' Sag ., ""*.. 1$ `a s x- P • ',Z,''..::U; r T�" ,'a .. ,„,„, i y .h 4 ali �fC yew [ .�k+ 3 SII. «. drove v ' a nom: ` .^J. = 'Y P' tF 3" "fix ; : 'i • „r' . ap, d.Y • "Start your ear with a bang . an in Cottage Grove" y 9 9 "Our Industrial Park is Growing Up, Come join the party s ' "Hear No Sound Development Proposals?, See No Prime Locations?, Say No More... Come to the Cottage Grove Industrial Park" 411- , 4 , 4 , , ,, , .. I , . St , .4, . . , - 4 ,, , , i , ,44,144 ::,- , „„ 4. t} _ g.v-„, ' L9g "din ... ._... , a t$ r ari ID "'?:,,'Ir - fad dl�,''�`' ' ��� �e k.5r-`' B a e 1- km•^P...."-' .....I''''' ' $ • "Our New TIF District is Right Here!” • ... I i 4 srhtr ° h e't Y 1 j '',';'''..733;;.'" rty `u S;aa �.w. - • '— a fs !, 1- , m .c:a, v. as.. .ka �: cr'. .ter. ..— 0.!..`''' v • it „., .,„. :‘,/if.lr„,„., , , , .. .,. , . , , . t-i. ,,..,..,...,,,,,,-,,-,z.-.,...,.,.:.:‘,.., ....,,,. z.„1,7,,,. , t,� �2 yf.,))., , , . „. , . . . ., .... ...,_ ,.,.:,,,...„ ,. 7 , =.„.,.. .,.. 'A _:„.,,,„„:„. ,i-itif.,--,A.,,,,,,44,1-p,',,TJ't°, 44-,,,:is i µ� r .3.... s 0 "Our City Staff Won't Slow Down Your Development Process" "There is No Speed Limit on Development in Cottage Grove" Oh • g, { i - V;;;: -","' r ' .-,- , .,... .... .ei.,,, ..4. ,, .,,, ,W .. .,, .,,,,, ,_, ...,.. .. ^- .(n yak =pas\ ks e= •. At a '4".10 r FE' 1 , a� ' .. a �e a d :4:7, " 'w"°mow .4.r.,:r. . , .. ...,..„.,,_ . ,. .,01 ,..., ,.. .., ,, , ,i.,....„ii,..z.... . ,. , ,, ,, ,-1,,,,,,,...... ._ ,. ,r,-.1-L : .-, '',',7*-';''''''-, It � , . , ,,,,,,,v -, ......_ , , Q 9 ate = s Cottage Grove w. 1 • aai COTTAGE G ROVE . CITY HALL .'. ..WA �' , 1 11..4 tiott.,.. ,, '*Ni..di ifii, Z ova 0 y ga 0 7 ` 4 *'9tee , ' d 11 d M x v i I • "We won't let you do all the work...come see how easy development is in Cottage Grove" 4 . r i " '' MM..se. P z ; 1 y� . pz'MV.! A e . ..u...ws hip Fes. .+" w.'"'�- ,,..� � .s @ r tib .� • •• ■ City of Cottage Grove • Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator prtj Date: 10/05/00 Re: Aerial Photos Item 4G We have two aerial photos of the Industrial Park. One is a "close-up" that highlights the Industrial Park and the immediate area. The other encompasses a larger view, in order to be able to highlight St. Paul and 494, which provides an insight to our location in • relation to the metropolitan region. We will be able to use one or both in our packets to potential businesses. The close-up of the Industrial Park was used on the Annual Report cover. Color copies of both photos will be available at the meeting on October 10. • \\CG_FS1\SYS\GROUPS\PER_ECON\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Aenals.doc City of Cottage Grove Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Michelle A. Wolfe, Assistant City Administrator Date: 10/6/00 Re: Realtor's Meeting Item 4H On Tuesday October 11, the City will be hosting a meeting with local realtors. The goal is similar to the meeting recently held with local bankers. We are working to cultivate relationships, inform and educate the local real estate community about current issues and events in Cottage Grove, and receive input on how we can better provide services. • A copy of the agenda for the meeting is attached. We will be meeting at River Oaks Golf Course as a means to help promote the golf course and the new food and beverage operation. Staff from Administration, Economic Development, and Community Development will be introduced. Ryan Schroeder, Kim Lindquist, and I will present the agenda. In preparing the mailing list for this meeting, we learned that we may be able to work with Minnesota Board of Realtor's to make this type of meeting eligible for continuing education credits. We will be looking into this further, then perhaps making this an annual event. Attachment K:\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\Oct 00 Realtor's Meeting.doc • ditidtOth efeatinf WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2000 8:00 a.m. City of Cottage Grove City Hall Council Chambers 7516-80" Street South You are invited to attend an information session at Cottage Grove City Hall. City staff is interested in the opportunity to share information with you about what is happening in Cottage Grove, and to receive your input on how we achieve our goals. This is an opportunity to meet city staff, learn some new information, and provide input back to us to help us do our job. Any realtors doing business in Cottage Grove, or interested in doing business in Cottage Grove, are invited to attend. Rolls, Juice and Coffee Provided . AGENDA Review of Cottage Grove EDA Strategic Plan and Industrial Park Plans "Our Future, Your Future" — What's Happening in Cottage Grove Review of Cottage Grove Marketing Plan and Request for Input y . City of Cottage Grove Memo To: Economic Development Authority Members From: Steven P. Barrett, Management Analyst I Date: 10/04/00 Re: International Manufacturing Trade Show ITEM 4 i In August I had the pleasure of representing the City at the International Manufacturing Trade Show in Chicago, Illinois. This is the largest trade show of any • kind in the world, with over one million square feet of displays and demonstrations from hundreds of leading manufacturers from around the world. The City of Cottage Grove was involved as part of a joint effort with the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development and Metro East Development Partnership. In part, our booth was used to market Cottage Grove as an excellent place to locate a manufacturing business. Marketing materials were used to showcase what we have to offer, highlighting our available land, streamlined approval process, and City staff that is ready to help. People especially liked our "Picnic in July" postcard, and appreciated how we were willing to try new and creative things to cultivate success. • \\CG_FS1\SYS\GROUPS\PER_ECON\Economic Development\EDA Memos\2000\October 00-IMTS.doc I I • City of Cottage Grove Economic Development Authority Annual Report .... .. . M k 1. • _. 4 • •-1"..,'-''''..•'ar..• •414.- \ _ :fate° t. l _ '� r , i 3 --•.`...--....-4-4-•i.:4‘,.."0..42 '- , ',-.N‘.,.,,,,,, ---. . . - ',. - : • - - ' . - ' r ' , '' ''r:,,,,_._ . ' . .,,., , . — • . ,• .';-..:i.:1 e r • � ' `' X ,J,Nc: / 41 -.. 7 a 7,,p i ,...' ' '/ F s Q ©Photo by Bordner Aerials • City of Cottage Grove • 7516 80th Street South • Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 Phone (651) 458-2800 Fax (651) 458-2897 www.cottage-grove.org Our Mission Our The Cottage Grove Economic Successfully become one of the first 0 Development Authority works with 1 communities mentioned as a choice 1 its partners to encourage business business location. and industry, and create quality jobs using all the tools and methods that are appropriate. ; As we implement this mission, we are mindful of these guiding re new a1 principles: 1. Encourage quality commercial —1 i and industrial development, _ " -ti''' , % '•‘ !' which enhances the quality of v' '.� t- V ' life for our citizens, and is Y •i • f ` compatible with the City's ' Comprehensive Plan. - - Renewal by Andersen 2. Utilize sound financial practices in using incentives to attract "Cottage Grove was selected after an extensive search and expand businesses in the because it offered the best overall features -a construction ready site, good truck access and a strong • community. labor pool." 3. Consider and use incentives in Charles Schmidt, Senior Vice President, Andersen Corp. J instances where they will promote quality jobs and Become a community that development for the City. enthusiastically supports economic 4. Recognize the interdependence development as essential to improving of the private and public the quality of life in the Cottage Grove sectors in a healthy community, community. and foster a spirit of cooperation between the two Our City actively works to balance and diversify our sectors housing stock, explore new opportunities for improving access to the Mississippi River, and preserve the history and heritage of the region. ... Live, Work, and Play 1999g g Hi hli hts • • Renewal by Andersen celebrated the Grand Opening of its new 30 acre, 227,000 square foot manufacturing and headquarters facility. The site will employ up to 300 associates by 2001 . • The City experienced over $12 million in new or expanded commercial construction. New businesses include Renewal by Andersen, Tutor Time, and KFC. Expanded businesses include 3M, Up North Plastics, Burlington Northern • Railroad, River Oaks Golf Course, and Mississippi Dunes Golf Course. • Total market values on all properties in 1999 exceeded $1 .1 billion. This is an increase of over 6% from 1998. • Over 400 new homes were built from 1997 - 1999. The average value for new homes now exceeds $126,000, not including the lot price. • The City expanded our manufacturing tax increment district in our Industrial Park, allowing for rapid turnaround in land delivery. • 1999 City Council From the Mayor ... John Denzer, Mayor III 1999 was a year of changes for Cottage Grove Economic Cheryl KohIs Development. We restructured our staff, so several staff Pat Rice members can now contribute their talents toward the City's Sandy Shiely efforts in retaining and expanding business and industry. New Jim Wolcott initiatives and programs were updated and revitalized. This document is a record of our activities and our successes. 1999 EDA In 1999 we continued to advance toward the goals set forth in the 1997 - 2001 Strategic Plan, and made plans to begin a John Denzer, President new strategic planning process in 2000. The Annual Golf Shannon Green Tournament was again held in August at River Oaks Golf Glen Kleven Course, with attendance doubling over the previous year. We Fred Luden welcomed current City businesses, as well as developers, brokers, and many others in the development community to Dick Pederson this event, and look forward to even higher attendance in 2000. Gerard Weingartner Jim Wolcott Major planning initiatives took place in 1999, which will result in several key projects proceeding in the next few years. Staff Contacts The City Council approved road improvements for the Industrial Park and surrounding area. The Metropolitan Council finalized plans for the expansion of the City wastewater Ryan Schroeder treatment plant, which will become a 15 - mgd regional facility. City Administrator Construction is scheduled to begin in Spring 2001. The City (651) 458-2822 Council, staff, and EDA worked with state legislators to strongly support the proposed Wakota Bridge / Highway 61 Michelle Wolfe • improvement project. Assistant City Admin. In 1999 Renewal by Andersen celebrated its Grand Opening. (651) 458-2882 In addition, plans began for two new businesses in the Industrial Park. Staff and the EDA also began the process of Steve Barrett establishing a Tax Increment District for the remaining parcels Management Analyst in the Industrial Park. Such efforts will enhance the City's (651) 458-2883 ability to quickly respond to development projects. It is through the support of the City Council, Cottage Grove Dan King residents, and our business community that our work is made Management Analyst possible. We pledge to do our best to enhance the tax base, (651) 458-2833 stimulate job creation, and promote the City of Cottage Grove. Neil Belscamper EDA Secretary (651) 458-2878 iiiiiii III John Denzer, Mayor Goals 0 Create an identity for the City that is positive and proud, supporting a high standard of living and quality of life. liwlitimpi Attract new industries that bring an . - enhanced tax base, quality jobs, and il new capital into the region. =-4. -- �, tr, ., Each year we host the Annual Cottage Grove EDA ;� Golf Tournament,attracting numerous individuals ,, '4 in the development community in an effort to 414 market the City of Cottage Grove as a place to do l; M. business.Tournament sponsors include Xcel * � .,, Energy (formerly NSP), Kraus-Anderson b 1 Construction, AMCON Construction, KKE Architects, P.A.S. Associates, Southview Bank, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Ehlers and Associates, and the Cottage Grove Area Chamber of Commerce. Support existing businesses and River Oaks Golf Course, home of the Annual Cottage Grove EDA Golf Tournament encourage their continued growth and prosperity. 5 Influence local, regional, and -- state issues critical to business site location decisions and overall business climate. ,..r. .'zia'e•77, ,c ,_ 1 ` =, pliti __ .. n '# ---- _. � " ior 1 3M Cottage Grove 61- vti,voit' "Our investment in capital, as well as The new six lane freeway along the training and equipment, helps us Wakota Bridge Corridor will replace the maintain our leadership position and three intersections off Highway 61. These positions us for future growth. • improvements will place our Industrial Annually, 3M has invested more than Park within a five-minute drive of Highway $30 million in our Cottage Grove 494/694. location." Fred Luden, Site Manager, 3M Cottage Grove's Economic Development Partners i Cottage Grove Area Chamber of Commerce The Chamber works with the City to attract new businesses and retain existing businesses. The Chamber is part of our site team. Metro East Development Partnership Metro East serves companies looking for locations by distributing a Site Request for Proposal to its member communities. Frequently, the prospect company will visit a selected group of communities through the coordinated efforts of Metro East. Xcel Energy Economic Development The Industrial Park is served by Xcel Energy electric and gas utilities. The company assists the City in marketing Cottage Grove as a business location, and has brought prospective companies to the area for site tours. Economic Development Authority Appointed by the City Council, the EDA guides the City's economic development • activities. The EDA is responsible for implementing the business retention and attraction programs, and coordinating the marketing plan. n :,--,„f AVIL \� ..- rz 1 i .' 1� .;,fir,\, } moi-» y FSP V , _ - ,Z � .� s. '. -:----K":,.."--:: ::::.1,.;.:711,71.tl ".�cw hr e-a =Y.f *;^. �... a w a . '1►v. CCE Technologies, Inc. breaks ground on their new • facility in the Cottage Grove Industrial Park f r ' STAFF REPORT CASE: CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 • ITEM: 6.2 PUBLIC MEETING DATE: 9/25/00 TENTATIVE COUNCIL REVIEW DATE: 10/18/00 APPLICATION APPLICANT: 5th Street Ventures, LLC REQUEST: A comprehensive plan amendment to allow a mixed-use development; a zoning amendment to change the zoning from B-3, General Business, to PUD, Planned Unit Development; a preliminary plat for 132 residential units and 4 commercial lots; and a site plan review. SITE DATA LOCATION: Vacant land north and west of Menard's ZONING: B-3, General Business • CONTIGUOUS LAND USE: NORTH: Residential EAST: Residential SOUTH: Highway 61 WEST: Commercial SIZE: 28.84 acres DENSITY: 6.94 units per acre RECOMMENDATION Approval, subject to the conditions stipulated in this staff report. COTTAGE GROVE PLANNING DIVISION F:\GROUPS\PLANNING\2000\Planning Cases\045CP Scharmer Site-ju124\045CP Scharmer Site SR cover-sep25.doc • I ASE fUI BE 2 S): GPQ 4 , "'"': ,PP1 4 `, SPOa448 PPLiNT, '5th Street Ventures,l PROPOSED# Et UEST(S A comprehensive pian amendment:to allow a mixed use development',. zoning amendment to t ttange.the zoning front B-3,General Business, to.PUDS Planned Unit development,a preliminary plat for 136 resident€al units anti 4 commercial lots, • and a site plan review .... :: E3A.`i7N O> RE+Ql3EST' ilacant land ttot#h and west tPJermarrd's a a$ ;p . = .mow f�� 005 Zr*"Q Q. .' 51' .4* . ;;LFv .0. y�� -Q "din,n 4_ . � ► �; ©, cam.vQ i a, `� 4� �� , ;, .. /fig_ ce;. ,�:- , s -lei _ i- 44 - u,�, © ', �l Egli `�i © 3►e!•, 4_,- i=r..., cz, - -..,_ ,-___ .. air,„,,-.....,nny...itta,,,gr .... . ...-.....-, "" csrr rll�r I!i9�i .1' ---a".4 tntA= r © "�Q �.,� .. ..: 07 ,Ott v© �v �� ��tit, ''�t �0 c� ,�, C�'� �© — r A a`dam.- r. �- t�© tea a: = Lie "goo�����;ri itinBA© �i� ,Qp © r- r, i4 .. A© -rD-=i -�y, ,9®� ._..: -. et, ..T. .61U_- ,„.5; v4i imirn ime 4: ov ` v.:vv == r �0 E; ®c vi m=1N)! ! 0• 0 ezegi'3 --'14.1‘,./inillit.,..;. mg -5„,,g,-iti,„.-7, ,— tri4'-ofe-... ii',.,..,,,. ,:,_...- „.,,,,.._..;,.:_ , ,,...:„:___,.:::.:,,,,.. .._, :..:_-_.,*, ,,,,r,.. :mi... . :4,,0 g egi.?1,0 i",0 11 • . -:-.Y.:;..---::11'.-;::-:.-::::::.1.:- .1.417 0.43"Thina glikV' -, ) 2 :._�rr� �:- 1O. _ A �,,}.a �� o����IcEal -© 14:.:11:11,9-11: 11 =1 py/ •.%a ' 0 • ©Ylrp Q�® 1��€EirI1Ffll$ �o —vlj -� _ af�aaa :1 = ",' vr000i.,ouKrt - .r. . �..Q 41-7==1Q �enq ;yam \ -',,s'„-\--s-\:...,‘;,..:‘' : - .,, ' .,o ® t iJ©-ate''s ; ��©Cipn),r-1r®`-•. .d Q j.•5 C"�„ • ,, l/ ... • W .,7 AFEi�9tlF FtFtIt�nnI i"'!!' - =; 110i//4 VE . . 4,�1 rti i. / s` , ra/ im a ice— ,=©HF.1V�©O`yf�•����© r®Fi['r �� •�� fir., ��, Ge��►� .t,,,....._' 'N ; : \ S U� � 'B �aplz , taKr � fl rE. ©�Ca©. Qj ©© nr l ik III.1 Ii .4 . '''.:1-'!•:::... ..... '''''''-' M7 Mil "" i'' ''N' ' 926° Th- --'- tI 'ILI11 ‘..,,,t .' liglig 7; _ ,,. , 1 Nal 1.:1..N. OM 1 z Q I~ Mr i tlfMq.i � // 11$ $Ull \`N I eiiI U \ 1 \\' _L I \\•<\s \` \ \k k Planning Staff Report Cases CPOO-045, ZA00-047, PPOO-047, SPOO-048 September 25, 2000 Proposal The applicant, 5th Street Venture, LLC, is proposing to develop a mixed-use project on the ir- regularly shaped remnant of land behind and adjacent to Menards. The site is currently guided and zoned for commercial use. The applicant is requesting that the Future Land Use map of the City's Comprehensive Plan be amended to reguide the property to mixed use and a rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to permit a combination of residential and commercial devel- opment. The current application represents a modification from the plan previously reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2000. Since the Commission continuance, the developer has met with Menards and has a tentative agreement to sell a portion of the property to Menards for future expansion. The expansion would be for the outdoor storage area, and the proposed lot line reflects the expansion dimension. Review of the required conditional use permit associated with the storage expansion is elsewhere on the Commission agenda. • The loss of property results in a decrease in residential units from 132 to 124. The amount of land dedicated to residential has also decreased from 19.02 acres to 17.29 acres. There contin- ues to be four commercial properties proposed to front along East Point Douglas. The applicant has revised the intended building footprints on Lots 2 and 3, Block 2 so that the potential restau- rant use would be located on Lot 3 and a larger commercial establishment on lot 3. In total, 56,575 square feet of new commercial development is proposed for the property with 9.42 acres devoted to commercial uses. A copy of the revised site plan is attached as Exhibit A. Other ex- hibits referenced in this staff report are also attached and listed at the end of this staff report. The applications needed as part of the proposal continue to be the rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment as well as a preliminary plat approval and site plan review. Depending upon the future uses of the commercial area, a conditional use permit may need to be processed. This is not a part of the current proposal. Planning Commission Discussion At the Planning Commission meeting there were several issues raised by individual members regarding the request. Issues related to traffic, screening to adjoining residential, amount of residential development versus commercial development, and the timing for project build-out were all discussed. The applicant has attempted to address several of the Commission con- cerns within the new proposal. • Traffic and Access A traffic study was conducted by SRF for the project site and for the larger commercial area. The site-specific study findings are similar to what was announced by the applicants during the Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 2 meeting. The introduction of some residential on the site reduces the total number of trips gen- • erated and reduces the PM peak hour trips, which is the prime time of concern. The study pro- vides a table that indicates that an all commercial development would generate approximately 6,000 daily trips and an all residential development would generate approximately 1,200 daily trips. Of course, these figures are based upon certain assumptions about the level of develop- ment that could occur on the site. The study also concludes that all study area key intersections are currently operating at accept- able levels of service. It also notes that the intersections will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service under the 2020 forecast, including the proposed development. Acceptable lev- els of service are Level C or better. The traffic study provides, in Appendix A, a level of service description. The level of service descriptor is applied based upon traffic delays experienced. The study also noted that the existing curve on East Point Douglas has an advisory sign for 30 miles per hour, although it would be more appropriate to sign the approach at 20 miles per hour. The consultant was also asked to take a look at the proposed curbcuts along East Point Douglas. They note that the eight access points initially proposed would probably increase the likelihood of accidents based upon the number of potential conflict points. The consultant is rec- ommending that at least two of the curbcuts be combined, Lots 1 and 2 Block 2, which are not combined under the current submittal. The report states that reducing the access points to seven would "result in a more acceptable average spacing of 200 feet between access conflict points. The study also recommends that the new curbcuts be closely aligned with existing ac- cess points on the west. In further discussions with the consultant, they expressed reservations • about the long-term impacts of having seven curbcuts within close proximity, particularly near the curve. A more preferable spacing between driveways would be 300 feet rather than 200 feet achieved by sharing one drive. Staff queried them about the curbcut on lot 1 Block 1, the com- mercial site closest to the curve, and asked if it should be closed. The consultant stated that the access is not in a good location; however, the location is mitigated by the fact that it aligns with the access across the street. His expectation is that both of the access points will not receive heavy traffic and therefore keeping the access open is acceptable. If those assumptions are not valid, for example the commercial users intended for the site are high traffic generators, it would be safer to direct all access to and from the site from the new public roadway. The same consultant was also retained to conduct an area-wide study within the same project area for the City. The consultant found the following: Landscaping During the public hearing the neighborhood expressed concern about the amount of screening proposed from the existing residences to the new townhomes and commercial buildings. The applicant was directed to provide additional screening, adding more plant material, and provid- ing more coniferous trees. In particular the resident located immediately north of the northern commercial site had requested some type of structural barrier, a wall of some type, to provide adequate screening to commercial activity areas. The applicant has submitted a revised landscaping plan that proposes additional landscaping , along the perimeter of the project site. The amount of landscaping originally proposed was acceptable and now with the additional landscaping in those areas of expressed concerns pro- vides a little bit more tree mass between existing unattached single-family properties and the Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045,ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 3 40 proposed PUD development. The additional tree plantings are primarily conifer species that have been added along the north boundary line of the proposed townhouses and east of Menards property. With the proposed Menards expansion, landscaping improvements between the two projects will need to be coordinated. Fourteen additional deciduous trees were added along the east boundary line of the PUD site and the north end of the eastern windrow of trees will be preserved (approximately 2,600 square feet). A four-foot high earth berm has been added along the north side of the commercial building lo- cated on Lot 1, Block 1. This earth berm will taper down to the existing grade elevation where a portion of the existing windrow of trees closest to East Point Douglas Road is located. Six pine trees were added to the proposed landscaping improvements along the north side of Lot 1, Block 1. Foundation plantings as required by City ordinance must be provided along a portion of the commercial building's foundation that faces a public street and/or parking area. The plant list and tables showing species types, quantity, and breakdown are the same infor- mation that was originally submitted and presented to the Planning Commission in August. This information must be updated and submitted to the Planning Staff prior to placing the applicant's applications on the City Council agenda. East of the proposed cul-de-sac, there is a play area and open space that separates the public road and two townhomes. This common area is proposed to be landscaped with a mix of trees and shrubs and should provide for an aesthetically inviting appearance as motorists enter the ID project site. Staff is concerned that the landscape plan as presented cannot be accomplished. Specifically, staff wants to ensure that the two utility companies will accept the plan and allow full installation of plantings and proposed grading. Staff believes the landscaping, hence screening, is an inte- gral part of the project and therefore is recommending that all utility companies sign off on the approved landscaping plan prior to release of the final plat. If, in fact, the plan cannot be imple- mented as approved, staff would bring the item back before the Commission and Council for further deliberations. Land Use Discussion Several members of the Commission expressed concern over the amount of land dedicated to residential development versus commercial. Under the current proposal, the amount of com- mercial land has increased slightly due to the proposed purchase by Menards. The new pro- posal increases the amount of commercial land by 1.84 acres. This decreases the amount of land dedicated to residential to 17.29 acres. Public right-of-way, the new public cul-de-sac, and East Point Douglas constitute 2.13 acres of the site. Although some Commission members did express interest in seeing a plan that depicted 50 percent of the land for commercial, the applicant did not provide any concepts plans. Staff rec- ognizes that the lots along East Point Douglas could be increased in depth to increase the total amount of commercial acreage, however, it is unclear if that would benefit the project. Based • upon the amount of frontage, and therefore highway exposure, it seems doubtful that additional commercial would "stack" behind the proposed buildings. The other option would be to increase the lot sizes with the hope that the building sizes would similarly increase. While the latter may Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 4 have some merit, it is unclear how much expansion could occur due to the placement of the Menards and the resulting shape of the parcel. In total, the proposal will create 56,000 square feet of commercial development. This is com- parable to the District Service Center at approximately 47,000 square feet, the District Program Center at approximately 50,000 square feet, and Cub at approximately 60,000 square feet. For comparison purposes, the mall associated with Target is approximately 30,000 square feet. In conclusion, staff understands the desire to create additional commercial development along the Highway 61 corridor. However, it seems from a marketing standpoint that the area proposed for residential development would be marginal for commercial development, particularly in the northeast corner of the site. As previously stated in the July staff report, there is also the con- cern that the type of business that could be attracted to that area would be undesirable as a neighbor to the existing single family residential properties in the east and north. Construction Timing An issue the applicant has raised is the recommended condition of approval that no building permits will be issued for construction on any residential building in the development until final certificates of occupancy have been issued for at least two of the four commercial sites in the development. The residential developer was concerned that they would be precluded from constructing a model this year, which would aid in marketing their product. Staff is willing to consider allowing one building permit for one residential structure to be pulled in conjunction with two commercial buildings. However, the City would not issue any more building permits until the two commercial building were substantially complete. In other words, the interior work • would not all be completed, or perhaps not all the landscaping installed, but that the building was substantially done from the exterior presentation. Staff believes this addresses the timing issue raised by the applicant. This modification is reflected in the recommended conditions of approval. Planning Considerations Project Design As previously stated, the plan has been altered to accommodate an expansion area for Menards lumberyard. This has resulted in a decrease of residential units and has not impacted the amount of new commercial development proposed for the site. Although the previous plan was supported by staff, there have been several discussions since the plan modification regarding the amount of hard surface and open space provided in the resi- dential component of the project. The current proposal represents the conclusion of those dis- cussions so that there were adequate green areas provided for the residential component. The previous submittal had three different congregate open areas; the current submittal has one. However, this area is substantially larger and may provide more of an amenity for the entire complex. Its central location allows easy access for all residents, and its placement at the end of the cul-de-sac will be more visually appealing. The applicant continues to recommend installa- tion of recreational amenities such as a picnic shelter and tot lot. These improvements are re- • quired as a condition of approval. Although the other portions of the residential component are fairly developed with either hard surface or building, the pattern is typical for this unit type. Staff believes the ability to create a central recreation/open area of a size that facilitates resident use offsets the resulting development pattern of the buildings. Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045,ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 5 • Along with the designated open space areas, the applicant was able to provide greater setbacks to the existing single-family neighborhoods than what is required by the PUD ordinance or the R-5, Medium Density Residential zoning district. The PUD requires a 30-foot setback from all exterior property lines; the R-5 zoning requires that a 25-foot setback be maintained between attached dwellings and associated parking and single family housing. Parking and buildings in the northeast maintain a 50-foot setback, whereas the central buildings have a 110-foot setback with parking 45 feet to 58 feet away from the north property line. In respect to the single-family neighborhood to the east of the project site, the applicant has pro- vided ample separation due to the presence of the NSP and Northern Natural Gas easement. In this area, buildings and parking vary from 80 to 85 feet away from the eastern property line. The proposed trail and landscaping will further mitigate impacts of the proposed development. The applicant must receive approval for the landscape plan from NSP and Northern Natural Gas Pipeline Company. The commercial development is located in the obvious areas for best visibility, along the front- age road. All site designs for the commercial entities appear adequate from circulation, parking, and layout perspectives. Presently, the applicant is proposing to develop two of the four com- mercial sites, the two northern parcels. The most northern is expected to be some type of retail warehouse use. Lot 1, Block 2 is most likely an office use, whereby two office buildings are presently proposed. Users for Lots 2 and 3, Block 2 have not been identified, although it ap- epears that Lot 3 could accommodate a restaurant user and Lot 3 could be retail/service use. One of the primary concerns staff conveyed to the applicant was the strong City interest in de- velopment of the commercial uses on the site. Any residential developer for the site was told that the City would not consider reguiding the Plan and rezoning the site unless 50 percent of the commercial property was developed. The applicant is aware of this interest and has indi- cated he will build "spec" buildings on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. Rezoning The property is currently zoned B-3 and the applicant is requesting rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to permit a mixed-use development on the site. Obviously, if the City were to entertain some residential development on the property, some type of rezoning must take place. Staff can support the rezoning change because we believe it results in a better project for the site and for the surrounding existing neighborhoods. Although the City goals are to increase the commercial services available to residents, staff is concerned about the type of business that would be attracted to the area behind Menards. From a commercial perspective, this area is hidden; therefore it doesn't afford the visibility to customers that most commercial entities crave. Staffs concern is that the zoning may encourage commercial users that would not be comple- mentary to the existing single-family neighborhood. For example, automotive, trailer, recrea- tional vehicles, boats/marine, and farm implement establishments for display, hire, service, and sales conducted entirely within a building is a permitted use. Those activities conducted outside of the building are permitted by conditional use. Open sales lots or open storage when incidental to a principal use, such as a contractor's yard is also allowed with a conditional use permit. Adult • uses are permitted within the B-3 district. Unfortunately, the design and location of the Menards development has left a residual commercial strip that may only attract less desirable busi- nesses, when considering the adjoining single-family neighborhood. The site would have been t l Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 6 more attractive, in total, for commercial development if the parcel had been approached more • holistically and a small commercial hub created. The above potential uses illustrate some of the most unattractive uses allowed when consider- ing the existing neighborhood. Of course, the ordinance permits many uses that would be more complementary to the residential properties; however, under the B-3 zoning there is not a guar- antee of the use. If a business approached the City for approval and met all the applicable per- formance standards, they would be approved. Similarly, if a business approached the City for a conditional use permit and met the standards listed in the ordinance for granting of the permit, the City would be obligated to grant the permit. The rezoning to PUD permits the City to some- what regulates the proposed uses on the remaining portion of the site dedicated for commercial. Staff has discussed with the City Attorney the idea of restricting outside storage, display, or sales on the site. The Attorney feels it is reasonable for the City to restrict the commercial uses from having outside activities in light of the trade-off of having a substantial portion of the site available for residential development. This restriction is a recommended condition of approval. In staffs opinion, the two greatest benefits to the City created by the PUD proposal is, one, the introduction of a more complementary use into an existing residential neighborhood than what could occur under the current zoning. The second is the ability to restrict the remaining com- mercial enterprises so that they, too, may co-exist more favorably with the existing single-family neighborhood and the newly created multi-family neighborhood. Comprehensive Guide Plan • The City, in its recent Comprehensive Plan draft, continued to guide the entire site for com- mercial land uses. In a November 12, 1999 memo to the Council regarding the Comprehensive Plan, staff noted that this parcel would remain designated for commercial in the draft plan. How- ever, it was recognized that the site might be good for multi-family housing, particularly senior housing, and due to its close proximity to a commercial area and Highway 10/61. In that memo, staff noted that site would remain designated for commercial to provide the greatest control over the future uses of the site and to ensure some commercial development occurred on the prop- erty. Staff, being supportive of the current proposal, is recommending approval of reguiding the property to mixed use. However, should the Commission and Council not support the current PUD request, staff does not recommend reguiding of the site. A land use map is attached as Exhibit D. Preliminary Plat The applicant is proposing to plat six separate lots of record. Four of the lots are dedicated for commercial development and may or may not have different ownership. The residential devel- opment is designated for one parcel and unit ownership will be as a condominium. The sixth lot is the lot to permit expansion of the Menards open storage area. However, staff is requiring that Menards be part of the plat and that the new lot reflect the boundary change. The Commission may recall the City has been requiring all lots involved with the lot line changes to be part of the application and plat. This ensures that Lot 5 will be combined with Menards and will not become a separate parcel under different ownership. If the latter occurred, there could be issues associ- ated with the buildability of the lot. Lot 5 is only buildable when attached to another parcel, not as a stand-alone property. An outlot should be added to the plat for the cul-de-sac landscape island within the public street. This island should be owned and maintained by the homeowners association for the townhouse project. The applicant should also be dedicating necessary tolanhing Staff Report—Cases CP00-045,ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 7 • easements over public water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer facilities. This includes a drain- age easement over the proposed stormwater holding pond. A copy of the preliminary plat is attached. Conclusion There are two options available to the Planning Commission and City Council for disposition of the request: Approve the request. Staff believes the applicant is proposing a reasonable development al- ternative to the development that would be allowed under the existing land use plan and zoning. The plan is found to be compatible with the existing single-family neighborhoods and may be considered an improvement over the other uses that could occur on the site. The applicant has addressed many of the concerns previously stated by staff and other issues can be accommo- dated by plan revisions or providing additional information. Deny the request. The proposed mixed use is not a reasonable land use for the site. The Commission would prefer maintaining a commercial designation over the entire site and wait until a new user approaches the City. Recommendation • Staff recommends approval of the comprehensive plan amendment to allow a mixed use de- velopment; a zoning amendment to change the zoning from B3, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit Development; a preliminary plat for 124 units and 4 commercial lots; and a site plan review, subject to the conditions listed below: 1. One building permit will be issued for construction of a residential building in the develop- ment in conjunction with building permits for two of the five commercial buildings. No additional building permits for any residential building will be issued until certificates of occupancy have been issued for the two commercial buildings. 2. Exterior storage, display, and sales of materials and/or merchandise for the four commercial parcels are prohibited. 3. The preliminary plat must be revised to address the following changes prior to review by the City Council: • Incorporate Menards into the plat. • The landscape island in the center of the proposed cul-de-sac shall be shown as an outlot and the Homeowner's Association must retain ownership and maintenance re- sponsibilities of this outlot. • Proposed drainage and utility easements over public utilities and ponding areas. • • The five-foot wide strip of land fronting along the Menards property shall be shown as dedicated public right-of-way. Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 8 4. A site plan review and conditional use permit (if required by City Ordinances) must be filed • with the City for review and approval for Lots 2 and 3, Block 2 prior to issuance of building permits for those sites. Permitted and conditional uses for the commercial sites will be based upon the B-2, Retail Business, zoning district permitted and conditional uses. 5. The applicant shall modify the landscape plan and irrigation plan to address concerns noted in the staff report prior to issuance of a building permit. A tree preservation and mitigation plan must be incorporated into the final landscape detailing. The applicant must submit a letter of credit for 150 percent of the landscape cost. This financial guarantee shall be held for one year from the date of completion of the landscaping. 6. The developer is responsible in the cost of constructing a 10-foot wide bituminous trail along the east side of the residential phase and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the com- mercial parcels fronting along East Point Douglas Road. Construction of the trail will occur prior issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the seventh building in the residential devel- opment. Sidewalk construction will occur prior to issuance a certificate of occupancy on the second commercial building designated for development. 7. Designated parking spaces at the east end of each private access drive shall be eliminated. "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed at the end of these drives and the Homeowners As- sociation is responsible to remove snow between the private access drive and the ten-foot bituminous trail (emergency vehicle route). 8. Final public drainage and utility easements shall be platted over all public utilities as recom- mended by the Public Works Department and City Engineer prior to final plat approval by the City Council. 9. The applicant shall modify the proposed access points based upon the recommendation of the City and the results of the traffic study prior to review by the City Council. 10.The applicant provides trash enclosures that conform to Section 28-29 of the ordinance. 11.The applicant shall submit exterior building materials samples to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 12.The applicant shall pay a park dedication fee of$93,000 and a recreation fee of$18,600. The applicant shall also pay 4 percent of the fair market value of the land designated for commercial development prior to release of the final plat. 13.The applicant submits the homeowners association covenants for staff review and approval prior to release of the final plat. The covenants should include the following: • The designated pond access and bench must be accessible at all times, therefore land- scaping and other structures are prohibited in these areas. • The Homeowners Association is responsible for maintaining the 10-foot wide trail located • along the east side of the project site and removing all debris and snow from it. This trail is designed as an emergency route. Planhiryg Staff Report—Cases CP00-045,ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 September 25, 2000 Page 9 • • Stockpiling an unreasonable amount of snow anywhere on the site is prohibited. The Homeowners Association shall make arrangements to haul away excess accumulation of snow on the site. 14.The applicant shall comply with all appropriate grading and erosion control measures. Site grading of the site is limited to Monday through Saturday from 7:00am to 8:00pm. 15.The applicant shall trim vegetation along East Point Douglas Road along the curve to in- crease sight distances on the road. 16.The applicant shall submit a sign package for the commercial and residential components of the site prior to issuance of any building permit for the site. The residential phase shall have monument sign that will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. The commercial development will have a sign package that will be complementary to each other and will be used for future issuance of building permits. 17.The applicant shall obtain approval from the two utility companies to place landscaping as proposed within their easements. Proof of approval shall be prior to release of the final plat. Minor modifications to the plan are acceptable; however, substantial revisions to the plan will require review and approval by the City Council. 18.The final utility plan proposed by the Developer must be reviewed and approved by the City's • Engineer. 19.Lot 3, Block 2 shall provide for a twenty-four (24) foot wide access drive that connects to Menards parking lot. The location of this drive aisle connection between the two parking lots shall meet the City's design criteria and its construction shall be coordinated between Menards and the developer of Lot 3, Block 2. Prepared by: Kim Lindquist, AICP Community Development Director Attachments: Exhibit A— Site plan Exhibit B — Land Use Map Exhibit C —Zoning Map Exhibit D — Preliminary Plat Exhibit E —Trailway Map Exhibit F — Parks Commission Minutes Exhibit G — Revised Landscaping Plan Exhibit H — Residential Building Elevation Exhibit I — Commercial Building Elevation No. 1 • Exhibit J — Commercial Building Elevation No. 2 Exhibit K — Utility Plan Exhibit L — Site Traffic Study Exhibit M —Area Wide Traffic Study S 1 E e y a„ a @2 I.a ! (s a ne F iei a n T a 5c :q I _¢ ¢ ,, i 1.., , ,. , • R:. 1 Cif ?' 51 ,. " "lea :Iii a1A -.-,'1 la . D0I ilb a g :4 f fagg 5 '' o a N e:9 E Kff�tl diEEl • 5Kc Viiq s • 11 d 3( .C@ �z o!s o10,e • rtlke�t Iii o v 1/ . r -N O au 7-„,,, a- WN ; II , , /// t '-- .b / /" rte•., ass �- I �'v '�� ` A 111 r,'- ,fir• 1 '- ''',,,,,,,,,Z, ,." / 7-- I I IiN �C / ----; \I ,1 cy \v / /./ tet. RR II I, ._•C r- '*r` R II 1 `\4 iii -: • \ •rte i 111 •(S• ^�'/ ,i 1 • 11 1 ' '` •\ M1I I r 7-9I19 1 Yf J� . 4 1 ,'r 1 �,� \ r C� far 1� / 1 ,1 1_ 1 - i � + /1 S I i/ , 1 11 V ° �rr s. / a 11� �/ `7 / //' ' ;i / 1 11 .:„ ,,4, z I o'n ! ���` -,`��i // /`- it - - -- - . IE i / / _ it s,, '-- ti \\ IM 1\ ._ �':1-�.._1 ,`a Pfo \ •��ya ar , _ f7] t'' 1I 1 ' n I`� 1_tell1 rn , II //: , L:.....:_i_i1,1 '",,y, ----=--;"\•2 1 , -1, I ' " : - ! I , i "-•,,,: 'F.5 'f'.., ,1 ' (.Q. '..,', _____ INS.• ./,�_.-- _ ----,--- _IL.L1-,_____' ' --,_rd 1 A - ) -r, 1 1 ,_-___ra.%. c„, �t r Ira j al !i6 'i Z .„. „___.,, , , , . , . , ,,1 ..... , ._I . i --,--,,---0 : V) < /OM ,'! 11 : / - t _�_ *) 1 l .. 1 ....., -_ '•—I1,,• IIS II/ g m� 1-.� A O 110 E t `� - •r - ' r;(0 O) �16'rLCt c0330)''fA,OSSk68S ' 0 . ' LAND USE MAP_ ) 71 c ri. • .. mis_____,Imleip." , , , ,, votto __is.= ‘ e Grove \ ll - 9 R: 411iTIFT :IttiLli.. .91-11111111110/ al \ gib Lts_aar4i1 - e I ii,„ .. ,ffia'S ihensive Pla 44„,,,,,iliiii . t ..._. k,.. 1.411,,,,,,,,. limmisinLatra ......= , 2020 . . eit ' t ill C: i. Jitirrivitiit.4:6,\ ),,,,,;,,,,14y41)IN 1Plia matkiiiittna.."brill. I :Mg r-_ NA : ff*::.. * -11 Man ' ..1 • . •a;:.i.ls,:„, •,- Mae: y mens, ,,, , N 11111 MIMI:it;:----tka•RiVii:3 il•-% , ii44::::- '''' ' I in'TS'1.-1-.T4i17. -,,, -•••• _ 4 E , -- EXISTING LAND USE • ;_ I •I•N am 'ti a EMI :-!", ._.,(,.,r,r1___,........,..._ terrammri: '1w-41-Lk 1 ,a Grove\ 147)311'0' 11 :44 .4 IN* all 1 li OrlegrAikft. niEtt . dhensive Pla ‘1/4 ",.2.!,,i-ibia- - f,A........ossg•,...,!.....7„,, ...., Emil - 2020 ay" ' IN, ,., '._ ir i 41k. Jr 1•2 IL •., "...,.. , riviVAL ",- 441tV/17. ' 47/• 4 a 1:illi Lite -'-' :i 1 IV ari • 711474 titit'D‘ ' :'''- '1 ,--- - • —, maslji . vs 111111111,sk. .4-;-M-%--,:fAsk :,,,„. 1Ntal 11 I 11.'''''' .:f-f,:', 11=211-ita '''' '''''''''':7'' '.'''''''?: i'''' ''''' '' C'',Y4k' ,•.' --,:m1.,L;gi:,,g,z4k*:::::?1,P4 . :•:-•:-.---. ' • \ re t.,•"7-::--',7,•::-.$:.--;•: :7:,:-:• :;i.:-.'i----"::%, ,--:', -,,,y,i-:"-IL, -, ., -..--:;--T',;.-- :''''-::::i•:. ,;•:"z:i.--;:":, .-4tv"----1?-_:-1 ' wik.E 0 PROPOSED LAND USE EXHIBIT B - _. .. . . _ ZONING MAP R5 fig 1 \)o _Li_ ft- ND 411 41411 I mow , 14 r = *, in . N : 2_ EXISTING ZONING • 411 R5 Is 1 ,\,„/ . ( �`� PUD � .N., !w s Itar-Pca, a Is PROPOSED ZONING • EXHIBIT C I! 2 { g �i Y !6 /gxa c4 1g R E' £ F (cif C _ H tltl 0 R s se 8 16 Ir b e fi � i 1 .0 a; a „.., Y .... J,CLI r A. s a __ J q L �, J o IssIS =ag A i! A V E2_ e ig S _ oe u t. were 55ry1i 2 .v+ 1 jui I 4�@ Ie A o 0 0 0 0 R ee �p 2 S vi \�•�` y/ 1 I O as -�L Z • S ',,m :�Y.-,_, ma-- I . 1- O_ I `•��> k. •_ 17 frL. .. L.. a -•I �:.,�-. ., dIP '.<„ O wi 'rn ..rS C.� I , —(6� ,las • ��� gE11 22 ,/ ! A 1/4•S • '''4,: , --•-- ! / ".„, c.,,,,06t, r.,,,/... o ,i --- \\ ' / -/ - . ,,,,. .",„:„, c 1‘.., 1, i/ 7; ),/7„,,'.' '..,/, ”-".. n ' < O fffF I ' I 0: ,,, _..., _ c.,,, / 11 Ii ! C� k 0 , 1 ,t1� r ®/ i t �°s � If -...",i.„,,,., / / z 6S'i .� `V .rben,s . ' •/ o�/ / //F. 1 �0o'zyo N �go Y 0! ,.-i-Nii ,„ f L ��� .g$' / // ///rely R I 1 CC SCI // Z 0 1 w �I w Co, i .,i d 1 I n0 1 r— 41 7pL - 1 111 11 41 ti I _----0 X10 ■ zl .I II. In � \ • I : 111 : R. A T ' :HI \ IFIHNi I ,F�tI!r.�, .1 I1. r• ° r , .y• / o. r r ! 11 11 • 4 i �( - - CI .e o _LCE: 11. j --.. c^`a=�r` ` •\ -_ —_-4=1-31,r—O \ \ �'� 7 `} ii!:'I . �_ . o i T ,. 1 }ii r—. _.! - 1r MI It III I � ' 44 C I '■IIIIIIII■� _ .- -- .... ~`r ,f----r, s. ....z..4 i Q Z — I'M ro - " --- :..•. III ... .,.. I �� I 1 ,A S� 1 •u r 7'' r 7 I .. / Li �-4. a 3 L I I 1 1 • mL L. Mill 11� " L \ >.#'" I1II ;I I■ ■ j 1 ' 0 k.'-C 1 I ••••=. X • �— II �rr sr c; Li! A CJ , • s Sc'o I L_---eLou it.los_ 1 III 1 Cr i 1 17 ;^^ I — I L^^ 4330) I I -, M.Oii S.S Io�S I _,_ I — I I�. I__. I I 1 1 r-1 1 I r--, I \ .z�w w wnsz••z..z.r.z-..wazu.z�.u�u.s L J e E ! [► �= 7 I a[ ►X a i iwii . 1- :d ; zii s li 11 ! ! r r 7 L y I �iinmi EN _ ;__ I s • _ Y i H 13 E �' a , ; � ill ik, ita dg �, I V irk k.; 5 e ii! tei ; 11 ,- 7. 7 Z. F., ..: lie (( 6 I r it rgg gp's rI (a La �✓:efig' iX'. U y1i a' i 3 gl9 e@g:e :! >' p I II z4=%,"'lmac. _ (. S . f/3 III Ii o / 11 / (. Y s `o • .::: • 47 / �� ..7___. ,,, (S` / �, „..., , ,,,„. ., ,, oc,/ /, /1 1 rho^C !li r,:. r1-11 Eft , `, 9gS ,/ (� i• i p rr cr �� /% rs 1111111'— ii r.::;; •Jvl,r, = IIS. .� ,-, IV .�6'�"..-- ---T-- --. --7+«-r O r 14 F` ei( Uml C J o ''' PI �� �� 6'v1 1-11 IIJ cn mom co ------ ,o 1 I± *AI'! ( 1l/ r i , - ' 1 {. —� a i I �' r' � J 4a ` e a _.. ,. e o -l s . , ii >4 e - --- - l 11 A s. --.. b. \ x CIIIIII U.1 J r. e I. 1 # IT. , . I I f I • I i >• I :- ',c. 1 0: II(0330).•6'64`.. I (0330)1w_OCs..as..' I - t- I I EE ! I C .o....wn.m�e..ry ..r.m..�.ar... L dVW AVM1IV 1 • c Parks Commission Minutes PARKS COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2000 • A. Camels Hump Scenic Overlook Rob- ogel was in attendance at the meeting t• - iew and discuss the importan - ' acquisition of additional lands • •roperties surrounding the Camels Hump • -•erty currently under • •wnership of the City. He also shared with the Co ' sion thoug ' •n the cultural and historical interpretation values of the property. • • fission also reviewed a memorandum from Kim Lindquist, Community De - -• - t Director, which provided an update on current negotiations •- ,een the •rospective developers and property owners in the a = -d area and possible • - elopment alternatives. Staff stated that he wou • -ep the Commission updated • se status of any land acquisit- , as it becomes known. Commission Ch- heney stated that design ass' - ce may be available through the Department of • . ' ulture and •'. ussions should take place regarding this possibility with C. -.'ssioner Hempel. B. Fifth Street Ventures Mr. Phillip Johnson was in attendance and presented information regarding development plans for property located north of Menards. The plan highlighted a number of off-road trails and a small recreation/open space area in the plat. He also highlighted a proposed trail within the powerline easement corridor. Staff presented to the Commission copies of the 1992 and 2020 proposed Comprehensive Plans that identified possible need for a small mini park in the northeast corner of the proposed development area. The Commission discussed at length the need for trails and a neighborhood mini park in the area. They supported the idea of creating a connection to the residential property to the north via an existing 20-foot easement. They also felt that it would be in the City's best interest to accept cash in lieu of land to develop other future neighborhood parks planned for this area rather than creating a small mini park in this development at this time. This was driven in part by the fact that the developer is proposing to create and install park amenities within the development to serve resident needs. COUNCIL NOTE: Motion by Steve Morse that the City accept cash in lieu of land dedication as the result of the platting of the subdivision known as the 5`h Street Ventures Preliminary Plat and that no park land dedication credit be • provided the developer for properties within the NSP Corridor. Motion seconded by Randall Briese. Motion carried viva voce. EXHIBIT F E _ 3 '• • '. i.., i a 33/3?III 'a 1 1, az'a. I ..rt, 7.3..•.'. tr3tta '1:5 1 " , z I; ;g1555.7555,5355..55.51,1,1. - - 1 .a. i IIII II - II + / ti : ai rr, r I g kl: 7 ig v, i , s 1 s • ! - * E 1 .21.EM 8. .' A 1, , i ;, . . 1 ii - I ii. i t t T It! 1 ili A i 1 11 ' 1 ` i . 8 1.... .m. . 114111 I I ..LY 4 g 1 i 11 a : 1 IL , r ii 01- , u• I . . I;41;plititiltrill Lt I -FpLoP; - w'' xLlia •-,1 ;• . a i , i , •.a - i . i i p; i I, ! ! ! a ilimmaitlislith ,isi ! .., Li 111,11i•! g i, I F.. t = • ;.! a §I II ' 1 1 itfi A oi ., 11f . 1 r: i . !.. .!.. H 1,, l • —,A . 1 . iji 1. Li A V. 'r ,F• 11A 1 • F. :c* w I-%' " 1°. . t.•' ° i gill i !I I 1 A ' ; Wit 1 i 1- • i 4 ISM,311 5' r‘qi;11#115 1, 1 Till 5 a ! ii...4 7. 4 -001Pli Z Pp 5 13 i i 1 1 't 1 lil i lit; 5 1 1:11 1 1 ' 131:41i 4115-nil:LI 1' '-• i 4! riirl; i ! !Olt ' l' lit it4-i.' te 111!! 1!: 1 i 1 11 a 1 t ' Ili t 1 . ,.. , g..., g a IA,:i A ir.3 3 I . 1 : % .. 1 . " • 1. 8 tin lala.132 WU:NW'1 g At"'r 2 1 a ...,.4 g ",abta !I el' t I I_t • 3 _/ t , .1 er 2- i 1 ii • 1. a) r / E ::litaialailitt;Eagatmet AS. itaTiATZ; S lit( li. 0 ..,..... , . ' -1. •-.- r r— ..,..„... '1 •-•-• 1 V11,1111 li 1 .1 ii,1114.,11 iii!ill iil lii If i 1 if! ' 11-- 11 i•A„,•10i•ii;i 41 i: 1 !'41 ' ' ,-;- •- a 1;1 imil iii;1 ill, l OA Hilili 1 =71, , I 11 i • , , .. , \ • It„ ,,. ' r,1 .1 `,• ,,,,, A 1 li__------2,_ s _.‘t h >1 , ,, 1 .' c- ,, le, /et ' '- -- '-.: ,.. . , . • -.MO ....,...; ! . \ ,• 8 : -----i ‘ I -2 r , ,... -. ,-......, .., ,. 4(i). , / // Iji O. • •'. Z' 'I 1•1'. •'•-, ''''' / '''....,. . ..•:. . / ----.' \' • /'''' ') C ''<-:) ' i 1 '•,,,, ,,_, / / / c.:-.-,..„ -,,,- rl'il I'd ' : \I ',.., ''''' ,__/ : / // ''',01::•A/74*. ''• . ........-..411: ---*' ' ; ',-,, '',--... / / " - 9 '-, , ••• - ., ' r\Z 4/ ...„._ .,,,,s..V"`",„ 1 • ' 1 , A I • E4Q431101..t4vii. .' -.s...,,--.--. 046,4----.\,-.: ', -i:'.::ai..,-',•. r• II '''' ..;:',...V sor ,e•*:'CL94-11! ••• . /2 ./1,4,di••••... -----. 0+, ' _.," // WO Cr.:----••, Vt, . -a kt, ., i/ ,% , • I ,1 i. , ,7 (I... 1 \ •, /1i % 1 - - // ,,/ • , .... ' I , ',.. --40,111• I ' ''• ek Align :_Os 64 ''„, ,2, * Aoicalle 0 _ill , ./ •, 1 , 3 gr .-...-J ...-.wr '•',.. .r...!•1 10 40.lib!' ''I'W' , / ' . i; - , me-- ,... rev - Ali. [ 1 1 L .-a7.'a'2=. -----,. ,,, ..,..,.. I tut,morm. •.'- - 1.71$ 'hi ;ma: '..t. .110.Mr1,7,11s1 , eat. l';',,,,',` '`?!. ,, ,'/ ' 9 • NC! .-.1 \./ 41' '41 61: _A% l'sr 1 e.- '',..,,-- '',, ," ,, ,--4,76, .,1,'„,1., . .mrlen, 0. 'ill r 3 ' 0.S, ; •/ 0 0 III I ' • --------- en' se as -,—;-.4E,„sag kelites, 4,., . IN — :- -Sr _. • ...imiwo=lo, .1 1 ' *oft,. „Nr. ..; • . ' -ad— J ..... :470,.. -__.--4 • G .•••se v'eV / — •-..*.IF• ttiire- - .... c.p. .„, 0.•,,,a._ vow ----0‘4,.. --.....e / ...„,..A , * ?mt,.- - — --,-,__ , ...ii r. 0... vai.,..1....-ii. g.tii.0e"• ' hi , 745'.44...:„;Mt - ir •. •<ardllavordialreadtAull ApiiirA9_,cs-Ave.r.:CrstrLIP . i g a •-IP- - .s'n 01 NO 4; '40 •, ,„,-----'0 iia----------,a. •;17 ••+a • : .. -. t.; IV ' liktfirialie." 1 • - a aSi t. .--'a sari '0,01 , .yry, 0.r 1,1 I (119 --- -'• - 411.1(01i11100,1 31] - 4, ,21 87; 0. 0Ak 4-1 '1 - mono: A ,,,: re . — .;•,*: i ,1 , - 7.---,L, „dog _,.. 4 Sr."PliPal• a rill617 _IP'r:- I CM% -:.'-• 0 t , 110 3 CO Cu ' ...ma ic al 533 111014335 . 0 11 i I MIMI 3 • • , -.a. , ,-;„ , _ . , 1 1 -"' .'•- "it ima -4,1 -- 1 - ,„,,e0 • •••I•We..- allra - .16 1111 , . e- 4 abili)•101.'"" (.L'• 'I ni, nOttPL # . L • '-''' * ? . •a - to '.:-. ‘.' •:4115'i ‘1',C 0 'e X 1 - •t• g• .— - .01•..ft, .' .° e ..• 111F-0 i ..0° '•41,re -.' • al . 4•4. ' 1 ....,. ••••' 10 - ,, ^00 *,,0*,'. •.• _/• 1. ° 0 ,,•0 •- J. 0 p.=, Ill • RESIDENTIAL ELEVATION T / . I 4„,.. .... . .../,. tr, xr k• - ';;;-", ';•.'",'• 'e; .. tk - 4 ft "::' e ti- '' .- ',,,•_?:`;---;.7.','1 _,::::•:-. ' :' c elkt,t:t,.`f ;?.,11,,0.0".t V5444.. 411 b. .1 ''' . .., •• „.. -_..:','-•,.-;,•:: :;.,'-';'.‘:'-A A • :• '....; 4•••• '-‘11&\,;,e 4 .•••••'Al.ir 1 '4v . I.. • L t--.. ';:.•- --... . ....,„4,0* . ,04,..- 'Zw5,;C•17... ,---11•17-----iifffiW''11,;' •••,!"•70•'( •3!..1;i- tIlillill iTMMOS-.: „t,k,e, • ..".1.1- ,:...: • - ,, ,,;;;, i , i '1 tal ''4'11 e•'^ •'•<-f A --/f's- -• 17/MIIMM ;till 1:"--="-- ptk, u Sp. .,,r... .1•4frd--',A---4/ f I 1 Illiirtittt:Vi'll'ill t.1_,;.. fikee -1,-,_j&t•?4:4 A, -4 . 4lirit Pi; 141 IIIIIIIIII ''' -,,-111111 II ",.- 0.k. 3 ell 1..•pip__ . ___ .'!..-.. ,1:1 8 . ilt' 111111"1;111.11 IIIIIIIMIMWV 4.;!' 6: :'-''' '1 011 ' ' ' ,1;1•1.-11 —' innlrmmum 1 14,1 ...% „.... I Ili I ' • ii ., -,• ..,.k.v,... „."_.,.=1 , 1 .• , -„,.: pr•-• 1 1 1 ,...,., ,..,:. * •t:•:: -. '' '''-, -'---;--1 11,11seth 1 ,, 1 - ..- . .,:..--•,. - --Ail, ii.,.1114 • , .„ . •,-----.•.1'':::-.,_.".":;',.Y.'; ‘.._..,.4 it %,1.1, ),%till+ a.* Ilk __,-7,--;.7m411,.. . 4.,, ',.,•...,I. V,' ,.. -i--:.•-.._:—....01 I .% ' ;‘. iN', t.11 q E i 1 '..C.s::,* A2,,"' - '.'I.• '''.`'-,, - ' l'il . i I I tlittiV ''f--11 '.I lit 1' , ,---:-. -----','I ' '' ------'' " - e 0 ,,.!..,.. ,,,,,-,..7- ,' - '_1 . :": k 1°,/t --; '-1 •Nr_i_ Iiiilil_L—...:---. :;..K•';',.--.-;:- .':::".)-. :',';,_ ' Ili 1\\ 1 .111,4l'dillIIIIII ; 11;', ii 111111 Iii '• \ k i V) 9 '.,_'". ',-;:i4,-':'.1 , %1: ,-:_!.--= orr_i_ 41 ti1,1 1 '=• :,:: ....-. _ - •'''.•.'. 1 ; Ili,i/,i,t'r 11;I I li 11 i'-_.t i—1 ' / \ Z rC1 •:, ''''‘ '\,I /''' ,:' . ;,-----.----'1 -:;-.;, 1 = ,111111111 0 v!- • \ olth, --;7,-,_. /.-1= 1"1/'ill-li i'dtEIBIN 11: IIH-21 :".i.i::=-) I Z IC CO C1) 'I:\ 1 1:11''1•/--;1%4 tvr.' '. Ill itil 21—1-1 = 0 g 11.1 . . 1 1 , mmie k , • ..,„ 1,1.,,,, ..\''.'jl ____,IIIM .1,11k Li,_,,,:1-1-1 . 1 ' 1 '‘41 "'0111111 '' 11111'142.1 .• ,,• ‘, 0, __,.1_ ••:.-_:!: • ,..wi u -6- ---.-' - 4;]- 1,,+1\l '• ' 1,,•Ii1.1"__11 411i1 Miiiiiihtili 1 =1,,,,/;1 _.,...Im ..ze:,!:.: /c.:::^g,...•-,' -,'6',....- --: sV J 11, _, i mosi 11 1 li -4a '''''''•':',.`•!;•••••••• ' -1.r.-..-._:i 111:1 f, -1 'Milli AI 1 11 i -'''•-';'...•.i',:)...': -f'. .-.1"4 1 iTlii, .'i-t-E., --AI 11111 ill il - - -• ''' ' ,.-: • .' ,1;‘ilit!i --,;-z. '.,..l.: 11111111 it !i \ 4..,,,. 74I.',...•, -. , 1 Zit, ••''.---.. --- ii.'141 •-• •' .'.' ••.'"...:', • .. 1‘Iliii 7-' Tines ,1, 0,1 di \ It'. \\11' tk;11‘0,'' IliiIIMIJillii!lilill :L 1 -- 0 v:1":: iiiIIIII ' Er=.11111_11511,i 4 \ tt 1 i 'Itti'i Riiii 1=3:i II 11 1 • , 1, ,_—IM 1 ':7,::: I I 1'1 . 111 ii,11111 • .,-',... 1 , _ i ' 1 111 11 IIIII ;4•: I I " I 11 ' t7s.... 'ikif,I• 1 1 '1' n;1 i Iv,. In— .. ' ,,11.$ _,. , ,, r,.... 1, .,.....,,A , _J... 1 4°. ' ''' .-0..iiiAegrt,.1, 0 „,frU .tuse3. 0 • 1 ...if:4 .,.... -.b.tk-.... ....., k ..7'.'..'. I vi e A. * •,..,, oeW4,,;(114 —• -4 ?4•1i • . 1, •felf4 ' -L -6 COMMERCIAL ELEVATION 1 i i I l — r I ;moi i 49.4(.41... a' �'�!� ' '� 4 I.iil4-/iJT� Q 1 i g I y !-;ti T{4"ii;•• 2tn} Pa oit� 9 � , N ii ,. }� I 3+ 111111 li - ---------- --------oras 'i?9' -- iii I I i'..III i r4 ' ' >3.3 --'"'".."' »,, I 111111 :-....i,'.' .J ftui :,,,_,....,_-----____...,,, 1[],{f — i il ,r___Hl 1 3, 4;i,-,-:),;,,„ cu I 11 •.;;;' ' 111111 .a Doll 4.4 X11 I' -- ti :_____; „ , 1 oi ; _ell , • 'I „:„....„... iir i Ei epi � ii ! .45.f� 1 111111 11 {'11 L ;=_,S .._ _ . 1 .,1 ,. ,. , , ,.,,, „. ; __ HEIR „... _ ..,,:„..„.„; ;__ tol.... i ,,.,..,.„ 0 I I _ E �.. E ti.-i:iapa I• �•-- 11 I i 1 i� I I” I si ill • -m • • CFI r2 I M� i III x W COMMERCIAL ELEVATION 2 ,,, . , , ,.......... ..! • _........•..._ci,_,. -r-- --y---ip • 1 , o cc .. i .. : 1 I i I. . I CeLa i (1) 0 /1 a , ir- •-----____F p ! .•. . 1 1 . , . it2 I. • lo & —J .. ...i , . . , • „ 1 0,, ,.. = 4,) - X I 51a CU C . I 55; 1 kl t 1 at"6:6 6...° 4.., 1 !! ! co t i. , 15 h I . i. ... —.: ,....,____ -- .-11 / i `-111 I I , . 1 I . 11111,_ i, i, Z 9- _....,_ n 1 : j 7.r.rr. r! .I.11,14.41allr TT74747r .F4 'U1V. U I —Eaz i ...;,=:'et riF:-=7. 1114111114101.111 C.) MM1511X111 y NZ;=. hi'A 11:WIS'a 1.7:: „, Et I H . ;., ;,..., ,.., -A-4- s ss' ;V:t.--,,,,, , f.7.•cc, :-.25.. ' Z Ess' -+- M;f1.,.....,- 1 cl•WF i t5-..-;;: f.1.1..1..INNIIrr '.......'j.- I 41.14 WO. liqg 444... l../.aTED 4 . Z.ZiMr33' ,,,- -, ,....m. 4 i'Si''' ' ! .,....Z.35 :At:••••••• VZ:.;: .. : ;.7q... , oliligli •.1 LTYY•341101111“ ..„„,,,,,,,,,„„, i ' VA i ! ! i l•.II,.11.1m., tP. C_ i..77,..-, I ,......=.• I ii...5?" 5.. 1 -,,E' f5.57: 5,5 1 I -7..: , fat .w...ot Apas T47 1 zr..1 e:;,...t.711 , VZ,untuni,,, 4— iVd..gsc . .iEr:,T,Il in ! .--..... . t I,11,1,11/1111,11 ,, El .1 ii 1 11 4,1 166° it ,4,1c, ig i g 1: 1g i i il mom ':._- s, . OP C''C, ....• I i I CCI :'''''r. 1;'19n' ••••• • I galliii ..... i it ...., LU — r 0 : e i ii I : p i Yg 1 ; 1 !I g tglgi ' ' PqRbiy f i ! ft:iitg 2 0 L: • I ei g i; g rt t I i , ' ! i it, g, X I t t ri.4./' 1 .. e :' ; : i N• r. 1.• 41 i 11 !iql1; A 0 14 II " ! ii 1 §1 Iliv-1 1r iv z 41 i i 1 H xf MIA gi t gAi i g i g!g ; 1 2 1 0 •" lc.; CI) I 0 CX 4. F. 0 Z . '_ „ ......, /9 .., """"'.:---•'';71t1;' - :=-J,t.'. ..'•=--- - ' arlit•tk:s!..- , , ,;,,,..,. -,,, t.:+7..---". ir.'li i-..-2_•e,,>.,: , 'eo 7 (-/1/ II i 1 -'-.;••.%:,-... Ob, '14, ›.. 1 416, '`,, iiii fi , I / / 162/ / / ,---,:_-,--- - - 40 h. , ., ,, ., .,::-. ,-.- 0' , ,' / ,: / ,---,_-_,--,,•k....?-,,,,:- 1. , , 1 .. — ‘\ • - , ,, ; -, '--: / ''' / '•I•''' 'ft r--`.r ' - ,,,, •.', . .I , •',„.r. ', / / / Az/ I' ''' • -....„ ...:,....,,,, . ---: ,I i / ,., Ar . I, , / Qtt, '1-: '; , * -•:::...-4-2, -:T.Ts--7-- '‘ „ 1 • - , ,, /' ! ;IR ,,,/ --0.1F -----, , \\ • 11, — v ,// • .4 1,_ , \ \, ' \\: ''-,'',''-‘2,' , ''--,'„- , / „„•/Vz ',\,„ I 1 1 , •,1 , ,, : - '.-- ./, •,',/,d; , , .,' .-r' h! /,‘,/Y // / ; /,2/ .. , .,. - - - , . , ou. 1E, ,,;/ i .__ . , ,, ---. 1 [-_-_, \\ -...,/,' -71_,„ i i , . .1 , ii—1 ...„, ,.., , ir. A .1 ani /11 ;,- ' r tn ‘ //,/I: ""iiill II, V\ L I-' It' 4% I I I I r "I.I WV III I I `k I s li• I ' .1— ••••I -gni—----.---7---.' -----. .V".."7-A, , ' ' • A r '17.. "•4 , I I H (-)) ..; _, e, ‘, it. , ,, _ 14. . i : "; I Ill I 1-.,—.1t_I",,4 ' li!!!A r IN' 4•01a 'Inn 111 .... ..... .:11J1210110 C-I: . ' i Ilk 1 !il r 1 •nmsm...,,f4"ni'%".':i=irbre:T"''' '''IllkM;: 1 , .•4_1„. , ,(114i ., .. , — .-„ 11 j /,, 5.1 !IN 1 ji i L, I 7 Id rrIsi I td r'r"4 1 lia,211.=1. I I— I' I I k-I .; fi 1-,,_ —."' is: , - ),,, it! r-11 , a 1 ..., ,, , , 1 v, 11, 1 , .,:c. -7-: I( ' I ' — , I • 4 41 I i I im".. \ .— --..' die. 1 ., eigj.1_,,;1 .— .... --. : ' 1 : : ; 1 41. I 11 ILL, ,ia... , 421 1 1 1 (--4 1 v Q__ II! Pi CO —' --• , '--, r- -ci_ .--- ) . , i it‘ mos I ___ c ge 1 i — -------"------------ LL ,i2 I' \ i • ' , ._____r—-1 , . . i . X • !NU— WTIEXHIBIT L CONSULTING GROUP , INC . ! Transportation •Civil •Structural • Environmental •Planning •Traffic • Landscape Architecture •Parking SRF No. 0003890 MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Lindquist, Director of Community Development CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE FROM: Dennis R. Eyler, P.E., Vice President—Traffic Engineering Jeff Bednar, Senior Traffic Engineering Specialist DATE: September 15, 2000 SUBJECT: FIFTH STREET VENTURES/ SCHARMER SITE/ADJACENT TO MENARD'S TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY As you requested, we have completed the traffic study and analysis for the subject development area (see Figure 1). Based on this traffic study and analysis, the following findings, conclusions and recommendations are offered for your consideration. • Existing Conditions Planning level analyses of the intersections of Jamaica Avenue at East Point Douglas Road and East Point Douglas Road at the Cub/Target driveway (based on recent counts completed by SRF in August 2000), indicate that both intersections currently operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS C or better Descriptions during the afternoon peak period (see attached analysis worksheet and Appendix A — Level of Service). The most critical movements during this afternoon peak hour are the westbound to southbound left turn and northbound to westbound left-turn opposed by the oncoming through-volumes. These existing afternoon peak hour left-turn volumes are near levels that justify consideration of dual left-turn conditions. All other key intersections in the study area appear to be operating at acceptable levels of service (based on observations during a study area site visit). The sharp horizontal curve on East Point Douglas Road just south and east of Cub Foods (see Figure 2) was constructed with a ± 200-foot centerline radius. This radius is too short for the posted 30 MPH speed limit in the area. An advisory 25 MPH speed is posted with the reverse turn sign for the eastbound approach, but the advisory speed is missing on the westbound approach to this curve. Using a ball-bank-indicator-equipped vehicle, numerous runs in both directions through this sharp curve area were completed. The results of this ball bank measurement indicated that the safe advisory speed through this curve should be 20 MPH. A review of available collision data indicates that there are sideswipe-, lane use- and restricted 0 sight-distance- (due to foliage) related collisions occurring in this sharp curve area. Overall collision rates in the study area are not unusually high. One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 Telephone (763) 475-0010 • Fax (763) 475-2429 • http://www.srfconsulting.com An Equal Opportunity Employer Kim Lindquist - 2 - September 15, 2000 0 Proposed Development The land use assumed for the proposed subject development can be characterized as a mix of retail (51,900 square feet), service (4,675 square feet of high turn-over sit-down restaurant) commercial and multi-family (124 townhome units) residential uses. Based on the appropriate average trip generation rates from the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers "Trip Generation" report, it is estimated that this proposed land use would generate a total of 3,563 daily trips, 144 morning and 315 afternoon peak hour trips (see Table 1). Table 1 Fifth Street Ventures Development Comparative Land Use Scenario Trip Generation Estimates DAILY A.M.PEAK P.M.PEAK HOUR HOUR • UNITS Total Trips Trips Trips Trips LAND USE TYPE TRIPS In Out In Out Proposed Development Scenario - Residential Town home Units 124 726 9 46 45 25 Retail/Service Commercial 51,900 S.F. 2,228 33 20 93 101 • High turn-over sit down Restaurant 4,675 S.F. 609 23 20 30 21 Totals 3,563 65 86 168 147 All Commercial Development Retail/Service Commercial 140,000 S.F. 6,009 88 56 252 272 All Residential Development Residential Town home Units 200 1,172 15 73 72 36 Comparing the proposed land use based trip generation estimate to a land use scenario assuming all commercial (140,000 square feet) development of the site, it can be concluded that the proposed land use would generate 40 percent fewer daily trips, 5 percent more morning and 40 percent fewer afternoon peak hour trips. Comparing the proposed land use to a land use scenario assuming all multi-family (200 townhome) residential development of the site, it can be concluded that the proposed land use would generate three times more daily trips, almost twice as many morning and almost three times as many afternoon peak hour trips. The proposed subject development preliminary site plan indicates five new access locations on East Point Douglas Road through the study area. Combining these five new proposed access locations with three existing nonconcurring access points on the opposite side of East Point Douglas Road, results in eight access-related conflict points along the site frontage. Averaging 410 only 175 feet between access locations (ranges from 40 feet to 280 feet) at 30 MPH, only allows approximately 4 seconds of driver decision/reaction time between successive conflict points along the roadway. This condition could lead to the potential for a higher rate of collisions through the study area. Kim Lindquist - 3 - September 15, 2000 • Forecast Conditions Based on the difference between existing and forecast population and employment estimates for the study area, long-range (year 2020) background traffic growth is estimated at two percent per year. A planning level analysis of a scenario adding this 2020 background traffic growth to the existing traffic volumes resulted in acceptable levels of service at all key intersections serving the study area. The directional trip distribution for the site-generated traffic was developed based on the regional distribution of households and employment, and the existing and forecast travel patterns within the study area. A planning level analysis of a scenario adding the proposed subject development-generated traffic to this 2020 background traffic resulted in acceptable levels of service at most key intersections serving the study area. Traffic volumes increase significantly through the sharp curve area as well as the area of higher access conflict locations. Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations • 1. All study area key intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service. 2. The sharp curve on East Point Douglas Road near Cub Foods has a radius too short for the posted 30 MPH speed limit. An advisory 25 MPH speed is posted with the reverse turn sign for the eastbound approach to this curve. However, the results of a ball bank measurement indicated that the safe advisory speed through this curve should be 20 MPH. Collision data indicates that there are sideswipe-, lane use- and sight-distance- related collisions occurring in this sharp curve area. It is recommended that an advisory 20 MPH speed be posted with the reverse turn signs on the eastbound and westbound approaches to this sharp curve. 3. The proposed subject development indicates five new access locations on East Point Douglas Road through the study area. Combining these proposed access locations with existing nonconcurring access points on the opposite side of East Point Douglas Road, results in a condition that could lead to the potential for a higher rate of collisions through the study area. 4. The proposed land use would generate significantly fewer trips than a scenario assuming all commercial development, and significantly more trips than a scenario assuming all multi-family residential development of the subject site. 5. The analysis of forecast 2020 background traffic through the study area (assuming • existing intersection geometries) indicated that during the p.m. peak period all study area key intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS C or better). Kim Lindquist -4 - September 15, 2000 • 6. An analysis of a scenario adding the proposed subject development-generated traffic to the 2020 background traffic resulted in acceptable levels of service at all study area key intersections. 7. Traffic volumes increase significantly through the sharp curve area as well as the area of higher access conflict due to both background traffic growth and site-generated traffic. 8. The number of site access conflict points along East Point Douglas Road should be reduced to seven. This would result in a more acceptable average spacing of 200 feet between access conflict points. Ideally the average spacing between access conflict points should be 300 feet. This conflict point reduction could be most effectively accomplished by reconfiguring the shared access driveway serving Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2, to more closely align with the Target service access. 9. The location of the access from East Point Douglas Road to the subject site for Lot 1 Block 1 is not at a desirable location due to it's proximity to the curve. However, the traffic conflicts at this access are mitigated because the access aligns with an existing service access west of East Point Douglas Road and the probable volume levels on the access would be low. Should you have any questions or comments concerning these preliminary findings, please • contact us. DRE/JB/smf Attachments ' ,kir I vF'0 .r C\ ST m q3 W w '‘• CNV !pP ,, ^ <I 6 ,udi si IDEAL r1' > L 4 y �� 6.044'c s 75th a ST S. w itt Z I • w m S y4yPE 9 J� 76 d` C,FLN N > 76th ST. 76 9 iS w 16 F A CT. w ui ui Cl- �4 ST' S TT�h IRISH AIDE. t'n IRVIN AVE. 77th N Z11,' w a •O �o ST 5t• CT �.� CT. CT. • ; W N <77th 11th 77th cw 77th ST. CT. – g a �� £l vi _a s. 2F 5' a w • C a '12 " a" U w ,p).„...)::!0,T w IRISH < y U PJB N. �+F ?s 77th ST.S. x 26. Fi < 78th r 741 . Sr s AVE.S. SC 4- 04 PO 92 �y !Ah ?� W w 27. S w ST.S. w r N of Z F Cr tn. �l > -c' > q > 28. 79th ST = N O O ' < e 19 79 Z S 78 QST.S. O ? 29. 79th Z th ST M. p�4'.7981 w iti5 B s CITY HALL ST.S. s y sr.07. Ism ST.S. w ��s 80th ST. S. < ---80th C2. 1 UPPER 81st 4,,.. T F, I ui = ✓4 S HORN@�i S P1'1510NE P oi' yj 81SSST.S.4 h, F1AVaill% .S. LL Z O T.C6 S7 821 5 > ,416 P`t' 82nd ST.Su ear S7 y' g3 .9P1.i83rd SL S. ., N %• N1 p4HYDECT83tlST. 5 yZWP 83rd � ( yP 9518HILLSID i � JE JEH tp y�yUI> E PSEN •FCFh Y00,6.•asIsIE AVE. Lti,`O 85m ST. S. < JENNER LA.S. S. ClY y yP,t,p4' N IR NP' i 4�'/`E uiAD ,/ > ZAlTR I ' , 4 4�c��P /� I'< �- 12 4S _, ,-,,..i, a m F JAN ERO 0570 may. HILLSIDE TR.S. w .O _ ele #--4.0. 88th °D N ST w C7_ F TRAIL P ci\0LF p UP PER 89th w V. ‘NC46• • $ cd&AST. CIR. CiR. w RC z 3`,. T a i n 4 N In \ R0 RO N TR. B91h ST.r CIR. a < a > jw j 90th ST. S. N $ a 90th ST. S. . o w M,ZLLE92 s s / w Ula > 01 t1 9 a 9tst STm i 3. 12. vNy ,„. 9 .43:44111111111444i/ 91st ST. S. /ui� w JAS41.6. ,W 'W92nd `Y * < \ 9 Ge ST 8.JEFFERY CT. y 92nd SL . W I Gam. 9.JERGEN BAY lEFFSER �, 11. 10.JENSEN AVE.S. S 1 SITE a JARROD t3PY LLt)' ft. 932 11.JERGEN AVE.S. 9i,P yyy GA 4i R0. S. F Q AVE.S. 93 rd 52.5' 11. §. ST. S. W E e ui 'oT 64. w w 3a\JER EN E ,t..P N 95th ST. S. a 4'• > 4).34/C. Z < z PL. 9s, vi l(6. G9S` v� . �O. 96 U ST. S. ST, , t s. ® '40 4 N = -IA PROW* y 0 Li; ST. S. S' �� —0 6 N < a® 10 , ST ST. S. h 61 `�� u ` i < •0 a 8 a QYQ i (' 8 98 N ST S. Q z d lY f < 'F.'21 WWJ ltj �dV q w N N /� 199th 'Z' ST.S. F,P /, loom ST. S. A QST do; q7• 4a CI..,11, opLC�s COTTAGE GROV d 1990 POP.22,935 lyse. 41,.? v; w L.S.POWER RD. 4 C,p • < -% H W n • CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE FIGURE MCONSULTINC GROUP, INC. PROJECT LOCATION 1 FIFTH STREET VENTURES/SCHARMER SITE ISRF NO.0003890 TRAFFIC STUDY IG` h 1, 1 „„„.,- , , ---'I , ,,,Wt,di ,.ota 1 -. ,41, . , .,;.,7„ ,„, „, , ,. ..„. i, vit °I. 3 - :,Cr I ±.4*.. ,:," 'le--4.- '- ,a _, - ' " 4,,,,,. .....,,1 . p tri , f - K A a ',. 1# 'y, a triaf" o � ) 0 it. tqr ..,-,,, -,. ii-iii-... . __,„,- ,c-;'1 .., ---- -,,, _ ,........,..„,, ,,,, T&�� � � _./ i, } � � ' 'tea I t ;` t,- , "j u_• i, /,:v ,_ Lu 7gg .7 ' - ) i ,oitc,.. „,,„, ,.....,,..- .... —,. ...L „.,, L s{ •' Qom' A O / eD%/ ,.' < 1 CJ , . >- i - illr IP .7. ... ,,,, 4,.. . i,. fi,.. ... r` 0 a t. , . ; 0. - r .-t Cn. 113'' U .1 0 * PI �' .ae - '� �� .. 0 D co co .s �� r ..� `�`_.. a^--"�w. ----."�.'�#• ..sa-- ..-kms.• LLJ P V. ' x ti. I— } �4 - r as v. F '. LLI a Alb }i `� ` } 1 Q' ,,,, �.'11311,. 'If( l /--t .A.,, =, 4 , ,, 4," t 1 . IMINIONne �jjj t ” 1�4 Xu I now i x� k 1 � r '. • TT n a. .'� Al s i it t 4 a ; i C7 / 0 4 t 1 ----- ' / / V ,,' 1 CJ $ g o / , �,,. f L'. : NMPN � Cf.�--v N� f1a y fa::, abo k ——�(— •�� �l `aq 1.1•, 6V ; « l{C .�L / is = i £ ,� I 211 3W e3 . @ T ��Sss� 3 i� ?r = gai kb O rJP ai3q <W.. 1 H d t � [8g 3i a g B 8 o I' u. 0 z - ..... /. , 9 i 'l \ � / I O1 r -,, i ,, 4„ j a iil �j .11 \ob 'S-(y >! II �L/oma w I ii: / Y."..'' ,- ,,, / L I�1 I ' ; \� / / / / ,� 3 �/ / / \/ « /" \ / / /1 ..",� ,:o i \; / / / / `� I ..�\, i J // /� `\ 4 pp n � �' -•-/ \--)1 \ • r- i I 1,� i ,� / ,I, �, --N i - s J.0'''. 1‘ \ .. -\ \ \ c___ ,, . ,, ...... , , 8 , \ ,. --- - 1 < � ����� �- A\ t -- . -...., t \ 7. A 1\_. I f c ' p 1 I( -_ --..___ I ., .. i SII/ I tyl 11 i � _ -..- - - ` i I -i/I , t 1 '\'' ' 11/Ia11110111]11 1 _ i it .I I. �,, ' 6 '`I1 ��� a. 1)\ . I. ._ i,.s-�- -- . , --4- -R I---\ tl 11 �. .a. r << ii: 1 d 1 o cc, i \ __ , MB In : I -Tt . 41 Iv, til I� � ---- 4 f �� �. - II W1 $ f i i I ____ - ,, --i-8,"._.r1..,D-..-c -S II 1 I _ - mo lig P. I ,.a — - 1 L 1 4 . , .SRF VP .{ `�1��{ n L �,p co,„,.,.a 3eag0 MAC?Mug 711��(��(`I/UAV ILI[-LTJ/� M� . J,E,5, o.n 8 :2 CONSULTING GROUP,INC co..OUTTI O ron. 1.^"" •~ OQE-R-°,11 Ok , ...an ate PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET • „,,,,,,,,,n:J•f•-r,./.3. A AAICA f t. N.90U(.Aiik tDO.K: tea-41Z-42100 IN..,R,p.,: .P[.QIN Y�II117 it ertia, Dor D A...l,.r ✓f-F J.3.vG�1�14[— Tmw period Mulrvd:I'M 1 CiV`. I4 . Analyst: Tow Period Ana/Teed: P k Ja1� H`. ,,,,,N, 3810CI,,,S„K C1Yf.fka� &LOVE. P INo ct„st..r �.X1ffIQ& CI�►.U?1S1ONS JAI-AA ICA Av. Coy/TA¢_cgE5 SBTOTAI NS STREET SB TOTAL N3 STREET . Lrg7 Z LLT.l 20 TOO JI -2.2,5 � Dim _J�Lyzt 215� C-31 1-1I 4 l I y 235 r snroTu 2le) wtroru -a Or —4 r 'Rl T T PO pc.,P(. cl Y L& , .0° .ri.UxLk.LA� J — 255 455 325 1`°6 T 1k1 i5 100 C.e.• —l 5 -i r'— (046 J 236 ��-��r30 OIOTAL I-I/� it r i BANAL Z ISO 1 ry NI TOTAL ��/ NI TOTAL LB L7 - 160 Na LT - MAXIM _ 1(05 - 26G MAXIMUM Ea LT NB LT ,( NV TH - ZI O- SB TH -LOQ SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY VISI„ - 1?b Si TH - 46 SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY iLLI VOLUMES /LEVEL I3�hl ZW 4 VOM6 LEVEL WI LT .•_ .I_ SB LT - / 0 TO 1.200 r warmr R WI LT - � 3Se LT - L 0 TO 1.200 VADER EB TH - 120 Cg' Na TH - 277 OR 1.201 lo 1.400 \ EB TH - f`r6 m NB TH - 0 1.201 to 1,403 NEAR® (4'151 >1.111 OVER X245. ® >1.100 OVER • .„±„._________,.__ 4, STATUS' lAs C 335 • 2_5 5$o STAB, L04 c E-w CRITICAL N.S CRITICAL a E�TT� E.44/CRITICAL NS CRITICAL 0z tu•`.2, PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET JAMAICA } Ir.P(. GttuCa1A5 o..,, two.22 2000 J.Pi. cbc.Y. 1.5i` CUA Dor A..Jy.r Tmw period Analyzed• C P'L ,C..C1te._ F"Lt• Analyst; Time Period A,Wyood. fi'APEAL HE P,q„„No a,,,,s,,f ZO ZO f3+C LIt ULOID OtiILY Rowel No. G,,/s,„` 2020 144.r.l3ZCX)4O UJLY .-1A)AAICA Aat,. CO b/?AP1 - St,OTAL NS STREET A 10TAL N.S STREET cue -/. ..)1 _ 4 — citi 10 -)I -3o 140 �� 4L T qB 70TAl T �� 6Ah4e/ G G-,-O►-t , LatotA, • 't.r. VOLY.A. '& -• eE,pS, W(..v_al A6 Z�E-WXTREFT ISD Rya j 196 38Th(x.490 KariJ ' -,l r'�h BIOTA/ ZLG OM BIOTA!. ILO 3So 7J a NITTOTTALU NORMAL EI LT - 166 NB LT e. .s.L. xIM I El LI - ZSO Na LT .. J1 MAXIMUM WITH - WV SI TH .. 135 SUM OF cxmCAL CAPACITY WITH _236 SI TH - !05 SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY VOLUMES LEVELVOLUMES LEVEL X4351 ISI WILT - We SI LT - 330 o 10 1.200 UNDIA WI LT - • � SB Lr - 0 TOT.211013 OR NB `• "' El TN - 1p1CO 1.201 to 1.40 NEAR EB TN -5G7s�✓ Ne TH .. 40 1.201rotAoo N.:AR "✓ - t > 1.100 OVER 3% TOG >1.100 OVER I 114301.' Gns 4,q,n, I i;6 C sem STATUS' LAS _. 3/6 _ v2' STATUS' LOS C. E W CRITICAL N-S CRITICAL o- �1IEL E-W CRITICAL NTS CRITICAL 0 tal... ,...„...5114 Q S�I.�/VLN{U /AS.H�A�LM� .J.e.,15 an 9222. CONSULTING GROUP,INC CoeenITATNNO TO.;*"'r'' ` 1C net.exc l oos Ona., oat[ PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET • In,.e,eeei.n:iAMAoCA# tfl.voaliAs 0n.: Adicl, 22/. 2 ,nI..,.�,;a,:>;.?t. 'G A S # CoS �I.: fug, 1'p MWrft.ve-c/ J' �L]iexxv e- rmw hLrgd Andrade c `Fr Yle, A�y�l: lime Pers d Afl d:nit �{f�L.�Y'4, \Yyk2 PAIetT N. ts1 Q G /9. h1f(C., Lza`iLY Project Na Cdr/A.ef SKS C.G!"VrI� I o._%- - .JArAAiCA xre,. ebb/v..e.[arc.. St TOTAL N•S STREET SI TOTAL N-S STREET . 15 Z I Zl 1 10 I. � �is TZ-L3— 1a� ` 16 E.— I �I r WI TOTAL 7/� ( ® [, WI TOTAL J `� J `. NN'e,'i, ctot �E '6.Pf. OiDe. LAS 6M STREET En STREET 10 -iti- NOTAL , I� Q7 ' 1i.2 Z� 1•."A t5 • NII TOTAL NI TOTAL • EB LT - Ne LT -_ MAXIMUM MAXIMUM L7 Ne LT ..- MAIIMUM WITH -_ 511TH _ SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY WITH -- SI TH .. SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY VOLUMES LEVEL I 1 VOLUMES LEVEL I. We LT - S/LT 0 TO 1.200 UNDER We LT A._ Se LT 0 TO L200 UNDER OR OR ',AI to 1.100 NUR OR OR 1.201 RR 1.100 NEAR ES TH - NI TH - EITH - Ne TH 11110 o• o OVER I o >I.Iee OVER • STATUS' STATES, LW CRITICAL 'N•S CRITICAL E•W CRITICAL �N-S CRITICAL PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET b.n.clian,310IVAN i Lfl, V O ,W^ to O..: WLa, GLI Loa ynonG }r, yWVU.AS yco, Die: C 1�j Aw.Ir.Y. Tune Period An.lr..d' N P`.AK. HQ AwdT+t: ,L Time Period A^'�. pNt lt,A4 AL P No 22q 00 a ,5lar 11051. DWELorM �7 1 PTewc-iNa 13Z ) „„..r 1'e1 t't'1 GeHEJ1 i JAMA►CA N. Cc»/ta> e.Z 81,5 STREET SITOTAL N-S STREET • sl TmAl mai 46 '//'2o. ' 3w gc_J _3c Si, _— CEJ '�t '�I� 5 2 -� 14 ` M7TT)tAL /1,6c� ., , I 1 1 1j 4o ( WI TOTAL - 4 34 ( 1 -? 4-- it i C � �E{ (yam��J A \ 1 I •� ,V.�I FIr6JL+L�ITM7 ` /rte '.r'`. 1LrLJ{i'{.J'AS FAZES4. �/F E MEET LPA 26o mei—to Th1( IIM7;�0 3 ® NI TOTAL '\2 HMV EI TOTAL3/6 W TOTAL NI TOTAL • • EI LT - Ne LT •- A LB LT _ 0 Ne LT - 33C MAXIMUM SUM OF CRITICAL MARCRIiM WITH _336 31 ss TH _ 35 SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY WITH - L8O se rH --- CRITICAL CAPACITY VOLUMES LEVEL VOLUMES LEVEL -1. WILT Se LT - 2 i- O1OI.200 We LT ..Wi SILT _ /�/� 0TO1.200 U�DFJt PI TH - 156t N34 e TH - J 1.201to1.100 'r.AN EI TH -�D OR Ne TH -SeSL I.AI b1.403 NEAR 114/M 4 S 1. ® >1.100 OVER ® ® >1.100 OVER 1 c) //�^ /� _616__ �L..�{(�, . �L� /� IAO _ fc STATUS'1-06 a EW CRITICAL +N-S CRITIC AL 6t 4E3 STATUS, .{.`C. p F W CRITKAL N.S CRITICAL �y Q,y 1�✓_D 11 tat u APPENDIX "A" - LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) DESCRIPTIONS LEVEL OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION • SERVICE AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY PER AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY PER DESCRIPTION OF TRAFFIC DESIGNATION VEHICLE(SECONDS) VEHICLE(SECONDS) CONDITIONS A Less than 10 Less than 10 Stable Flow- Low delays; most vehicles do not stop; acceptable LOS B 10-20 10-15 Stable Flow- Low delays; some vehicles must stop; acceptable LOS C 20-35 15-25 Stable Flow- Moderate delays; some cycle failures; many vehicles must stop; acceptable LOS D 35-55 25-35 Approaching Unstable Flow— Moderate delays; cycle failures noticeable; many more vehicles must stop; limit of acceptable LOS E 55-80 35-50 Unstable Flow- Significant delays; cycle failures are frequent; most vehicles required to stop; unacceptable • LOS F Over 80 Over 50 Forced Flow/Failure - Significant delays; many cycle failures; most or all vehicles must stop; unacceptable LOS S EXHIBIT M CONSULTING GROUP , INC . Transportation •Civil •Structural •Environmental •Planning • Traffic■Landscape Architecture • Parking SRF No. 0093891 DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Lindquist,Director of Community Development CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE FROM: Dennis R. Eyler, P.E., Vice President—Traffic Engineering Jeff Bednar, Senior Traffic Engineering Specialist DATE: September 21, 2000 SUBJECT: EAST POINT DOUGLAS ROAD CORRIDOR TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STUDY FROM JAMAICA AVENUE TO THE MENARD'S SITE IN COTTAGE GROVE, MLNm'ESOTA As you requested, we have completed the traffic operations study and analysis for the subject corridor area (see Figure 1). Based on this corridor traffic study and analysis, the following findings, conclusions and recommendations are offered for your consideration. • Introduction The subject segment of East Point Douglas Road is classified as a major collector street in the city's current comprehensive/transportation plan. Collector streets typically interconnect neighborhoods and minor business concentrations within the metropolitan urban service area. They also provide supplementary interconnection between major traffic generators within the metro centers and regional business concentrations. Collector streets should provide a balance of mobility and land access and provide direct land access predominately to development concentrations. Providing direct access to individual sites or parcels should be discouraged on collector streets. Major intersections on collector streets are typically controlled by side-street and all-way stop control and some traffic signals. Desirably, spacing between major intersections on collector streets should be 800 feet with spacing between individual driveways of 300 feet. On-street parking is restricted on major collector streets as necessary, as is heavy commercial truck traffic. Regular-route transit service is typically provided on collector streets in more densely developed areas. Posted speed limits on collector streets range from 30 to 40 MPH. Typical daily traffic volumes on collector streets range from 1,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day. Pedestrians and bicycles should be separated from vehicular traffic on major collector streets by providing off-street facilities with marked crossings at major intersections or higher • pedestrian/bicycle volume mid-block crossing locations. One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 Telephone (763) 475-0010 • Fax (763) 475-2429 • http://www.srfconsulting.com An Equal Opportunity Employer Z00EJ dfOND ONIZ'IIISN00 d2IS 6ZbZSLb£9L XVI 6£ ST 000Z/TZ/60 Kim Lindquist - 2- September 21,2000 fi Existing Conditions Existing daily traffic volumes on the subject segment of East Point Douglas Road range from 14,000 near Jamaica Avenue to 6,000 near the Menard's site. These daily traffic volumes are very typical of major collector streets. A review of collision data available for the past three year period indicates no significant concentrations of motor vehicle collisions or a serious traffic safety problem. There was a minor concentration of improper lane-use related collisions on East Point Douglas Road at the Cub/Bank driveway intersection east of the Target/Cub intersection. During the study area visit a significant level of driver confusion as to lane-use in the area 'Of the Cub/Bank driveway intersection was observed. Much of the confusion appeared to be related to the roadway width, the number and designated use of the approach lanes and the lack of channelization in the intersection area. Vehicles entering East Point Douglas Road from either the Cub or Bank site seemed to have the most difficulty with the lane use. No more than two vehicles were observed to be in queue on these Cub/Bank site driveway approaches at any time. Observed delay to these site-generated vehicles was less than 30 seconds. And a sufficient number of acceptable crossing gaps in the traffic flow on East Point Douglas Road were available during the peak periods. Since this is an area of commercial development there may be some periods when traffic operations are less than acceptable. However, based on the field observations, existing traffic operations in this area can be characterized as generally acceptable. Some infrequent queuing spillback conditions were observed on the East Point Douglas Road • approach to Jamaica Avenue where queues spillback into and beyond the Target/Cub intersection. Lane distribution on this approach was also observed to be imbalanced where the optional left-turn/through center lane was used more heavily than either the left or right lanes. This imbalanced lane use is due to left-turning vehicles that have a desire to make the right-turn to the northbound Highway 10/61 on-ramp at the Jamaica Avenue interchange mixing with westbound East Point Douglas Road through volumes with destinations west of Jamaica Avenue. Concern has been expressed related to the northbound to eastbound yield controlled free right- turn condition at the intersection of East Point Douglas Road and Jamaica Avenue. It would appear that the conflict involves the free right-turning vehicles failing to yield the right of way to the eastbound through vehicles on East Point Douglas Road. Additionally, there could be some conflict with these free right-turning vehicles weaving across East Point Douglas Road to make the left-turn to the Cub site driveway. However, the field observations and a review of the collision data did not indicate a significant problem associated with this free right-turn at this time. As traffic volumes increase in the area a more significant problem may become apparent. Pedestrian/bicycle activity observed was moderate with crossing activity observed at numerous non-crossing locations (mid-block unmarked crossings). Planning level analyses of the traffic signal controlled intersections of Jamaica Avenue at East Point Douglas Road and East Point Douglas Road at the Cub/Target driveway (based on recent counts completed by SRF in August 2000), indicate that both intersections currently operate at • acceptable levels of service (LOS C or better Descriptions during the afternoon peak period (see attached analysis worksheet and Appendix A—Level of Service). £OOEj anon 9uIL"II15u00 JHS 6ZtZSLI,£9L XVd S£:9T 000Z/17/60 r Kim Lindquist - 3 - September 21, 2000 The most critical movements at this intersection in the afternoon peak hour are the westbound to southbound left turn and northbound to westbound left-turn opposed by the oncoming through-volumes. These existing afternoon peak hour left-turn volumes are near levels that justify consideration of dual left-turn conditions. All other key intersections in the study area appear to be operating at acceptable levels of service (based on observations during a study area site visit). The sharp horizontal curve on East Point Douglas Road just south and east of Cub Foods (see Figure 2) was constructed with a ± 200-foot centerline radius. This radius is too short for the posted 30 MPH speed limit in the area. An advisory 25 MPH speed is posted with the reverse turn sign for the eastbound approach, but the advisory speed is missing on the westbound approach to this curve. Using a ball-bank-indicator-equipped vehicle, numerous runs ini both directions through this sharp curve area were completed. The results of this ball bank measurement indicated that the safe advisory speed through this curve should be 20 MPH. A review of available collision data indicates that there are sideswipe-, lane use- and restricted sight-distance- (due to foliage) related collisions occurring in this sharp curve area. Overall collision rates in the study area are not unusually high. Forecast Conditions Based on the difference between existing and forecast population and employment estimates for the study area, long-range (year 2020) background traffic growth is estimated at two percent per year. A planning level analysis of a scenario adding this 2020 background traffic growth to the existing traffic volumes resulted in acceptable levels of service at all key intersections serving the study area. The directional trip distribution for the site-generated traffic was developed based on the regional distribution of households and employment, and the existing and forecast travel patterns within the study area. A planning level analysis of a scenario adding future development-generated traffic to this 2020 background traffic resulted in acceptable levels of service at most key intersections serving the study area. Traffic volumes increase significantly in the sharp curve area as well as the area of higher access conflict locations. Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations 1. All study area key intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service. 2. The sharp curve on East Point Douglas Road near Cub Foods has a radius too short for the posted 30 MPH speed limit. An advisory 25 MPH speed is posted with the reverse turn sign for the eastbound approach to this curve. However, the results of a ball bank measurement indicated that the safe advisory speed through this curve should be 20 MPH. Collision data indicates that there are sideswipe-, lane use- and sight-distance- related collisions occurring in this sharp curve area. It is recommended that an advisory • 20 MPH speed be posted with the reverse turn signs on the eastbound and westbound approaches to this sharp curve. b00tj anon 9NI.'IIISNOD d2Is 6Z17Z9LI'E9L Xv'd 5£ :ET 0002/TZ/60 s . • Kim Lindquist -4 - September 21,' 000 3. An analysis of a scenario adding future development-generated traffic to the ;2020 • background traffic resulted in acceptable levels of service at all study area key intersections. 4. The number of site access conflict points along East Point Douglas Road should be minimized where possible. Ideally the average spacing between access conflict points should be 300 feet. 5. The lane-use, roadway striping/signing and other intersection geometric conditions on East Point Douglas Road in the area of the Cub/Bank driveway intersection slould receive further review. A detailed survey and plan showing the existing conditions $t this location will be required to complete this review. 6. Should the queuing spiliback condition on East Point Douglas Road between Jamaica Avenue and the Target/Cub intersection become a significant problem implementation of signal timing and/or a queuing detection/management strategy should be considered. As queuing spiliback is detected the traffic signal controller would invoke a timing plan that • would either clear these blocking queues or provide queue "gating" where traffic on the approaches to the queuing section would not be allowed to enter that section until the queue is cleared. This queue "gating" technique shifts the queues to more manageable approach locations with capacity to store these queues. 7. Should the free right-turn from northbound Jamaica Avenue to eastbound East Point Douglas Road become a more significant problem, consideration could be given to removing the free right-turn. This would bring the right-turn under the control of the traffic signal and if necessary the right-turn on red could be banned. This revision to the intersection geometries and traffic control should mitigate the conflicts associated with this free right-turn. Should you have any questions or comments concerning these preliminary findings, please contact us. DRE/JB/smf Attachments • soo damp 9MIZ"IIISN00 IHS 6Z17Z5L17£9L DIA 9£ :ST 000Z/TZ/60 i R 1 , W`*ay IDEAL I /L\ s c CT 75th 4 II ST. 5. ;:' 1 Z, • Val vi -y'1+.O�IE' "th 12' G7 Vl - P mth 9T, 76l zs ! w 7 T6 P Lil.` CT. to • g w CT ST , tT S- Nh IRISH • E, m IRVIN AVE, 77th <z a '� Cr CT. CT, Pt W� OW >0ww 'Z TTM n 110` a 77s PN 77th ST.z CT. y a rn Q ,b•i•^•U a l- 4 7.TI IRISH Z > O t S -bee • 4 771n ST.S. Ii >� 26 Ril G 7BM w m w . s., ¢ AVE,S. ? ,,p' �D ui 61'.9 �. 26 27. 79th S7 I ST.S. N y Y U T % 41 ' a LP �: r 19 79th I 79s, \ '• •• TB ST 6. ¢ s p �6 s 2B. ST. 7t_ ST?‘" u� ;CITY HALL St S. s. a at pr 79th ST S. H t 19'• ' '�M BOIh 9T. S. < j I; r 11117111114E' GZ II UPPER B1U or td Z '. ! r , 'S' 'NF s 1J'1T� t. - .9.V. an to e19•ST.6,w �,S ��1 y' y d7EAD 44, Ali' ear > D P 5,. �• F 4 - ® c ST. ST.DT. i uIS < -14' �' 9, hs AVE5 62nd w O JW, 2c0'7:2-\\4' P �,� (, 4(, (O • , O S.t CT. >�� = S P o 92ip5T. 5 •Ct• cl, ¢ F Zc S. U t1 d. awl < '17; t7 • = AVE. W 83rd ST.9, tA' y CSR ?`'�'k. E HYDE C7 t i� _ ¢ p p Q s N U' w J lFr1 6 B7 dSW. > m m 1.� �G '9,,..,,, .� �" B3rd ° u II e�S P S etto 5 , P n RO ISLE P i AVE. 7('�,EI' g 'QO..V.• �6� ds,?,.> L14:___:r Ai:, Z JENNER LA.S. e'*' g. •.. 114/. O BSth ST. S. Cr 4FERV S' y. p u1 ¢ J ti. . •,,� W _ N MjjjP;: 5„iv _„., N ECROR Mb CIR:a N \ RO y 7R SIM ST v~i CIR, a N a 6 a 90th ST S. 90th 1 J.' > y w w uS¢I w U >,m a oL` �g 19 < W i t'r.:Z.i%), . a < � � ? 91 s1 ST.m 7W � j 7. 12. ag6- 4, 14! 1O. d. 1991st 9T. 6. c >4r 'lfI fEVil\'' 'IA'S� B• et� 92ndB.JEFFERY CT. • C ( ST ,v B.JERGEN BAY //i �� '11, 10,JENSEN AVE.S >`(`- 4s # \ '•�'I CORRIDOR ; : N s1.JERGENAS.C.''' m 95th ST. S. B 4//(e<, ; r7�••p i :F, W PL. p �h rn FR 954 LL 4- -6n 'ST! S\ ST ''''1. i, d S. ¢ Rp S 9J N RROIN Q ( u ¢ ST. S. 2' C 1� ST. 6T S) 1.)..!1E c, �I 9e Ith ST. S. X1 r < 99M 't' ST. S. OT \ II sr A 100th ST' 9, C)'74 _ ('t/ l c COTTAGE GROV �� �L Q ckS syco1990 POP.22,935 tr., IinI di L.S.POWER RD. 4,,,‘. `�, ',I Po a x� 1 o_ I 0 ),k CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE FIGtiRE SRFCONSULTING GROUP, INC. PROJECT LOCATION 1 EAST POINT DOUGLAS ROAD CORRIDOR ISRF NO.0003891 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STUDY 900@1 dflON`) ONT.LT(1SNOD ANS _____ 6n7ZEL6£9L YY1 9£ :5T 0007/TZ/60 09/21/2000 09:00 FAX 7634752429 SRF CONSULTING GROUP 0006 f r..- — l ._ _ _ mss _ (14 • r f _ __ - . r 4.-+ -7 q., te ' ''_;*,--_-.....".-14 4-:-.4,-. ..-i-,.,--,'.,,,..li T. , ti- -,--.,..- s ..-.-_.-_,-- -• , — '- -- - ' :— .' .:.,4011,.....' .., ' 'I''''',.. 4 .. ......:: i D - {- =� T z Y : �`.tom`�q W ' fiii x ♦ fit '� 4, d (f) � • l -'s rn O U1 < • , ---41, .,. 0 ti - a `K W fir. _. • '* ' t - • 3 � t F� -- il_� iS '- -- • a. s 4 .. 4. Z.. k Yom - w _t 1 ' f - - % -- >. # -_,-F•-J .4 CA 0....- j. f Z 0=c7 `]� _O0 Fr 4 - _ '-'7'.-1-•:-.-+--- _s ; O o U S 4/11& • O - x r O 43�oN '_J _ '" 1 z 09/21/2000 09:07 FAX 7634752429 SRF CONSULTING GROUP Z007 ; figil .,10,1CTM,.11614 Jf. VE11Tt e-Mia,NfraN Q.�� ��1 L ..., _ •, R Z CONSULTING r.lOUP,INC. Cp.....P., I iw c z OP1'-rI e,VL Ow0.SY OM '.lI PLANNING APPLICATIONyWO�RKSHEEAT.` PLANNINGAPPLICATIONWORKSHEET Inen.etRn ,�L �IGA �P.,� 1.. Wl3(a1�15 El�wu: ip+�L�J/(fig. 1y� �c,rI1 l Issswila,L et.OALY'Jl .s 1 alb DOW �/ Re- Nm.,.., `p M..Iy.,:br.-F'al J.ft.M.14- T..P.ad Atil/ud.111 1'LM LA-. Analyst Time Paled Analyzed: PM ¶c. -. Re- Pm..,N> 5990 CT,,„.,` tM(A[at, LotoVE Pespal Ns CTIy,S,.Ie• Egi51.106 Ca•lO C101SS 3/4AMA 1eJA. bvfo. Cob/TAed.o....sr SI TOTAL NS STREET SI IOIAI N-S STREET , 1 110111 6O JL...2,26 1 " 144 GM _J ` U.6- 3i3 17 ' 4) 1 U ... 35 R7 roTAL - 4. ,� 40 ( WETUTAL • i 7 ♦ 1 iis- • #-- IC -4 r .-i i s. h T T' �L FL: j c iy 3 'e..K.Gt tvauks 1 1 EW SIff27 LW STREET J 100 2f 9� 325 J I cos Zo5� 1 Ewa—I� -�I r— (o4b —2E -m 1 r� EI14GL , 1.I^ 11 WWI El IOTAL ) 2IIL 2� 1 iV NI10IANI LTA /�� (,� 2°4�(�, NI rolAl LILT • 100- NR LT -2 01LT - I(J" NI LT . '+ice /�/� MAXIMUM MAXIMUM WITH 2101 WITH - Ivv SUMO,CRMCAL CAPACITY WITH •- 110 SI TM •46 SUM Of CRITICAL CAPACITY _^ -"'� VOLUMES LEVEL - VOWMES LEVEL WILT I'�7`�iAni1�-J SI LT Mor,., OTO L2WS40) WILT / SI LT -= OR 070 1.I0D UAUEA EI TN - 110, w WITH . 24 OR 1.711 I.1.4W ' EJ TN - 206 O11 NI TN - 1.201 IR 1.100 NEAR —��®SZ 1C .1 > I400 OVER q® ® >LAW OVER • EW CRITICAL *NS CRITIC.4ThL�1- 1 9 STA , 6w CRInc L�� 'N•S CRITIC � - � STA�I �� v ac ELAIEL oe amt �� ♦PLANNING APPLICATION L.WORKSHEET ',- M/L C { t'1,��PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET Ylea..,Im:.),+VSICA 1 C.,1�, w.K1LAt, Or.: IMLsy.az, ZW.-. ,ao ,.........L�PIS b aix2{ C par y� C H .Analyst' Mom Peril A.My..� r EP1 . PALL Analyst TYn.Period Analysed: ? MAL H . Prn}tet Nn coy'„,. 2020 WL LOL)I.1D OilLY P.=i.rl N, cq,a.K 2020 bl.C.41.22.00.10 aLJLY ..ANlAICI. Avg, Cob/1A4.1aE.( SI TOTAL NS STREET SI 101Al N.S STREET 3 1 140 30 1G �I`3?'0 � um 16 JI`2 �� 416 LI ( W7IDTAL AS r Pa lOTAI 114:L —� T `— J ��1�� ♦ _ 1✓ I�/ 64-4:4-4 , G 01.1, 6IQLaiL� FJi�� -) �I�— Ir—16 my —?.9 38 4q0 L' 11 J 356 Ilium , WRIO EI DIAL , ;(.G_d 350 2p( 10101AL NI TOTAL • giG EI LT - 1160' WI a - MAXIMUMEI LT 2( NI LT •• 31° MAXIMUM WITH - '-7b! SI TH - 16 SUM Of CRTCAL CAPACITY WITH -23o SETH - 4 SUM Of CR/TICAL CAPACITY VOLUMES LEVEL CR/TICALVOLUMES LEVEL • . 414IM WILT 9 SILT •.( _ 0ID 1.70D WILT - Ij SI LT - 0 TO 1.700 Olt EI TH . 19 6!' oR NI TN • 3 I.IW t.1,100 NEAR p TN - +✓5/L >I.IM OVER N/TH - 44 m 1.70,w 1100 NEAR ®I 1tn61 13101 [1 a61 > um MEP 4BO * (D1 - II..,r STATUS' LBS C _* 3? - STATUS,LOS C 6W CRITICAL NS CRITICAL M. et.1"'1G 0 6 W CRITKAL NS CRITICAL Ce- WILL. 09/21/2000 09:08 FAX 7634752429 SRF CONSULTING GROUP a008 ini11 41.. /�� [ �r, /1. `, p ... 3890 ...v wrE 6'M 1.UL►.tig /S .1.11a,IAL MIIT� n Z .. R22- CONSULTING CROUP,INC .CAMRAnow no•e.A.* ` 1eepn 04012.114- 0.441____ PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET III 1 .1,1.,{k.1 'Alpp%�AICAQ�t�t,�C'�(�1�tk�i.A3 0.1.: AgU�[s1.�2.Z, 2� L.1..,eliewg'.P(. �k11. 1 Cc3S OW. �r��/ 1 1p Ar•Il JF-f/ ' ' �te371 AL Tom Prid AntysI�.1e1SI�fItil.sl.* Nem/ AIN1y : Time Period Analysed:G!�1�♦�fI�EI14—. 11 .. FIVOCI MI /. 32436 ,„,,,,,.0,0, ([E.�ltti4 L�.101 h,Ia1 No Crr/51.1`''�1`i ea lN11.LA41C.✓ o ..1 Le - -*Ake.). , CUP2 i'104LO SE 701AL N.5 STREET SI TOTAL NS STREET 15 26 LZ I la L.. 1 _J,` 1!i ?-- JI 10 JIL 10 $�— QI 7 -- 'TG r worm. 7/S ( WI MAL _—� 1 %.. -. • 'L1111 LAAkslA'S ` t•fir. Q001.AS G. SW STREET EW STREET 115 1 J _Th 1(loo rr'--yy'�����n��' J 1I Zo mir 16 EI IOTAL , Tei ' u 1CJIAL , 'C _�•� N.T01AL `NI TOLL EE LT - NI LT -_ MAXIMUM MAXIMUM LT �_ NI LT MAXLMUM WITH - _ SUM OFCRMCAL CAPACITY SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY iSR VOLUMES LEVEL WITH - SS 771 - VOLUMES LEVEL WI LT -__ 0. SI LT - 010 1.200 UNDER WI LT -_ SE LT -_ 0 TO 1.200 UNDER _ 1.2.1 N 1100 NEAR OR MI TH .• NI TIM - 01 1.201 to LAW MEAN EE TM - NE TH • I I O > 1.400 OVER I I 1 >1.100 OVER + - STATUS! • - STATUS? • E•W CRITICAL N-S CRITICAL SW CRITICAL N•5 CRITICAL PLANNING APPLICATION WWORKSHEETPLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET 1sweea+0j1,- # Lii, WJ9L &to D.u: A a., 21_1taJ ►+„,,,ontr pr, ZUciwo, k co ep Om. .411„1: T .Rrld An,lyud• "r "' %Q Atiya1: T1wPeriod A. ysd: P 11)f 42_ N. 21:02.0 rR,/S N.: pobT pf-IJELOrME4.11 h.ieclNu 21520 C,,/s,.... PC61 VEIJELOPMEAT JP44A4A vim, cc»l k SSW/TM NS STREET SEAL NS STREET . li[1' tip_ 1 IT1 I 44 1 g0__)I`3115 230 '><_' B�Ji`_,3$ 5 - 11/119 n, i�'J (i 1 ` y 433) r .TOUL J ( M,TI[AL _ jdQ.t 1 k....,--..,-. 7 ,S , ij '7 444/ t— 4. .r) t.rt, IR1t3AS ` et../Pt. Rxx s J 1.... ) h T ? � J ZGo � SW � o CI70UL ,1,, 'IPIN LITERAL 316 G>•�P.] NI IOIAL• 7 ' lNEEI IAL El LT - NI LT - � MAXIMUM II LT - �"f`��O NI LT - 3Q✓�0 MAXIMUM WI T1-1 - 33d SI TH -a/4 SUM CRITICAL CAPACITY WITT+ - "`�O SETH -—Ek SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY VOLUMVII 1526 WA] �, VOLUMES LEVEL • WILT - amu MSI LT .. ��`j l.60TO1.21D UNDEII WI 13 -AAte�_- SILT -_4�� 0101.200 UNDER EI TM - NE TH .4. _6.[ 1,2111,a 1,100 lr.nN DIM -TIDO O11 NI TH - CO/ OR 1.201 N 1.400 NEAR U ® >1.401 n� DYER ® HEI Al _ > 1.100 A� OVER ASO—.—_Ala.--_ I 76 STATUS,LITJ C . 3MJ� 'V O STATUS,LLL✓ E.W CRITICAL NS CRITICAL R,.,r E.WCRITICAL NS CRITICAL WILE- 09/21/2000 09:08 FAX 7634752429 SRF CONSULTING GROUP I J009 ; APPENDIX"A" - LEVEL OF SERVICE(LOS) DESCRIPTIONS • LEVEL OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SERVICE AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY PER AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY PER DESCRIPTION OF TRAFFIC DESIGNATION VEHICLE(SECONDS) VEHICLE(SECONDS) CONDITIONS A Less than 10 Less than 10 Stable Flow- Low delays; most vehicles do not stop; acceptable LOS B 10-20 10-15 Stable Flow - Low delays; some vehicles must stop; acceptable LOS C 20-35 15-25 Stable Flow-Moderate delays; some cycle failures; many vehicles must stop; acceptable LOS D 35-55 25-35 Approaching Unstable Flow— Moderate delays;cycle failures noticeable; many more vehicles. must stop; limit of acceptable LOS E 55-80 35-50 Unstable Flow- Significant delays; cycle failures are frequent; most vehicles required to stop; unacceptable LOS F Over 80 Over 50 Forced Flow/Failure - Significant delays; many cycle failures; most or all vehicles must stop; unacceptable LOS • EXCERPT FROM APPROVED MINUTES OF THE • JULY 24, 2000, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CASES CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 5th Street Ventures, LLC, has applied for a comprehensive plan amendment to allow a mixed-use development; a zoning amendment to change the zoning from B-3, General Business, to PUD, Planned Unit Development; a preliminary plat for 132 residential units and 4 commercial lots; and a site plan review. This proposed development will be lo- cated on the vacant land north and west of Menards. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the revised conditions that were handed out at the beginning of the meeting. Ed Hasek, Westwood Professional Services, Eden Prairie, stated that they believe this project is a good transition between existing single-family residential uses and future com- mercial uses on the site. He explained that they are planning 132 townhouses and 53,500 square feet of commercial space. He stated that they met with the neighborhood, who voiced concerns about screening, potential commercial uses, and access/traffic problems on East Point Douglas Road. He stated that the developers needed clarification on some of the conditions of approval. Japs asked about the price range for the townhouses. Hasek responded approximately • $125,000 to $140,000. Japs stated that based on those prices, they would probably be selling to families with children. Hasek responded usually townhomes sell to young profes- sionals and retired people and that historically the number of young children in a project like this is relatively low. Patton stated that they have built five projects similar to this one in the Twin Cities area to young couples or older people, but very few children. Japs stated that because of the price range, he does see young families as potential buyers. He then asked where a park would be located. Patton stated that they propose three separate areas for a picnic shelter, a tot lot, and picnic tables. He explained that they would like to establish the community and get input from the homeowners association on this issue. Auge asked Hasek if they are generally in agreement with the 21 revised conditions. Hasek answered that he is concerned about the traffic study condition. He stated that he does not have any problem with doing a traffic study of just this location but wants to know who would pay for a larger study, if that is what the city wants. He stated that it is his under- standing that the current road configuration anticipated full development per the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan and that they would not exacerbate the problem. He further stated that the timing of a traffic study might be critical to the timing of the develop- ment. Auge clarified that Hasek was concerned about condition #6, which is the scope and timing of the traffic study. Hasek agreed. Joel Buttenhoff, 5th Street Ventures, stated that they would be acting as the developer of 40 the commercial portion and D.R. Horton would develop the townhouse portion. Buttenhoff gave information on the proposed commercial uses of the site. He stated that they are pro- xperpt from Approved Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 2 of 6 • posing to build one of the two office buildings and the showroom building rather than both of the office buildings. He acknowledged their responsibility in developing at least two of the four commercial lots but they would like to have some type of arrangement to commence construction of those two buildings in the spring of 2001. He stated that they would be will- ing to escrow funds with the city to ensure that they construct the two commercial buildings. Japs asked for more information on the type of commercial users the developers envision for the development. Buttenhoff responded that for the office building, tenants could include professionals, chiropractors, dentists, a real estate company, and in the show room build- ing, because of the visibility, a lighting store or a carpet store. He explained that they are building these buildings on a spec basis and do not know who the future tenants would be. Auge asked if they had any other concerns. Buttenhoff responded that the only other con- cern is condition #2, regarding outside storage; if, for example, they had a mini-Fleet Farm type user who needed a small amount of outside storage, and he wanted to ensure that they could get a conditional use permit to do so. Auge opened the public hearing. George Alex, 9182 Jareau Avenue South, stated that his property abuts the easterly end of the development and he was concerned about screening and landscaping. He stated that they have a nice plan but he wants to ensure that it is adequately screened and not just noted on the plans. • Lisa Lukitsch, 9284 Jarrod Avenue South, stated that her property is behind Menard's. She asked how debris would be contained during construction, what the time line would be for the townhouses, if the townhouses were for purchase or rental, what berming is. She stated that she is concerned that there is no playground area for the townhouses. She is also con- cerned about the trail because it would run by her backyard and asked about the amount of traffic on the trail. She was also concerned about the lighting, because there is already too much light from Menards. Hasek responded that all of the landscaping will be installed as the project is developed. The entire site will be irrigated and maintained by a professional landscape company. He stated the townhouses are for purchase only and they cannot be purchased and then rented by the purchaser. He stated that the lighting from the commercial portion, with the exception of the northwest corner of the site, will be substantially blocked by the construc- tion of the townhomes, and in the residential area, there will be front door lights and street lighting on the cul de sac that goes into the project. Hasek explained that berming is mounding of soil, basically building a small hill, and the proposed berms would range from two to eight feet in height. Patton stated that he cannot promise that debris would not be blown around during a big wind, but they will take precautions to prevent it and there will be trash bins on site. He stated that they would like to get the site graded, the cul de sac built, and construction started on a model this fall so they would be open in the spring. He stated that they would also like to minimize the view of the back of Menards with landscaping and that the Excerpt from Approved Planning Commission Minutes I , July 24, 2000 Page 3 of 6 townhouses would help screen the lighting from Menards from the existing residential neighbors. • Lindquist stated that she does not have any estimate on the number of people who would use the trail. Jerry Tape, 8803 — 91st Street South, stated that his property is right behind one of the proposed commercial buildings, and his concern is that the driveway is 20 feet from his property. He asked what size berm they could build within that 20 feet. He asked that some type of screen be constructed, but not a fence because of maintenance issues, maybe a concrete block wall could be added along the commercial area to shield the residential from commercial properties. Charlie Melcher, a civil engineer for Westwood, stated that a five-foot berm with trees on top could be built there. Tape asked if there would be any flat surface between the drive- way and his property. Melcher replied that there would be about two to three feet of flat surface on either side of the five-foot berm. Lindquist stated that staff is recommending that the driveway be shifted to the south to align with the one across the way, which is 10 to 15 feet to the south. She stated that the other option, which was recommended by the city engineer, is to delete this driveway. No one else spoke. Auge closed the public hearing. Podoll asked who would maintain the trail, the city or the homeowners association. Lind- quist responded that the trail would be constructed and maintained by the homeowners association but it has a public access component. Podoll asked if the developer would be required to do the asphalt onto 91st Street. Lindquist answered that they would. Podoll stated that he does not see any way that a 50-foot fire truck could turn around on the trail in the winter. Lindquist responded that emergency vehicles would primarily come up from the frontage road and they would then hook into the private drives. Lindquist stated that staff needs to further review the final trail alignment. Japs stated that he would prefer that this property remain commercial. He stated that with the number of townhouse projects already under development and the city's need for prime commercial property, he cannot support this proposal. Sawyer concurred with Japs. He asked if there would be enough space for a large retailer, such as Walgreen's, or if there would only be smaller retail. Buttenhoff responded that the most southerly lot would accommodate a 20,000 square foot box retail use or that two lots could be combined to double the square footage. Sawyer then asked if they had any po- tential tenants. Buttenhoff answered that they have not yet started to actively market the commercial lots. Sawyer expressed concern that the City has plenty of residential oppor- tunities available in the $125,000 to $140,000 range. Podoll stated that his biggest concern is the traffic in that area. He asked what staff figured for average trips per day per household. Lindquist responded that it is about seven trips per • day for multi-family homes. Podoll asked what would happen when the traffic study was done. Lindquist responded that staff would ask them to assess the current proposal versus Excerpt from Approved Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 4 of 6 . what could occur under the present zoning. She stated that based on what the applicant told staff, there would be substantially less trip generation with residential, particularly dur- ing the PM peak. She stated that the study would also look at the access issues and any mitigation that could be done to at least maintain the same levels of service. Lindquist stated that staff wants a traffic study done to ensure that any development does not impact the traffic problem any more than the current situation. Podoll stated that he feels the problems are at East Point Douglas and Jamaica. Auge stated that the traffic is a serious issue. He stated that the traffic study would help the city understand the impact of this particular proposal versus other potential uses on the site. He stated that one of the issues is how viable the site is for commercial. He stated that a mixed use on the property has some merit, but no matter what the traffic study says, the issue of the Jamaica/East Point Douglas intersection that Podoll is talking about would still be in front of the city. Auge asked the Commission how important the traffic study is before making a recommen- dation. Japs stated that he wanted to see more of a balance between housing and com- mercial land uses. He stated that some of the properties located deeper into the lot might not be as attractive for commercial. He suggested that he could support senior housing in that area. Hasek stated that at the neighborhood meeting they hosted, the traffic issue was brought • up. He stated that they have a traffic department at Westwood that does traffic studies and designs, and based on their estimates, a mix of residential and commercial would result in fewer trips per day and less traffic. He stated that during the PM peak, there would be ap- proximately 500 trips for the proposed development and for just commercial, there would be roughly 900 trips. He stated having single-family abutting multi-family and then moving into commercial use makes good logical sense. He also stated that there is a demand for townhouses in the community. Koch stated that while she agrees with Japs that it would be nice to have commercial de- velopment in this area, she is concerned about the type of commercial uses that could go behind Menards. She feels that the townhouses would be a good buffer between residential and commercial. She stated that from her experience as a townhouse resident, senior citi- zens would be living in these homes. She stated that even though there are a lot of issues related to this development, she could support the project. Bailey stated that he agrees with Koch due to the development's location and because there will be commercial along the frontage road. He agrees with staffs comments on the recommendations and he would like to see a traffic study done. He believes that the plan as a whole is workable. Auge explained that the Planning Commission could approve the plan with the 21 condi- tions, continue the request pending receipt of more information, or decide it is not compati- ble with the land use and deny it. 110 Lukitsch stated that they were misled by their builder and were told that that are was initially zoned for single-family housing and that a park would also go in there. She would prefer to Excerpt from Approved Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 5 of 6 see single-family housing instead of townhomes but the townhouses are better than com- mercial. Alex agreed with Lukitsch and stated that when he first moved in, he was shown a compre- hensive plan that indicated the area was zoned to be a park. He explained that he got the plan from the city, not his builder. He stated that he would rather see townhouses with nice landscaping and screening rather than commercial. He also stated that any new commer- cial entities would face the rear of the existing commercial buildings in the area and the single-family residents would then have to look at the backs of the new commercial buildings. Mary Pommerening, 9306 Jarrod Avenue South, stated that she agrees that the commer- cial and residential mix would be better than only commercial. She asked if the develop- ment needed to be that dense. Lindquist responded that the townhome project comes in at 6.9 units per acre and the multi-family designation is generally 5 to 10 units per acre, so this development is within that range. She stated that most of the townhome developments in the city have been in the 6 to 8 range. Podoll stated that he could not vote in favor of this project tonight because there are too many unresolved issues. Podoll made a motion to continue the applications to the August 28, 2000, meeting. Auge seconded. • Motion passed on a 4 to 2 vote (Bailey and Koch). Auge asked the Commission what information they would like clarified. The Commission responded the traffic study and outcome, location of curb cuts, review the percentage of commercial versus residential, and landscaping concerns abutting the existing residential property. Japs stated that he would like to see 50 percent commercial and 50 percent residential in this development, if it is not all commercial. Patton asked for clarification on the landscaping concerns. Podoll responded screening of the development from the current residential area. Podoll asked if the six-foot concrete sidewalk around the commercial end would hook up with the sidewalk on Islay. Lindquist stated that staff thinks it should hook up but are not requiring the applicant to install the connection. Patton asked for a poll of the Commission to see if the percentage of commercial and resi- dential mix would be the deciding factor. Auge stated that the Commission would not do a poll but he explained that there seemed to be general support for a mixed-use develop- ment, but there was some concern about the amount. Japs stated that it is a factor for him because it is zoned for commercial, but he could see some residential included. He would • vote against this plan because there is too much residential. Sawyer stated that he agrees with Japs because it has been zoned commercial for a long time. Podoll stated that he does not have a problem with the mixed use; he is more concerned with potential traffic Excerpt from Approved Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 6 of 6 • problems. Auge pointed out that three commissioners were absent from tonight's meeting and could be at the next meeting so there are three other points of view. Hasek stated that if this application was for the development of the site as commercial and it met all the criteria and ordinances, traffic would still be an issue and that a study would not change the traffic generated. Auge stated that he hopes the traffic study would not only provide the numbers but also some potential solutions. Hasik stated that he would like to have this application back before the Commission in August but he is concerned about the time it would take to do a full traffic study. He asked if a preliminary report on the traffic study would assist the Commission in making a decision. Auge stated that the Commission has attempted to clarify the issues that the six commission members who are present would like to have clarified. Auge stated that this item has been continued to the August 28, 2000. • r k , • MEMORANDUM TO: Cottage Grove Planning Commission FROM: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director DATE: September 22, 2000 RE: EDA Response to Scharmer Site Proposal In our haste to get the 5th Street Ventures project put together, I omitted an im- portant piece of information the Commission should be aware of. Due to concerns by some of the Commission members regarding the commercial/residential mix, planning staff requested review and comment by the Economic Development Authority (EDA). The EDA discussed the proposal at their August 8, 2000, meeting. The proposal was the previous project, without the Menards expansion area. However, the two plans are substantially the same and it can be inferred that the EDA direction would be similar. • The EDA unanimously voted to not support the project. They indicated that housing had been located in an area better suited for commercial, next to the VFW, and they did not think it should happen again. They also felt that all com- mercially designated property should be dedicated only for commercial uses. A copy of the EDA minutes from August 8, 2000, is attached. • • x 7 • Economic Development Authority- Minutes August 8, 2000 Page 3 4.1. PLANNING REVIEW: 5TH STREET VENTURES The Planning Commission had requested EDA comments on this proposal, which is for residential development in a site zoned and guided for commercial development. Denzer stated that it has always been the EDA's stand to keep commercial property for commercial use. Kleven agreed. Kleven moved that the EDA not support the 5th Street Ventures proposal. Pederson seconded. Kleven did not see any reason to give up commercial land for housing, while Pederson remarked that this mistake had been made in the past, and that the City should not repeat it. Motion carried. 4.J. AERIAL PHOTO UPDATE Once prints had been received from the photographer, they would be reviewed and a decision would be made as to placement of an order. Copies could then be sent out with the Annual Report and other advertising correspondence. 4.K. INDUSTRIAL PARK CONCEPT PLANNING Schroeder outlined some of the concerns with stormwater and buffer zones in the • Industrial Park. 4.L. CALENDAR This was an informational item included with the packet. 4.M. MARKETING UPDATE This was an informational item included with the packet. Wolfe said they were pleased with the last ad in City Business. 5. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS ITEMS Luden commented that Louann Tobritzhofer had been hired as the new office manager at the Chamber of Commerce. 6. ADJOURN Wolcott moved to adjourn. Weingartner seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Neil Belscamper • • Economic Development Secretary . STAFF REPORT CASE: CP00-045 ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 • ITEM: 6_2 PUBLIC MEETING DATE: 7/24/00 TENTATIVE COUNCIL REVIEW DATE: 8/16/00 APPLICATION APPLICANT: 5th Street Ventures, LLC REQUEST: A comprehensive plan amendment to allow a mixed-use development; a zoning amendment to change the zoning from B-3, General Business, to PUD, Planned Unit Development; a preliminary plat for 132 residential units and 4 commercial lots; and a site plan review. SITE DATA ii• LOCATION: • Vacant land north and west of Menard's ZONING: B-3, General Business CONTIGUOUS LAND USE: NORTH: Residential EAST: Residential SOUTH: Highway 61 WEST: Commercial SIZE: 28.84 acres DENSITY: 6.94 units per acre RECOMMENDATION Approval, subject to the conditions stipulated in this staff report. 1 • COTTAGE GROVE PLANNING DIVISION F:\GROUPS\PLANNING12000\Planning Cases\045CP Scharmer Site-ju124\045CP Scharmer Site SR cover-ju124.doc . - ,....,,.....,,,.-..r.:::::::::::::::::::-:::::::::...i-:ii.,..iii.i,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",,,,,,,..„........,,,,,,, , - - - --ii- - -...... - .. . ,:—::::,:::,:::::.,-,...------ ...::.,.i.i:,:i,.:;,_,:::-,,E,::: ,:irvi.:?.:i,.::,]_:,:::;:::,:,Ezi,i,,?i,:.,,,,E,:::i,H,i,i,:,,,,i,iiii.i;,,::.i.i-,.:i,i,iri:.i,i,ii:,:i,i:i,,,.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... c+A$ENui.oigeRtsysitp.00.0-4w.:z06446 :p..p013..04tispoiro:40,,:i. .:: ::;i: :::: : : ,1 ,.::: -.:,:;r ,::. ..:H.i:.:: :,, . ...,,......... _,_._...... , :...„..•: .:.,,,,,::,.,.:,,:,::::::;,„,,,,,,,,, ,:. : smi,i,i:::i.;,:,i,:::ii, ,,- .,:: :i . i.,.,„:,,,,,,ii,,,:....,..,,,,,,,,,,H 1(0.prvciANT -titt.a.liteet.iiientiesiazi:imini:i.;i:i:i=ii:in:ii:n: i.::::i-ri:i:iE;i:-::i.::wE:i::::iii :: ::iii:,.i-: ,:3::::;:;: i: , .:::f:::::i:].:i. :i -:::.,-.:.i.:i:i:-: ..::.:::.::,: . .:.-.::PROPPSaai:13E,QUEST.::($) .ff:Azom prehetiStYWPIOrt:40)0hdintiintilp::tios*ttilb*tlise:-:::::: .il.i.,:....ii.: ::' .i;:-.,- . .....„,......,:•,.,...,:,: . ::„...„,...,...,•:..,...„.„,..::::::::::,..,:::,:::,E.,...:.„.:::::::„.....:::::.:::,.::::..........::::.:,..:::::,,.:.:.:::::::::::-.:.:..:..„:„...::.:::,:::::::,.::•::,,,::: :„„H„„:::::: ite.veoppleritokgot.flog*toon-doloo.::€04...thatigo:,..it*looktti,to.ti*iz. '$;itetiorar;E(iitioesSIojPtia -, -;gplay0001..iVt41310.0E00.000:kr:a.preatliOatytifatifdifil36.A$Ide.iltialtiiiiiftlitkiAtOttitriet.Oafibit''''''i.i-i - i, :464.: . . ; ':';''': :] i''',':::i:::::'''''''ii:'1 .?:: 'i N,,,,:,:::•:::.,,,:,:,,, :z,',: ::: ::::i: ,.ii.::i.,:iii,',.:i:: :•iiii::iE.ii::.:1,iE,E,:i,:i.i:i :,i.3i.::::,.:.'?ii:-:-:,:iii,..:i,n'i,i,i'i: E::.:i]i*•:•.,,:::.::::: ::::::j::;:::;:::::::::.:-::5,i]ii:::i.::•i:ii:i:i.i.i,i::i:i' i: :.i.:i,i,:':;:::.i.:::?;:'::.i:i::::i:::-::::::f:::::•::::::::::::.;,:::::::-:,-:-;.Y.:-.:'.:.-;.:.::::is::::',,,,:,:::::,,,,:.,:::.,,' ;,-: -.-:.-:,:;::i:, :•:•;.::::::;,.:ri,i::,,i.:::;; ,,:::f:;:i:,.::;.:E.E,:m:i.m.:,:;,,:, ,,,::::,:.:::::::::::]:::".::..*::,::::::,4: ::4.:i:i3E:i:.::,. .ii,i,i,i::,::i:::iE::,:::E.::i.Ei::::: : ::'ii):',i'ii,v: :::,,::*,::::, .':;:,,:,iii:i:::,'E-i,:..::,i:i:::i.i.:::i .::,:i:ii:q.;,,-F.:.;:o: ',. ,! , 1;10,P.#011:).#,.f.40011EMAN....00iitlandiiiotiiiiiiiiitiiiiiit ditiidiisttirs:.i,:asi:i1:Vriq;iiME: i-ii: :: :-,:.,1', :',: :,.. ; .,:r .m. ..... ""' ,:::41.., am .."1Y 4 l'fr,a. ,I 1, .....^::-.471114. • - -,"..-11111111 • .1) .g7 :••_....1\1:;IL, -1..* MI. 4r4i9,4* ,1111=1.71 -9... --. ... -itaint '7 -' Mk Nu '"" I= . •V 'Ab.- 111=1.419=1,01-417 - L, :' • - : ,,,, 4'11 p.‘,..\ '714 rr, . ----: :"4" 1=1:a,-.prk> k .,-a..... - . .. le ,i;: ismonp.-^ g - iLlidllUurft ..--n-all .. Cir.E.--- : - * •W.4.4;:11- "e4",A C:1 ' ,-__ - `,4k 4;.$,r-,-, --..-gy, • • •-irt. "...-1 _ . 4;; = ...... fiqwwik=.:-.'i ::•it-": 7.-'j.:Ji;*.• A., • ",--,k i‘-niilS..... (' -:- •- ''.° '..4-111 :t.'.\--',Alt,%.:e),-...--., . ,.ll&fit..7 'A&. -.'' 47 . -...,..:, ow. .:::•::::::::..--.,::,::::::::'...::.-F:1:-.:... ..:;:::::.:,., :: -- .,:::,,tvip-,i.i.v.,6 - Nwilw.x...‘.4,--.-5... ezzi :=' -- .-- -7'.r.jOti'L•.::: :..:':'::-:'-':.::::.':f.'-':':'::•:::.!-:•:.iitilli-,1-ii-'141_..-,, ...,-....:..p.1,,1 u• 7,---••.4"sedt<.4 4,:,:s 4.,:27 /r...,_ ,••.• •- L1-. lASt i 1 1;I;•,7 n ilEriPf R.---7-,,,, v'''' ,' ,41E1 • 4q*k."-----_:,t,i-- -:-.-• = i..ii, '---sill_WN .-. 1./7,1,1 ,„ .....-u ,,,,,„ 77-,,b A 2%,...,, 0,,...1;-.:-..: , Am E -•.__ ....„ 1::300. Jon, 15,4:,. .---.... --•410.• 4,0 ,4//9.ititr. 41, _ ..„,,Nri it,14,491Atip.7„,"74. I `•1 /A- A 4, /,_. :•••• ••,--- rt. "1=1 .t L'' '•:? A .."'. —" ' usr-p7, sdronft.nri r, -,_ ..,*----4,---4, .., iza • „e,,, di.:-.,., „,,,,, ._ 4041,11,11.ipu ,,,./79/y/I, -',..._.... 'f.--, 1.... "rnikgp>„.& ,%\alini, -== "'Vti. itifit, ',c,,>2. ..:,....o..._//ii- ''--.1 :A-1"r... ...0,,,--s7 ,...,I: .-. "4 rfhczv ,-.. = czu.titi dot=-•.--...' kz - _.',..- — = .4r. mil ..=. _..- Rtr.: ....=-...tfc-4-, "7;--.-,- . ', ..-! ,ca.,.. p...........,.. ...A ., ,....,,„, ...1...,,..., i EN IN -44ige> 740,'-'41.argiii =,-• r-ArAricrirAr. - ,..,..-:-.._. . Afaduuti ,....„. 0'.4 ,„.., / PL.. . ""' r.---- ---•-7-----7. • . - .::.• mans it7I;g7=...fti.•var 114E1 LT-: --' 4t,';''- - :7-''':-.:1----1' ::- :-.-.11 r-:' -' .1 _, .- ':VP1,1,'F'12‘i71-5..vi ri-7-77 1 1 1 r* ee,t=i-a. ..: 1,.r:::;:.'...li'.;i::::::: ::,•:1.1.1 '"'4'*':2tee1. 71W 41-iro:4;- '' ----,-1.7t.--- ----- ='-':‘: --:-..7.1 -'1 ::':-r7: :! % :,.,-,,4,,t4 ,••••,:i/...-,,,,.....,_&'"""%ii1;•-: . ot.,,,,.. -__ ..=,,,.,, ' ta 4• .F.::•••ff,: 771:•:7: . '1111/41/01 Mir A.L....'..,;.1,11.4 ..., '.41 /4*' '';fia _t, i' ,.4 ..,,-•='A-:::::',:L- ::1:iiiiii * 7r rriiniiritT7J— E"-- .....' '01-"imil -----.: : . -- •:--'• \\I ....... -.... ,p.4::,. - --_: - ._- '1- -: '-•:;. 441- N r.Aininfittrinll- 1 •=c3 -; <.,,,,( > .7.," •til, ..__ Irin 3':::•].i .:1....: '',Egg irdirti . , L.TW'f'''?iagiM16...t ' ii.L., -,;'''''''''' 74" • '' ',1==uninfinfil, ':. Ally--- fiFillfifilliTheiRlifiti ==3 .... ....' - •--... ,= - -ill C4 TerA — ifif :-''''•:-:''''''''•'.11 1"I , 1 41117, ---11==-- E-9:-. .=-, "...dittt ^-4II: call".. . FR ki: ,-.. ...N • '--- .40*.sag::--, .., i I! f & ,•, .=_-_,_,-rf., ,=1 .- .,........;„ 1 tzt .--", .,,. ...,..--, / :--- '=------- a, vii. ....ort;‘• 4----, e2,1„,N, .:.., --.-,s-. .:,4,03.041 . ., . „ __ F,,.-E--: E.3.m — ii-e2ZP----,-, %-t-- .4.•-•. ^- ---r-n2 - Os / '''• '''•" ''.-' .'.:.:1' "a' 11. at ':''''401:=11151‘li1=11-- -41riP7111111ffiltlilfiTZS mat.,-,zel iffijil 'o: .',-,,,),e,, .* ' / ‘, •.;-..-•...-:-... ,-,.. • .." , 1 :::...-:•:•:•:•:•:.:•:.:•:.:.::.......:.:.:.:.:.:.:."'" t-.... ,.' • ,4,1tX.,,4.. . hk‹,)_,,.- ,•'-: *A,..‘ / ‘‘‘, ,'''.s.` , /s - 8Th •:::::::::::::".`.i.:;::::::::::::::::::::.:.:.:::::::::::::: 'atH flaVn 7rri ' ISI-i4V*774.,47944: .17-33 . tt\ / \s'S ' '' ' ' 's.' :::::::::::::::::::.::::.".":".:".."..".."..".:":%:::::::".:".."......:.".. OW ‘..Z:''r•41%-..."Th.„„dj,:: rillitargiIr........-)!:"..Ht ''''' . \`' 's'•••• .)..,::,••,•:. '\PLATA \ .............:::::::::::::::.....::::::::::::::::::: Ma rilUnhill. ....,•,-,,,n •••••-11 ,...e.,4"1 71:;;::::::::::•::::::::::-..a.::::.:* *-:::::::::::g -tit,40., 6.--4,rici-, -----,„11:104-Ett ,.. ." N J,; , . - '--------_,_-/,::-, 54/6,-,.,--. - -- • -F, ,,., -.:.:.:,..:.:.......:. ...,, -....,- !._510,1..s.... : .... •• , tairvall Alegm„..1 4, =II-ri k,,i4"—-t.=- k•--`4111^' In 1.0"Arinirn • / I/ N 1 1 ii:•: .:..''.-- ;':'', Ione • f r : , x 7- :,':;..;:':'1';;','..::. .:7','-..'":-':•••„- ,. •mr.---' ....,:at -;-.., ...01-00i.'::-.,':::.':' `',--..--,-',,„ Ida nurnn :-.-.aA 1::.- iiiiiiitInti '2*. , 7 11‘.::.,::::: :::::i..:::f..:::: :.,::-.-,....•:::::.i,;.:::::::1 Illik„-2-',--:,-f.,:,-,,...s., \,‘ = ai=m101,-eller"''.-!iv • :, ' " ;/-•.,=. ; , .__ i V---,. .,.; 1 11 \ .1, • -. -..;trl- ' • ','„-.::•-• , •. 11 I •-----___ 941Ir' rill : ..::..il'. • = 'Ili ' . WM I . I t 1 1 711110:1 I li : \'\ si I fielli t 1 1 1 UMW.*Nss'''N:,-7fKis..."•_. 'Zlite ' ----I! /•/\ 0> g .• 1 i I 11 I I .`, ,, • ',‘..''•-•''' ' N , 1 ,:> I>I \ X \ ! ,4C • \ \\ i \,'Z..•'Z, -:--•:.-_,..: ,;.' --: ', \ . . • Planning Staff Report Cases CP00-045, ZA00-047, PP00-047, SP00-048 July 24, 2000 Proposal The applicant, 5th Street Venture, LLC, is proposing to develop a mixed-use project on the ir- regularly-shaped remnant of land behind and adjacent to Menards. The site is currently guided and zoned for commercial use. The applicant is requesting that the Future Land Use map of the City's Comprehensive Plan be amended for purposes of reguiding the property to mixed use and a rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to permit a combination of residential and commercial development. Four commercial parcels would be created along East Point Douglas Road with the remaining 19.02 acres devoted to development of 132 townhouse units. Along with applications for amending the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning the property, the applicant has requested preliminary plat approval and site plan approval. The proposed site plan is Exhibit A. The applicant's narrative is Exhibit B. Background • On September 20, 1995, the City Council adopted a resolution approving a conditional use permit for a home improvement retail store and outdoor storage, and a site plan review for Menards. The Council also adopted a resolution approving two variances for the project, one for the amount of on-site parking and the other for exterior signage. In December 1999, the City Council approved the draft Comprehensive Plan and requested staff to forward the Plan to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval. In the Plan, the subject property continued to be designated for commercial use. However, it was recognized that some residential land uses may be acceptable depending upon site design and proposed uses for the site. Planning Considerations Project Design The 28.84-acre site is proposed to develop as both multi-family townhouse project and com- mercial uses. Four lots, totaling 9.82 acres, are dedicated toward commercial development with the remaining 19.02 acres for residential. All commercial parcels front along East Point Douglas Road, with the residential gaining access from a new public cul-de-sac that permits access to the interior of the proposed residential site. Initial submittals by the applicant were not supported by staff due to the amount of hard sur- face proposed, predominately in the residential portion of the site. The applicant has since modified the plans, which are reflected in the current submittal. Staffs main interest was pro- viding additional green space within the residential areas and removing excessive paving. The Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 July 24, 2000 Page 2 amount of paving is always a point of discussion with the type of townhouse project proposed. • The applicant consolidated several structures; thereby reducing needed driveways and in- creasing the size of open areas. Through the consolidation, the applicant was able to provide several small open space/activity areas for the multi-family residents. In the east, between buildings 10 and 11, there is a small picnic area for residents. Center to the residential devel- opment, between buildings 6, 7, and 14, there is a tot lot, and there is another open area, with gazebo, between buildings 15 and 16, north of the proposed pond. Along with the designated open space areas, the applicant was able to provide greater set- backs to the existing single family neighborhoods than what is required by the PUD ordinance or the R-5, Medium Density Residential zoning district. The PUD requires a 30-foot setback from all exterior property lines of the PUD; the R-5 zoning requires that a 25-foot setback be maintained between attached dwellings and associated parking and single family housing. Parking and buildings in the northeast maintain a 50-foot setback, whereas the central build- ings have a 110-foot setback with parking 45 feet to 58 feet away from the north property line. Staff would like to explore the idea of slightly reducing the open space areas interior to the site and shifting the development in the northeast, slightly south. Staff is interested in increasing the setback to the north approximately 10 feet, which would not dramatically compromise the usability of the open space recreation areas. In respect to the single-family neighborhood to the east of the project site, the applicant has provided ample separation due to the presence of the NSP and Northern Natural Gas ease- ment. In this area, buildings and parking vary from 80 to 85 feet away from the eastern prop- • erty line. The proposed trail and landscaping will further mitigate impacts of the proposed development. The applicant must receive approval for the landscape plan from NSP and Northern Natural Gas Pipeline Company. The proposed landscaping and buffering is an important component of the plan and must be adhered to, to the greatest extent possible. The commercial development is located in the obvious areas for best visibility, along the frontage road. All site designs for the commercial entities appear adequate from circulation, parking, and layout perspectives. Presently, the applicant is proposing to develop two of the four commercial sites, the two northern parcels. The most northern is expected to be some type of retail warehouse type use. Lot 1, Block 2 is most likely an office use, whereby two of- fice buildings are presently proposed. Users for Lots 2 and 3, Block 2 have not been identified, although it appears that Lot 2 could accommodate a restaurant user and Lot 3 could be re- tail/service use. One of the primary concerns staff conveyed to the applicant was the strong City interest in development of the commercial uses on the site. Any residential developer for the site was told that the City would not consider reguiding the Plan and rezoning the site un- less 50 percent of the commercial property was developed. The applicant is aware of this in- terest and has indicated he will build "spec" buildings on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. To ensure the commercial uses do occur on the site, staff is recommending a condition of ap- proval that requires the two commercial uses be substantially complete before any building permits are issued for the residential portion of the project. Staff is recommending the following language, "No building permits will be issued for construction of any residential building in the development until final certificates of occupancy have been issued for at least two of the four commercial sites, up to three buildings, in the development." lamming Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 July 24, 2000 Page 3 • Rezoning The property is currently zoned B-3 and the applicant is requesting rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to permit a mixed-use development on the site. Obviously, if the City were to entertain some residential development on the property, some type of rezoning must take place. Staff can support the rezoning change because we believe it results in a better project for the site and for the surrounding existing neighborhoods. Although the City goals are to in- crease the commercial services available to residents, staff is concerned about the type of business that would be attracted to the area behind Menards. From a commercial perspective, this area is hidden; therefore it doesn't afford the visibility to customers that most commercial entities crave. Staffs concern is that the zoning may encourage commercial users that would not be complementary to the existing single family neighborhood. For example, automotive, trailer, recreational vehicles, boats/marine, and farm implement establishments for display, hire, service and sales conducted entirely within a building is a permitted use. Those activities conducted outside of the building are permitted by conditional use. Open sales lots or open storage when incidental to a principal use, such as a contractor's yard be also allowed with a conditional use permit. Adult uses are permitted within the B-3 district. Unfortunately, the de- sign and location of the Menards development has left a residual commercial strip that may only attract less desirable businesses, when considering the adjoining single family neighbor- hood. The site would have been more attractive, in total, for commercial development if the parcel had been approached more holistically and a small commercial hub created. The above potential uses illustrate some of the most unattractive uses allowed when consid- ering the existing neighborhood. Of course, the ordinance permits many uses that would be • more complementary to the residential properties, however, under the B-3 zoning there is not a guarantee of the use. If a business approached the City for approval and met all the applicable performance standards, they would be approved. Similarly, if a business approached the City for a conditional use permit and met the standards listed in the ordinance for granting of the permit, the City would be obligated to grant the permit. The rezoning to PUD permits the City to somewhat regulate the proposed uses on the remaining portion of the site dedicated for com- mercial. Staff has discussed with the City Attorney the idea of restricting outside storage, display, or sales on the site. The Attorney feels it is reasonable for the City to restrict the commercial uses from having outside activities in light of the trade-off of having a substantial portion of the site available for residential development. This restriction is a recommended condition of approval. In staffs opinion, the two greatest benefits to the City created by the PUD proposal is, one, the introduction of a more complementary use into an existing residential neighborhood than what could occur under the current zoning. The second is the ability to restrict the remaining commercial enterprises so that they, too, may co-exist more favorably with the existing single- family neighborhood and the newly created multi-family neighborhood. A rezoning map is attached as Exhibit C. Comprehensive Guide Plan The City in its recent Comprehensive Plan draft continued to guide the entire site for com- mercial land uses. In a November 12, 1999 memo to the Council regarding the Comprehensive Plan, staff noted that this parcel would remain designated for commercial in the draft plan. Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 ' July 24, 2000 Page 4 However, it was recognized that the site might be good for multi-family housing, particularly • senior housing, due to its close proximity to a commercial area and Highway 10/61. In that memo, staff noted that site would remain designated for commercial to provide the greatest control over the future uses of the site and to ensure some commercial development occurred on the property. Staff, being supportive of the current proposal, is recommending approval of reguiding the property to mixed use. However, should the Commission and Council not support the current PUD request, staff does not recommend reguiding of the site. A land use map is Exhibit D. Preliminary Plat The applicant is proposing to plat five separate lots of record. Four of the lots are dedicated for commercial development and may or may not have different ownership. The residential devel- opment is designated for one parcel and unit ownership will be as a condominium. An outlot should be added to the plat for the cul-de-sac landscape island within the public street. This island should be owned and maintained by the homeowners association for the townhouse project. The applicant should also be dedicating necessary easements over public water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer facilities. This includes a drainage easement over the pro- posed stormwater holding pond. Exhibit E is the proposed preliminary plat and Exhibit F the requested easement map. Site Plan Review As part of the site plan review, staff is reviewing the entire residential development and two of the four commercial pads. The remaining two commercial pads, the two most southern, will need to come before the City for site plan approval prior to issuance of a building permit. The • following information discusses the ordinance site plan issues and how the application ad- dresses ordinance regulations. Property Characteristics The property is irregularly shaped, in part because of the placement of the Menards develop- ment. The site has frontage along East Point Douglas Road and also is adjacent to single- family neighborhoods on the north and east. A long three-acre strip of land, the NSP/Northern Natural Gas easement located east of Menards is included in the site. The property is generally devoid of significant vegetation with the exception of two windrows of coniferous trees. These have traditionally been recognized as having the some historic signifi- cance. However, given their location and age, it is difficult to maintain them and develop the site. A portion of the windrow was removed when Menards developed. The remainder of the site is farmed or left fallow. The site is extremely flat without topographic relief. Ordinance Criteria Utilities The development will combine the use of private and public water and sanitary sewer systems. In general, the water and sewer located within the public cul-de-sac and looped within the de- velopment will be public. Additional public water mains will be required down some of the pri- vate streets, within the townhouse portion of the site, for fire access reasons. Hydrants will be Plann24ing20005tatt Repoli—eases ei'UU-u4b, LAUU-U4o, rrUU-U4I, Jruu-U41.0 PuJy , age 5 located at the most eastern end of the site, in the most north and south private drives. Public works has requested that the water main looping be revised to go around the southern 10-unit building. A portion of the sanitary sewer will also be removed as compared to the original plan. Easements must be dedicated over the portions of the system that-will be public. Because of the fire hydrants necessary for fire protection, some of the mains, while serving only a few residents, will be public. Individual public services to the units are similar to those proposed under Orrin Thompson's Lodges of Pine Summit project in the West Draw. The applicant is proposing that one sewer and one water service be brought into the building with individual lines branching off to each unit, interior of the building. Because of customer service issues, the City did not initially sup- port this proposal. However, the applicant, like the Lodges of Pine Summit project, will set up the Homeowners Association as the customer for utility purposes. In other words, the billing will be directly to the homeowners association and the association will include the utility costs within their monthly dues structure. The arrangement must be shown within the covenants for the project that will be recorded with the final plat and reviewed by staff prior to recording. Parkland Dedication and Trails The applicant is not proposing to dedicate any land to the City in lieu of parkland dedication fees. The property is designated for a small mini-park (approximately 1 to 3 acres) to be lo- cated in the northeast corner of the site. However, when the Parks Commission reviewed the proposal, they decided not to accept any land. Their feeling was that the multi-family portion of the site made provisions for some recreational features and that money for park development was a higher priority. Additionally, they clearly stated they would not take the NSP powerline easement for parkland. This is a slight departure over previous policy. Staff concurs with the Commission's approach to the NSP corridor since the property is too encumbered to be build- able and therefore should not be used as a credit against parkland dedication requirements. However, the applicant is proposing to construct a trail within the easement that will be public. A public trail easement should be dedicated to the City. The trail serves two purposes. One is from a recreational/transportation aspect. The trail will provide a connection from 91st Street to the frontage road. A small outlot exists between 8999 and 9013 — 91st Street for trail construc- tion and that connection should be made as a part of this project. The secondary benefit of the trail is that it can be used as fire access for the townhomes located in the east. Fire access for buildings such as those proposed are usually a point of discussion between the City and the developer. The trick is to balance fire protection with an interest in reducing hard surfacing and increasing green space when possible. Planning staff was reluctant to "loop" the road around the units to provide better fire access. The Fire Chief is agreeable to using the trail, so long as the trail is in close proximity to the private drives, within 10 feet, and that the trail is maintained year round. In the north, "hammer head"turn-arounds have been added again for fire/safety reasons. The landscape plan indicates that small juniper plantings will be installed at the ends of some of the private drives. Because the landscaping would impair the ability of the fire department to access the trail, they should be omitted. Likewise, the designated parking on these private drives should be removed and the trail moved closer to the driveway ends. d Panning Statt Report—Lases GPM-045, LAUU-04b, 1-ruU-U4/, JrUU-U48 gUbt 24, 2000 Page 5 located at the most eastern end of the site, in the most north and south private drives. Public works has requested that the water main looping be revised to go around the southern 10-unit • building. A portion of the sanitary sewer will also be removed as compared to the original plan. Easements must be dedicated over the portions of the system that will be public. Because of the fire hydrants necessary for fire protection, some of the mains, while serving only a few residents, will be public. Individual public services to the units are similar to those proposed under Orrin Thompson's Lodges of Pine Summit project in the West Draw. The applicant is proposing that one sewer and one water service be brought into the building with individual lines branching off to each unit, interior of the building. Because of customer service issues, the City did not initially sup- port this proposal. However, the applicant, like the Lodges of Pine Summit project, will set up the Homeowners Association as the customer for utility purposes. In other words, the billing will be directly to the homeowners association and the association will include the utility costs within their monthly dues structure. The arrangement must be shown within the covenants for the project that will be recorded with the final plat and reviewed by staff prior to recording. Parkland Dedication and Trails The applicant is not proposing to dedicate any land to the City in lieu of parkland dedication fees. The property is designated for a small mini-park (approximately 1 to 3 acres) to be lo- cated in the northeast corner of the site. However, when the Parks Commission reviewed the proposal, they decided not to accept any land. Their feeling was that the multi-family portion of the site made provisions for some recreational features and that money for park development was a higher priority. Additionally, they clearly stated they would not take the NSP powerline • easement for parkland. This is a slight departure over previous policy. Staff concurs with the Commission's approach to the NSP corridor since the property is too encumbered to be build- able and therefore should not be used as a credit against parkland dedication requirements. However, the applicant is proposing to construct a trail within the easement that will be public. A public trail easement should be dedicated to the City. The trail serves two purposes. One is from a recreational/transportation aspect. The trail will provide a connection from 91st Street to the frontage road. A small outlot exists between 8999 and 9013 — 91st Street for trail construc- tion and that connection should be made as a part of this project. The secondary benefit of the trail is that it can be used as fire access for the townhomes located in the east. Fire access for buildings such as those proposed are usually a point of discussion between the City and the developer. The trick is to balance fire protection with an interest in reducing hard surfacing and increasing green space when possible. Planning staff was reluctant to "loop" the road around the units to provide better fire access. The Fire Chief is agreeable to using the trail, so long as the trail is in close proximity to the private drives, within 10 feet, and that the trail is maintained year round. In the north, "hammer head"turn-arounds have been added again for fire/safety reasons. The landscape plan indicates that small juniper plantings will be installed at the ends of some of the private drives. Because the landscaping would impair the ability of the fire department to access the trail, they should be omitted. Likewise, the designated parking on these private drives should be removed and the trail moved closer to the driveway ends. Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 • July 24, 2000 Page 6 The subdivision ordinance dictates the park and recreation fees associated with this project. • Each of the 132 units will pay both a park dedication fee and a recreation facilities fee. The park fees for the townhouse development is $99,000 (132 x $750.00). The recreation fees for the townhomes is $19,800. However, because the applicant will be constructing the entire eastern trail, including the connection to 91st Street, staff is recommending one-half or$9,900 of the recreation fee be waived. Park dedication fees for commercial property are by ordinance set at 4 percent of the fair market value of the land at the time of subdivision approval. The ap- plicant should provide information on the land valuation of the site. The applicant is proposing a public sidewalk along the new public cul-de-sac. Staff does not see a project need for this sidewalk segment and it can be deleted. However, consistent with City policy to have sidewalks along the commercial areas, a sidewalk should be installed along East Point Douglas Road. This would be at the developer's expense. Exhibit G is a trail map and Exhibit H is an excerpt from the Parks Commission's minutes discussing the project. Traffic The functional classification for East Point Douglas Road is a minor arterial street that provides supplementary connections between principal arterials, other minor arterials, and collector streets. A portion of East Point Douglas Road, between the VFW and the delivery access drive for Target, is four lanes wide. At the Target delivery access drive, East Point Douglas Road then tapers to a three-lane road all the way to the traffic signal light by Video Update. There have been concerns expressed about the impact of additional traffic on the frontage road, especially as it relates to the curve near the Cub entrance. The Public Safety Commis- sion has held general discussions regarding this issue and staff has discussed the topic with the City Engineer. There was no particular recommendation from those discussions other than that as development occurs, the traffic issues related to the roadway should be reviewed. Un- fortunately, it does not appear that there is any easy solution to the problem. The curve is diffi- cult from a sight distance perspective and cars move quickly around the curve. However, due to the built nature of the area, the ability to realign the road is limited, unless additional land is obtained. However, it is important that the City understand the ramifications of this project upon the current traffic operations. A key question would be a comparison of the proposed use, residential and commercial versus an all commercial project. Fortunately, this is one of the last vacant parcels in the immediate area. The next large tract designated for future com- mercial development is the outdoor movie site, which is much closer to County Road 19. The traffic consultant would be hired by the City to review the project and the immediate environs with the cost being borne by the applicant. Staff is recommending that the study be completed prior to the project being reviewed by the City Council. As previously stated, existing site lines on the curve by Target could be improved somewhat with pruning of the existing landscaping. This should be completed by the applicant. Several years ago, some landscaping revisions were already completed by the eastern entrance to Target. 11111 Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 July 24, 2000 Page 7 Access • Staff has reviewed access issues associated with development of the property. There were several areas of concern centering on the commercial driveway locations proposed. Going north to south, staff had the greatest concern over the most northern curbcut. This location is along the curve of East Point Douglas Road. After reviewing the location out on the site, there are not sight distance problems created while exiting the site, the only slight concern is the sight distance for vehicles turning left into the property. Southbound on East Point Douglas has two lanes so that vehicles can continue south uninhibited, however, care should be taken to increase visibility of the left-bound vehicles. It would be helpful if some of the vegetation near the Target shopping center was trimmed back around the curve. Staff is recommending the curbcut be shifted south to align with the curbcut to the west. Staff is also recommending that Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 combine their driveways. The combined drive should be located across from the existingtruck access for Target. This is in the general u g vicinity of the proposed Lot 1 drive. Some changes to interior circulation in this area should be done so that clients accessing Lot 2 do not have to drive past the front of the office building on Lot 1. There is only one curbcut proposed for Lot 3, however, staff would entertain the ability of a shared access for Lots 3 and 4. Since the applicant does not have a user identified for either of these two parcels, it would be prudent to keep options open. Because staff is requesting a traffic study be conducted for this site, the consultant should also review the access proposal and make and recommendations. The City's recommended access proposal is shown in Exhibit I. • The City engineer expressed concern about the configuration of the public cul-de-sac because of the "dropped circle" shape. They indicated it might function more like a traffic circle than a cul-de-sac, which would cause confusion. It is recommended that the cul-de-sac be tipped north although it can still be skewed to the south. This would allow a greater setback between the project and the single-family development to the north. The public road will be built to City standards as well as the private loop road surrounding buildings 6, 7, and 14. Both of these roads will be 34 feet back of curb to back of curb. The other private roads, which spur from the loop road, will be decreased in size. For the most part, these drives serve a small number of residents and do not need to be the same size as a pub- lic road. The applicant is proposing these drive aisles be 24 feet in width, which is consistent with other townhouse projects in the community. Drainage Drainage from the site generally flows toward the ponding area located on the site. Engi- neering has reviewed the ponding area and it appears to meet water quality and rate control concerns. Water quality and quantity ponding on this site is required because of downstream concerns expressed by 3M. The proposed pond addresses some of the expressed concerns. The City, under the 1996 Surface Water Management Plan, had intended that a significant amount of drainage flow into the ravine system within 3M property. The drainage flowed out of the DNR protected wetland, near Glendenning Road. Drainage into the wetland comes from the industrial park, which is fed from the Hamlet Park wetland and ultimately the West Draw, and from the north, from a pipe located east of the subject property. Because this northern Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045,ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 . 1 , ; July 24, 2000 Page 8 system, the City's central draw, was primarily installed before water quality regulations were in • place, any addition of water quality ponding within the watershed is important. Also, due to rate control concerns, any water quantity ponds within this area are also of benefit. There are some minor issues of note regarding the design of the pond and site drainage. A 10- foot maintenance bench should be installed two feet above the normal water level for ease of access. A designated access route must be provided to the pond. The proposed pipe flared ends entering the pond should not be located next to the outlet and the number should be limited. Additionally, Engineering has requested that all emergency overflow routes and elevations be labeled. Portions of the storm sewer are considered public due to the regional nature of their use. Easements are required over some of the piping and the pond itself. Final design of the storm sewer system will occur during preparation of plans and specifications for the project. Grading The existing site is extremely flat with an average constant contour of 808 feet. The proposed grading involves excavation of the pond site, the creation of landscaping berms, the cutting of roads, and the establishment of building pad sites. The proposed elevations range from a low of 790 feet in the ponding area to a high of 818-foot elevation on the hill in the northeast cor- ner. The height of the proposed undulating perimeter berming ranges from 810 to 814 feet. In order to increase required screening, the average height of the perimeter berms should be increased by two feet. Erosion control details were provided on the proposed grading plan. • These details shall be followed accordingly, as erosion control practices are enforced during all construction projects within Cottage Grove. No grading activity will be allowed between 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and on Sundays due to the close proximity to existing residential homes. Landscaping The proposed landscaping exceeds the minimum amounts of required vegetation for all cate- gories as required by the landscaping ordinance. Due to screening and buffering requirements, the balance of coniferous trees on the site should be higher. More coniferous trees should be placed between the proposed commercial and existing and future residential uses. Some should be installed where ornamental trees are proposed and the plantings should be stag- gered to provide more of a screen. This will allow for adequate year round screening. A tree preservation/mitigation plan for the existing trees on the site was not included. The miti- gation vegetation required for tree loss (the windrows) must be added to the site in addition to the standard landscaping requirements. Staff is recommending that the majority of this addi- tional landscaping be coniferous landscaping. The plan details the residential planting areas as well as the commercial areas. A variety of Minnesota grown plants are to be utilized, including native grasses. The native grasses are proposed to be placed in clusters along the new rec- reational trailway. This is allowed by ordinance. As required by ordinance, a letter of credit shall be required in the amount of 150 percent of the landscaping estimate. This financial guarantee shall be held for one year from the date of completion of the specific landscaping. The financial guarantee shall be required to correspond with each specific phase of the project. Although the design of the landscaping plan is well placed, there are some minor changes that • Planing Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 July 24, 2000 Page 9 • will be required. The applicant shall coordinate with staff and submit a revised landscaping plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. The proposed landscaping plan is attached as Exhibit J. Some of the identified changes that will be required are listed below: • Additional coniferous trees and bushes shall be planted on the site. • Underground sprinklers shall be detailed and installed in all landscaped areas. • All private access drives that abut the single-family areas shall have a concentration of evergreen plantings that will sufficiently screen vehicle lighting. • The designated pond access bench shall not be blocked by vegetation. • The emergency access connections to the recreational trail shall not be blocked by vegetation. • The width of the linear landscape island on commercial Lot 2, Block 1 shall be in- creased to a minimum of 10 feet. • Additional building perimeter landscaping is required in the front of the commercial building on Lot 1, Block 1. • A tree preservation plan shall be submitted for the existing trees that are proposed to be removed from the site. The required mitigation plantings shall be included in the revised landscaping plan. • The pond area shall be plated with grasses that are tolerant to periodic inundations with water. • All trash enclosure areas on the commercial sites shall be screened. Architecture The proposed residential building facades are similar in design to the units located in the Bright Keys and Pine Glen developments. A variety of brick, vinyl siding and decorative windows are utilized in the exterior finish of the residential units. An elevation detail of a residential unit is attached as exhibit K. The commercial building elevation details identify a combination of brick, concrete tile metal flashing and tinted windows. Brick facade arches or false colonnades are proposed over the joint entrances to each of the tenant bays in the warehouse/showroom building and the office building. The proposed building exteriors meet the City's commercial architectural require- ments. Additional concrete tile detailing is lacking over the garage doors on the rear elevation of the office/warehouse. Revisions to the elevation shall be made prior to the submittal of a building permit application. Roof top drainage shall not be directed onto or across sidewalks. Trash enclosures on the site need to conform to City ordinance criteria Section 28-39, which requires that they be enclosed in approved enclosures. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened with approved materials. All required architectural revisions to the site shall be made prior to the submittal of a building permit application. Exhibits L and M detail the pro- posed building elevations. Samples of the exterior building materials for the project shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. Conclusion • There are three options available to the Planning Commission and City Council for disposition of the request: Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045, ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 . July 24, 2000 Page 10 Approve the request. Staff believes the applicant is proposing a reasonable development • alternative to the development that would be allowed under the existing land use plan and zoning. The plan is found to be compatible with the existing single-family neighborhoods and may be considered an improvement over the other uses that could occur on the site. The ap- plicant has addressed many of the concerns previously stated by staff and other issues can be accommodated by plan revisions or providing additional information. Continue the request. The applicant is proposing a reasonable development alternative to the development that would be allowed under the existing land use plan and zoning. However, there are too many issues unresolved under the current application and additional information is necessary. Continuance would imply general support for modifying the land use and zoning to permit some type of a mixed use project on the site, but issues such as traffic, access, land- scaping, and commercial user information should be made available before the Commission makes a decision. Deny the request. The proposed mixed use is not a reasonable land use for the site. The Commission would prefer maintaining a commercial designation over the entire site and waiting until a new user approaches the City. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the comprehensive plan amendment to allow a mixed use de- velopment; a zoning amendment to change the zoning from B-3, General Business, to PUD, • Planned Unit Development; a preliminary plat for 132 residential units and 4 commercial lots; and a site plan review, subject to the conditions listed below: 1. No building permits will be issued for construction of any residential building in the devel- opment until final certificates of occupancy have been issued for at least two of the four commercial sites in the development. 2. Exterior storage, display, and sales of materials and/or merchandise for the four commercial parcels is prohibited. 3. The landscape island in the center of the proposed cul-de-sac shall be shown on the final plat as an outlot and the Homeowner's Association must retain ownership and maintenance responsibilities of this outlot. 4. A site plan review and conditional use permit (if required by City Ordinances) must be filed with the City for review and approval for Lots 2 and 3, Block 2 prior to issuance of building permits for those sites. Permitted and conditional uses for the commercial sites will be based upon the B-2, Retail Business, zoning district permitted and conditional uses. 5. The applicant shall modify the landscape plan and irrigation plan to address concerns noted in the staff report prior to issuance of a building permit. A tree preservation and mitigation plan must be incorporated into the final landscape detailing. The applicant must . PI'ant?ing Staff Report—Cases CP00-045,ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 July 24, 2000 Page 11 • submit a letter of credit for 150 percent of the landscape cost. This financial guarantee shall be held for one year from the date of completion of the landscaping. 6. A traffic study must be conducted addressing access and traffic interior to the site and along East Point Douglas Road prior to review by the City Council. The applicant will pay the cost of the traffic study which will be contracted by the City. 7. The developer is responsible in the cost of constructing a 10-foot wide bituminous trail along the east side of the residential phase and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the commercial parcels fronting along East Point Douglas Road. Construction of the trail will occur prior issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the ninth building in the residential development. Sidewalk construction will occur prior to issuance a certificate of occupancy on the second commercial property designated for development. 8. The Homeowners Association is responsible for maintaining the 10-foot wide trail located along the east side of the project site and removing all debris and snow from it. This trail is designed as an emergency route. 9. Designated parking spaces at the east end of the private access drive located north of Building 9, south of Buildings 10, 11, and 13 shall be eliminated. A "NO PARKING" sign shall be installed at the end of these drives and the Homeowners Association is responsible to remove snow between the private access drive and the ten-foot bituminous trail (emer- gency vehicle route). 10.Stockpiling an unreasonable amount of snow anywhere on the site is prohibited. The Homeowners Association shall make arrangements to haul away excess accumulation of snow on the site. 11.Public utility easements and drainage easements shall be platted over all public utilities as recommended by the Public Works Department and City Engineer prior to final plat approval by the City Council. 12.The five-foot wide strip of land fronting along the Menards property shall be shown on the final plat as dedicated public right-of-way. 13.The applicant shall modify the proposed access points based upon the recommendation of the City and the results of the traffic study prior to review by the City Council. 14.The applicant provide trash enclosures that conform to Section 28-29 of the ordinance. 15.The applicant shall submit exterior building materials samples to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 16.The applicant shall pay a park dedication fee of$99,000 and a recreation fee of$19,800. • The applicant shall also pay 4 percent of the fair market value of the land designated for commercial development prior to release of the final plat. • j ; Planning Staff Report—Cases CP00-045,ZA00-046, PP00-047, SP00-048 July 24, 2000 Page 12 17.The applicant submit the homeowners association covenants for staff review and approval prior to release of the final plat. 18.The applicant shall comply with all appropriate grading and erosion control measures. Site grading of the site is limited to Monday through Saturday from 7:00am to 8:00pm. 19.The applicant shall trim vegetation along East Point Douglas Road along the curve to increase sight distances on the road. 20.The applicant shall submit a sign package for the commercial and residential components of the site prior to issuance of a building permit for the site. The residential phase shall have monument sign that will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. The commercial development will have a sign package that will be complementary to each other and will be used for future issuance of building permits. 21.The applicant shall obtain approval from the two utility companies to place landscaping as • proposed within their easements. Proof of approval shall be prior to release of the final plat. Minor modifications to the plan are acceptable, however, substantial revisions to the plan will require review and approval by the City Council. Prepared by: 411 Kim Lindquist, AICP Community Development Director Attachments: Exhibit A— Site plan Exhibit B —Applicant's narrative Exhibit C —Zoning Map Exhibit D — Land use map Exhibit E — Preliminary plat Exhibit F — Public easement map Exhibit G —Trailway map Exhibit H — Parks Commission minutes Exhibit I —Access location map Exhibit J — Landscaping map Exhibit K— Residential building elevation Exhibit L — Commercial building elevation 1 Exhibit M — Commercial building elevation 2 • . ' l, 1 • I , , 1 L-.. 1 EXHIBIT A SITE PLAN -' ...1 i/.---.1 1 I 1 1 .------', 1 '-------I .-, ....I—„, 1 —1— ,•-------1, — •'1 — 1------• •410, \ 1 i 45 ----_-_ • ..1q 5 ! ;'Ser15'50".•:(D.Etg) 11 ..- '112 91'(DCLID) .2 il ., ii ,4 II ., ,i,. : i 5 _, \ : : „ ,-, 1 1 va• 4i I '''-';34E- ..,' S . ..:L II ", - -(1-, Off ;; ! iir c) !j53-' 11 '! 1 I •. i --i 0 (TIM , 1 • . ia-,-- ....r-•-, • .., (---; --L: __,I.h 1 i . .: , ,, a . • i . , ,, , I ' " . : i -:,-5-- •,• I I, si , 1 [ - ' ) , ----c •,, ---_, r ril il )•• 1 1. t•t: 1:71...„7,_1 II ,4 ' A.--- ---------''-'e------. r Ln ..... , ' --- (rr - r • 1 j7 — -1 '• 1 '..... _..,_; `, - • NM ! -11 4: , : . 1 7-3" 1 1 HI,Ill p i —,„„ r,„ , ,,,_:__—___ , I. : 4 . .-----`1 L .F. I • --, , -*- - .1( i 1 4.... . • • , • --- • is 1 r , , ...., . ;!, J -4.A----,-- ---,—A-.-..---.----..---L---—-"..---4,-::-----"--, `-s•F=•-' 1 -- - — ;-.7 !: ..,..:.- • /.9 0 ...._ '; , mg____.no I ,;. . ! ili! I ) _ D c•-• ---t. I ..._i . •• --- - •• t: \- f..-. .., L \c\ IA I ' ?_____,71,. .. 1 1 III__L,_h jit I 1\„,____..----.• /., ------. .,. / ww-.-,.. i -....... .,< C.11 i 1 . • I , .0 I -2!•-9‘. 1 sl...:_1--,) 1 Isr 11 Ili 1-L.....- - 6 2 • I .42.,..),'\ li' : ' L . 11 0 I I I I MU I= ' I II ;L' I • i 8,, 4 , ct. 1,........1 I,i \ i 1 0' ! -.., (\!,1 I ..., , I ' . . . ;: I ...J i . , ! i . . • mi-1 ----- - -- \.1, • .1 y---,,,,„! , • 1 _. _.. \\ 1 I ' , i • ' % .. „ t - , r .., ' ,,,,., \ ., , I , . _ — ° '1 1/ '' / ,J3 .11(:' : el . . • ob ,s,, „ ••‘ / ---4,-,,:„.._____-- ,. f . , ,,, . ''- .54-- ,,,, a \ - — ,-:-: is- 1 ! / 11U i 1 / • • / • . .-,.., 1 -- ,, / •. • , \ ,./ !-,'-, / .------ • // 7 -. , . 0,- ,J,, --„/ .....[, ,.• _ ,. .. /I///,,,, ,/ ,c.. ' / •-• ,, -. ., / , • ___ , ,,, % /.4./ I v / .4 „ .'• • • •••\• V;7;"?.. \ /' f . . d'D• ( 7\ '''' L- 1,7 /' ''-, .` • :/"4,' / . ,.„ , 0• \ ,, .. . ,.. r -. ,.., , k...) '''=`,,,,s,.... '',,,, .z., . / I '.1 •.. --. ''',-• -\/ AA I 11 , ;, 10- • -,. •6- ..• e -- .. 14,1 `... ..7c., . ; 1 1 i i a '. ,.. /Y/6-1, . 779 ':: s•-., 1 li ' , 1 .. ..-:,.. "/Afr .., '-- , ..,..) -3 %ow ••••••• ..7)( >- " 7:.2. - ' ''' = '• , '\ Vp- . ,,. , ! -,-. •- r ": o .. -• • --. ;: .E. .. .... .. ,,,, -... .,.•-• ,,,,,, r 2 ..... . .... — „.__• i5i iRIN li* 2-.2 X^. If, :=!iiill§k is ri I RIP /4' go 0. 1.9 ti an 4,3 fillIr r4 iro p c . il t.i.-1-I-i••I.•it;t ! li g.11 { • 0 I , iF.' ,I.L.,_j I ! 4 . .t.,...,..4 Z l AO AAA ; "3 IA -. -, n i i 4 A ; L• i , s • 1 i 14 r•,-- i' . Ai 1!.'1 i :.. . — A ------- - JUN-30-00 FR I 03 :04 PM -- P ©` NARRATIVE . u Narrative: Schermer site The Schermer Site is a parcel of property near the intersection of Highway 61 and Jamica Avenue South . Originally the property was shaped with the northeast and northwest corners having right angles, the southwest corner having an angle of about 132 degrees and the southeast corner an angle of about 58 degrees. Thus making a long west property line and a short east property line. Menards has developed a retail facility on the southwest corner. 5th Street Ventures has purchased and has submitted plans for the development of the remaining 28.96 acreas. The site is now bounded on all sides with developed property. On the north and west sides of the property are single family residence. The west edge of the property contains a utility easement which runs the full length of the property line and is 75 feet wide. This seperates the residence on the western from the Menards property and will be a part of the setback on this development. A 30 foot wide city easement connects this property through the residence to 91st street south. To the east across Point Douglas Road East (Islay Avenue) isa retail developement containing a Target Store and many small retail and food establishments. The back side of the development faces this property. SCHARMER • The remaining side of the property fronts on Point RES SITE Douglas Road East as the frontage road to Highway 61. The property is zoned for 83 general business. Such zoning ''' would permit development of various types including: g TARGET quasi-industrial and wholesale enterprises, auto, R.V., N, boat/marine establishments for display, service sales and MENARD repair within a building along with all permitted uses 4>y�- within the 81 and 82 retail business development. Sth Street 5s o Ventures has proposed a rezoning of the property to a mixed E cc s? use developement. This proposal would provide a transition 5 from the single family property on the north and west with an approximately 19 acre developement of medium density owner occupied townhomes_ The property along Point Douglas Road East would remain a commercial development and 5th Street Ventures has proposed a combination of retail/showroom, small office, retail and possibly a restaurant on this portion of the developement. Construction is anticipated to begin as soon as city approval is given. Site grading will begin as soon as arrangements can be completed after city approval. The roadway excavation will begin and the infrastructure (utilities) will proceed as quickly as can be arranged and will continue as long as possible until winter weather stops progress. The residential units are expected to begin construction on November 1, 2000 and proceed as weather permits. The commercial sites will be ready for permits upon approval of the project by the city. They will begin construction with the site grading and roadway work and be available for business off of Point Douglas Road East as soon as possible. • EXHIBIT B _________ ZONING MAP • - � R5 E1l / NA4 1.--.17; ---64 . r Mb.. ' , ! Iprilic , (4 '-' ' I Et3 111 L.,,AvipPow- , . \ .... ,b 1 , 1 : 2 _ EXISTING ZONING 0 i ___ 41 R5 1,11, : j \....." 1.1 zz..1 .! .. r MIN a.. -- PUDI � ! t IP_ _ imN, * eg (\va.w. PROPOSED ZONING 0 EXHIBIT C • : • f r • LAND USE MAP •t— , ,e Grove IMiip "��am=inwEN .1., .. rhenseve Pla a ��'• ..r ' I .' - •'- �� 2020 �i` jai w? Ap �` e rordt\_,.:• -• , ''::.1.47- :71‘ti 'il*I:iri I' iia;-111011Eall Cli= 11161111-1 ' , _ , WilullikEll;.._____ :7.:„.7.,... . ....; : .,._. .., N ;LI. If IN Iii a :-?=f-'f:f:7:::fff.. 5.1"—::1:..."?'- .- '"'' -'1- MEMIEr'ir-' -' ft.MM. _::::;;;:: ::4.-7---4i*g--4e'V -:-.' 41446 '/1 Mkir::..: ::.';'' . 4,E _ > IN:I '.. � .�._gi ,�. •.`:`:^~ •vim f.� -----... — -....,,.-.,, - - .._ _.- .-...-- . I, •- :•.; : ,1.•-, .,,'..Le•.,:.--A,---------- --.:- ...;--_,.1:•i: '..-,..--...--.-..;--z-,.: --,-,• .---:.:t- . --5,-.::: •. - - ,:1,1:;;,•,-,,.±.,i.'.••: :.,...:,-:: EXISTING LAND USE • ;ri .1t. '�� 1 , ,t Grove f .. A :: .. 4,4174.7.0' 11.11F ;hensive Pla ' �� :pril i . 911 r 1 . 2020 . vAiri is YIN �1j 'A, ® r 11161) N Ark-104_3: ''''' ' f. 44 lr a.: n1 Vliftkit C: . _ mitx.10 5=o - Ism _ Nlit-4-2: Ems :--- ,.-,:. N , _ . N . firm _ 1.ft--C___, ,-,1, it,,,...=:„ i _ _ ....:: ...:, #E .:.:.----....„--- ,..... -...• ., . ,,,, , ,. _ .-•• li. nt-,....,,,,,,,,,.,.-,,-..„..„..... „....-1,,,..N`N--... - - -14 PROPOSED LAND USE • EXHIBIT D fa Pt' ' ! . PRELIMINARY PLAT '. I LJ I 1 LJ I I I 1 ,-� .,-- 1 , — , _____ �' • .0_, 1 4, I - ( I I 1 sw•,.yo'.kacEo', i ',ntsl mrsD; .3 I !• . p� I I I I I I i I I I I '. �fF 1 } i 'siI L..tr •ilil }�— :l I I ri �J t�it IT. 11 ' --I i _ t" 11 _ I, d).1 n.... -- ! rr Ot l 1 it . 1 91 � rl 1` I I .1 ell 1 , .,-- -1-1 IL - // ":-:- ' ��' \ II: , `\ C -i- iL ` ti ;', -`____ isi - , lir x. 1 „ ,:i MI r'.\--ia I Ell - moil- 1, -' i • 01 ..='1 °.'"q‘)4_l.. I I g r'___ ' , , 1,=L-,-., „ • /7 ,.., , .„ ,, . , lir , , , „, ,. ,.,...•_••• ,___. •,,,•,. c.. . \ _4 , e�I , , ' , J . ' 0 _. Lo' , ;g ‘A. *,/,',:// ' - • lc.° ''' '4."'"Nrc...' -,---,.. -("4:":",.... I v�f r ' I 11 ~ • / �4 . . .. • ', ilii so. / ,' r i/i7 .. , , ice{ -) !,' S� Cv/ (;-z.„, / /.j r A \�--,„ \:,c., � // // /~ C 4'.1 4 -'-.:\ , / // / 7 ''.. ,/ / ' , C iii1 / ------ teacy ' 4`•`:) � CI! ° /o rJ - ,"11 1'-ice '— 0 ,,, ,,7 ^,c., ?' A f ft c Iffdllaor..a F TAIe I°I:I^ req t ti a xa i= ! 11' 1 1 I»I 1 c 1S +€i A a� IS Iw .I:121y ->"1 a is ''-:p I �1 qa 1 • 15 2 S, 1 - , y,. t f° A$ i 2 •aa s _''l 4._ ry '7- i 11 I T �$ . = EXHIBITE 4 , gti"� t 9 3 a S . Y , PUBLIC EASEMENT MAP -. 1 , , it :411IS 1+ i1R�l;IIIL 7 1I r 1/ _, = — III I t ill i i 1 - 111145.115114',. -1 L ::' ri Etiff au I . .� , , Ili . • r' \ C iI i1 4-5...,00 \ r . �( rile . '1 ,ter W • • �IN 17,1... au1� I I. • I[-II caoil ■ Y a"a a `-k- ---- I II4 �1 L� ' I � • 1, - - r r! . ' Ar/(/, g; # t le / li ::. I 001 . sio,thi.ri qt ' I ./. -.,..,,. _____ — -.\ - / ..„ d // / '464104stkitti9 . . ___0 /i '',,,,,. , ' \\%. i In 0f f \\f IIPApyr = . ., -- T, 1 ---• \ / `` \\f!P ' /7„. l'ii . 7 'c , •0=1. �t:l. \`\�.,., \ 'V., /1I Mil .1g; ‹. -'2., / fiN f,� ti� sem, < r -9 iill / cia 6/ -..N, z .`` 0 il • s • ;if I 1 eiuI6 ag ai W1 it T Al p� 48- G ? €ax € p III a 9 if a€ €:ag 11 J = PFF� lig • 6 1 1:6 t 3; Sap s.Ix: XI' Wig" r = --� .1, a. a ' .f o E A s • + E `I �f T liEed yt 71 O L;4 I A[ �i F • I t�i, 71T = 1i g€F aiiii J21 i .' • X I a * fa IS g ""112 s a / 7 __ '�1 i k 1 I 3, 8 o x$1€f-`ai I a _a® T i s a a" a € "a ilia -1 ►T C 1 a a # d as€ l gi i¢ _ r EXHIBIT F a • a € ` r .. el =1 t "i 7 TRAILWAY MAP • 1.-_-JL...._.1\ I I J I IL...._.1 ; I I I 'n-'1 �� .. — —I I , —I— i — i .� I : I - I , ;•prrm.;aao, a:..rlpu1 I :I I j�. --- - • 1111 \ S. --.---.-,..-S-...-....__r_ �� giiII 1! ' r , • ES 1 Z 1� ` i i 1 a- L.. C r-` _ j I —1......77:!-- ";,' r . I .may _'" ( ,' ►i.,{ a II i } r1 Ila ---,:,_- �!� -4L mo — �— �' m.• -` , . c t ..-1 i • �.-.J .,p.'..-.- -2--------- --_�3— -T !I J �' Uf. - . ' 7 \ • E ' 1/1!iiiili 11. r MUNI ; o - �11 o 1i w �1 i ! - V • • mos d . . . 1.. ,, m IBCoJ m / n _ $1 •Oc',.%, (Pe,' . V/////////// 't / c:', i • ,. e. 24:,‘, ,... / / „ „,‘„,.. c` -_- U efe ,,,.,,, ....„,•!..(//7/7 1!F- 'Q; /' -„,As.„-,s e ja v :.•.•ol*. E`tF S ...,..4-4. . F Iii /'- r-. Fg • !' :'l r"fie, • -.- ,.i S I '4,°,o ') it ,\ -). i, >,.. i (� a ,�.,�, �,� .y. -''- ff i 6 sap g 18 5�6 I E OE Ili alley i i :ii is i ? 0 a "�� : Ie��i;i. _Ib '1 �, I I I • # ,di'j ti c • `E % cl:1. :i i -4 !y otf •!�!`'-I` I k ;• pe, 1 1 1 n R g: . i a C .0 IJ n �JI• • - a i ; psi • 2 }�---� b' i �I X --! utN,.�. REF �7.T 1 ill ° '�S €E A = �Iir g� L i py I ri- -,,a, 1 l� ° 7 if F% p :.7, ; i_ I !I_: iEXHIBIT G ' =• °a 11 f Cq -= i ---- .a I d a -1 Parks Commission Minutes PARKS COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2000 A. Camels Hump Scenic Overlook Rob- ogel was in attendance at the meeting t• - iew and discuss the importan - - acquisition of additional lands. • •roperties surrounding the Camels Hump • -•erty currently under •wnership of the City. He also shared with the Co ' sion thoug •n the cultural and historical interpretation values of the property. • • fission also reviewed a memorandum from Kim Lindquist, Community De - -• - t Director, which provided an update on current negotiations • - ,een the •rospective developers and property owners in the a- _ -d area and possible - - elopment alternatives. Staff stated that he wou • --p the Commission updated • •e status of any land acquisit- , as it becomes known. Commission Ch- heney stated that design ass' - ce may be available through the Department of • . ' ulture and ussions should take place regarding this possibility with C• -•'ssioner Hempel. B. Fifth Street Ventures • Mr. Phillip Johnson was in attendance and presented information regarding development plans for property located north of Menards. The plan highlighted a number of off-road trails and a small recreation/open space area in the plat. He also highlighted a proposed trail within the powerline easement corridor. Staff presented to the Commission copies of the 1992 and 2020 proposed Comprehensive Plans that identified possible need for a small mini park in the northeast corner of the proposed development area. The Commission discussed at length the need for trails and a neighborhood mini park in the area. They supported the idea of creating a connection to the residential property to the north via an existing 20-foot easement. They also felt that it would be in the City's best interest to accept cash in lieu of land to develop other future neighborhood parks planned for this area rather than creating a small mini park in this development at this time. This was driven in part by the fact that the developer is proposing to create and install park amenities within the development to serve resident needs. COUNCIL NOTE: Motion by Steve Morse that the City accept cash in lieu of land dedication as the result of the platting of the subdivision known as the 5th Street Ventures Preliminary Plat and.that no park land dedication credit be provided the developer for properties within the NSP Corridor. Motion seconded by Randall Briese. Motion carried viva voce. . EXHIBIT H • + " ACCESS LOCATION MAP ismommems • 'jiff \ , I II f _ l sir,ea■,.farm) I "st.n'(oa9) ;_ t I��I ;+.; ._„-- ! <� i c: I �, II, i J.-1. •H_T,,,,,,...___ ! . c t i} 1 —1 is r . _ ,. V IN -,...s- ► lid rç;- I — . L : .fr7jj j Z L 1�• , i i ' ' ll1 ■ 1a I - o. --��-- 1 .▪\""I 1 .-: ig r _ 1 = _ it I lis i 44 � t � I I L I I ';"tel a i ' ) _ l m • r ,I tau / - \T 71.4 ..r� I / , • II t 1 // I '23 ir; //1 *k ; ') / f.rya �� /G//� ' y �;\ 1 • , '',1..i / / ' /7 -•••„., , 41 \\ i�,,^' \yU 1 ! /� ISI ,, . .. r 17, I jjqi /V•'v I irp iy I ` - - qr ▪ , `mow'// / \ ``_ '��-''- 4 I y CI '7g o Cs; poi-1 i3 1111!r Is 1-Ise i li IES P et . . 4 E a i a IS Z r $ I. fk' ; dee • -- ` - �.k F a l _i_ s .s:c_ F as Ni F a' X -- u raeY-=* & niE-Sa= 3 PF r^ 11 � ' ,,. .� ',{'1� `R fi R ae _ EXHIBIT I ► :it t '; ial I P' LANDSCAPE MAP --•:.:.'-.-s;, .1 - 4,01_,,,, 1 " - ;±--.A.,,,,.:.k ‘,. .-...0.. ,".., ':•4:-•;:".• -t; *....N•10,...,,,,!1„0,14:.,.4,A,.;-4,.:..., -.<.,,..4<.*:_:,..„;: „.:,:---::::1-7,77 ,,:..-„Tm'f;:'_31'"1-•,-.*A7.:,!•''.,,i,.Tt.' .7 ;k........17. .,.,•••;. • :'',.." . :Ai:i• .i.27.1-.1-.--k4t.: . - :: .- .:-t,i 3.4- : •; '::-.';:::'"'iti :: : ...;,H L,;,•.•,.. !,,, -*too.•:, ',.‘7,-., .., o, -, -:::,.;1 - .•-,,::; .. .-iti:.... •:.;t$V.',v'---:; ,.... ..>:-.t.-ii ••••'.•.;.,. 41 .;!!.;-.i :.••.;..'...... : ''. ,:.-..'Mi§5:::. .- .,..,' ,,,•- f,inaidia'.kI., ••• .:,... . '„h 7• : . . Q ,,i i- ••,:x . •;.: ,,,,i,*0,,,:! !„,-,,..i,:, .•,* i !,:c:i-'t.i;:i' 1 - 7'':4,41.1.7'.i- -...4.0,4 .-4:7;,..7,,,t, ,.....•:.....7.!':• -; -.:.:•:ii,,..:.g5,,„ .. ...;,--:45,,,, .,:w,, •,....:.,0' '::•';-:stirA. ..- ',..- -.:.,,.;:•':7`.7,--• '..7,,::.•P,:, .: 7 :: i ,... ..'''..; '.... ',4',,,,e4.*J.:::::::: ,',•.,' - • ,‘ E ; L 1 • r • ': -- '-',N$•>-•,., 1 ri*V-.-:;.:;,:t11".,''''•:?.,. - . ' ''!i!'.;:<-i •:.'77,.IL t ',.. -,.-. :., :i ,_ !,,- . ,:iJ!thwe/:-., ,:::-..-.:...i. .::::, -r.i-. ,:,-,:.:,.,,,;:-;.:-;,1,s,:,-,:•..,-;:,y:::1.- - 7 , ; ik:4:--,.. . ',.:y 4,- ..),---, .4,..... .::„..„:,,I.,,,,;,7„„,:,::iv,„t;,;.::.•,- :.',.. ...:- •-:,•t "'. „.....i '•;t:::-.•".-• ',.,s, -:-0P::.:*:., : 400%:':-.,1);?,•:i ',F :.,•,:1,.:• ,.•.:.;, '". , . .,,,.:.t 4:4,";..:',":40;t2;=:: .' :::f. .-.:.* •,,;:-;.i,.*-:', .:. ... 2". .• :••••;,::":• ,,'';',3,..• -•,....i.,.*:1":•• -....". "-:'"':•. '''...-;- :::"..--'''.:'..q,;,... - .,'.:k,".;:4,-., '•-,•,.'--;...':.:"-,..:. ,.;.J",,:-....:::,.".:, "" .,:',,•',".:.•;•:-.:::::,i.'....i,'"'" --:,..;::..•:,r;rAii4v;,-'" -;:.'„i- ,-.: :,. '4.4,i:'.-::'-„ -•::', • ...:..::::•_!.'.,Ini •"' ":--...":. 1 ... • '; . .._.'''•'.'.: ''....,:-: :,.:',"&:!`Ac7::!'."''.--'' ..:.",.,.:',-,.-:;':. .,...,-.,,,.:.,': ;::' '. Zii'.1.::: ('fi':'-illf.*.e.:.,"*.1t7 •E:: ;,i• :- :°<•'-e''''P- !`r 7,..:*;!.. ..,,,.,.•'.•-:•: •::4...1'.:..:-z,-4'. ',.e..- ,....:-..-' -'-----.-. -...:.4t:.:In:::::i1:..; '-ii, '.'.:': •:i::::,,i•!'" :-.. ":-.,.. . ,:••-..-,.;• •.:::4•:!.,-,..2:.,-;d ..••. '• -. • ..,"-- •x:•:-:0;: ]i::'::•:i4::..: •::, '..!..":,...•'::1".;:::,:--i -,If••:::,•;...''2. •::::•i::4::::.'s • .i( .1'. _. • , . :_., ,,,i,' ...---,..-.,..--:-,-..-... 77;-:.7,,,.-- ..„:.:'..--.,:,;.--- *,,,,....-i4x ;.. k:4,440-1:"5.::.t. ;:::•..':'':"....".:*?..,1 .t-r.-,,n---.... ,.,,- t''''.1!::''';:I- ;.••,!.t i . ','ff 1 '-'"---7Zir---- ''':a.--':'4- -:---- --".,--•;'::: :A,','-'.oa._-7"-•- .'",?.. ',.•.-1-':.;. ' .- •1 -,...,,i',.7:k<...-41;,;4A":;,.4-.-- ../..."....:,:-,:,',','--',-;-.-7...:,44.,,I., ' Ili ::.:-A` :',--. . - - 0.._-..: .:.:1a, •,:.:. ',',--„0.-"' ' ••.„ . 1,:.::.,- ,.!,.,•••r•: .-4;,,.. . "-,..-',211;;,,,,:4,;:4;,":g •.:".•,.-.:.•::: •-•,,•:::1;t:-...1— :"1. . - '':' '. '''''-'' ' .--..,„,„„,--• ,,:., , •••:. •,-.,... :.-s.tt'11...„::,••,. v••••%•:-.:,.:::h:, 1. ..,••,, k...:,.,!.z.;:., ft', ,,:i.• !is ,-',',:ii'„1, ., : -'-'-'.I:. . .'.'''.::,:. , Jerl '? ,-'''-. ''.•'•..: .';.'.--','-',;.::4- .1.1•4= ,..:-.::i-'!:-.:,•,•••,-,. IA,„.„;.:- .:. -'.• ..:';..44, , .V.4:::"..•4.i •&:0!':..----T-:' . .-.1 '''A .'.'.'.;-:...- ... . '''.`:',74; ‘,....'1N:: '4;,::,..P.7.440:;,'' >.- 14: •:1 ..i-'',,'I''',... .. -0.:'• '...!..,.;;.7. ._...-- ,..,,,,. •-'. ''Zt, ;:•::; :'. ' 1. .1. 'ill::',4k'r 4:1':''''''',:-:;i7,,,i'.- .77".....'''.. . ..,:;.r.A., !,i:,•'?",r.ig!‘-t.71 :7:it ;•Et•••'.,.,:.'`.t ,;: .;":,,..... .. -::...., -i;,::.f<1 '..,!57N',.. .1„ .1 -°:. r".".::::?-7,'.t:,1-'.-,-:-,...,:: ::... .." '.:7:•:',4 . -..,;.,::::.`. '-,,,..„.8,15:,],''' •',. i 1, . :::::':,,.,.'.. ',• '',F ,.:..<::,',...'•-•,, :...'.:.N,H:::- .::,11 ..'. , _ , . . N, :i '.a.,:k..:.„,!'t:::::::':'.:• ,:,:,: :..:..:„'It:r.-.;.•;3••V4,:lta'',.. :.'''',",i....4 i,.,.7TeMPZ-,?..,':, !:. ,,:i::.';'.-'''• : - ..,'. ':"'''' '':-,'...°".'..,:Vi.%--.----- i.:. • ..:. 1 . 11,:;,.. ::S.'•14::,4. ,., r---1' i'''-' '''•q**.,:i..:• „,..:'s.'....7.:•4,1440S„'*??.:,-.•:•....13 . .-;:M,::: • : ',..'''',-.A..`'.':'.." '''' -::''''..!.,4•'''::: !.,F•V-;,•'..::;''.•'•:.!..;: 1.,<;;:.i.;:!, it. ...:,::,...:::,: . ).;i:1, 2•,:,....,,,,-.,,:i ..4ii,.1141 ,.. . . . .. :• ..:;.:.,::::.:::::,....,,,,..::,:.. '.:"--'-'• c.:77.',4:;'-;::•.. rtr'....:41...:.,,,:;, •.:w.,•?,."••:" .'. - ' ' ' • - :T:'-',,s-,'',.; :i.,'':7l.-S:,! ::•„. '-:.-:-•:.."..•;..:••,.,:;;;17.77.•.„,•,.-':-*il.:.-•:::E.:•:-::;;;';',p:J.1 I ,,,:".' gtt • . • . ....• .,„ •;,,'=.4...,-;ttN_"., ,,,,,,,-,;-•.;.:w*A-4;., „:„:... :;;,...7.:''.'":.:11.; , . L. .•, ..: - *.t1;',4":,.,;*• :;;?..;.• /"Ati..-4k,"....,!;'!,.,;,;.!::::...•.: , ,,, , •:: .,,,,„ .„,.. - -• •: . ,.. -•"" t•• :-..:, :::=!•'A!::t1 :• '' :.•• *-:•''' (4:,> .........:;J:::1•1',;"1:. • 1 -t:::`:,--.;;;:l • 1,-,..••:.:-....-•. •"f.:. ,,-no-v ,,,,,:r:•. •t<."•llAik"••••.:4„,..:. -.„.., •:•,..,. -7-- i .. ''.*:-.: :: :,-,4.., 't::.t.; !:::. • •-•*-",,:../"-••••••.... •I• - 1 •. I i ! 14:::::;.:!..*::::- .7A::,:".*:',,:i.• :-:0.,:;.M1Mg.,;;;""i,";,i;, ;•:: . -t ,?;?•,: t t 1, ':' ,';',':;.,:-.• - "..:..'":..;.::::: :-::',.:,aa:2101P9'. : '4.*:1•*'..t/. ...:?. ::::.„. ..... , . : :t.: ,,i( if.••• ..P.•••••••••••••• 1 i,1 •. i •,-:' • . .. ;.•,, •-•-•• -:,.., .:: 4;..:',.,.. • -........'"':„. .:::''..,.,:;.-..,.. ..:,":. t . = .... ..: -....:'''ti' - . 3,:4::::*>,-.-•ii • ',.PiN..,.:::,:;.,i .. .,....,.... . ••':'-• :41'.!,,,,-t:M;:' .;,.4- •-• ; ,•••• :,- , I 14'•,,';;.",':-,•,,, ,14-,3i ,:o.i-• r/ V'i• if . .4,'•,,. .,;,,,,tNk..„ . ],i, •,.i .; . .,..... . .• - • • i -••;1,.{::. ........7 . _ 1 .:,,1:.•,' _ • :.1,.-i.i.,: , • . .• .- ' . . . . 5 i 1 ,.„„:.'...... %, ..-...,, 21 I A .4 t7 ;;.•!:-,,' '-'4 *.' --•,;,,•_...„,, .:,1,l.!.,..: #1, , — • ,,,,i, :, ..,.7., ,—, ..,.. -.'• ; ot., , ,...‘,,,,, 5T. .!', k :. .. s; , •'• :-. t 5t •••,... . .,;. . '..,• ,, :,i • ,i • ---:; ., re i . -,•,:,•,,:.\-;.7.., :,....4;;;;••• •:ta-...tt:,t-t,.. r, ......, ' ;.. .i 7 -,..,-.. • .:... ••:,: • •;:.r.: • ,i-• : :-,: : ,.r . • 1 ,,,,-7. ....N.:;., . t - f..7. a I ,-.0. .,; .i.',..t,'• ., ,,,,•• , , ,...:,. ., • - . ,, •••,..-N,„ ,..-,•,,,,,• ' i ' 'A-,;:t • .; , . • i....1t ;• !:1/•'' ' ' !, ',!t!t•Mit i; €1 itt!:i r.PR!! l ••,.. . t ! -N,.*:...-7•;-•',11:::::1 8.,,-..,.....4, 1-i ii!. i !:!I:ill I ..... ,s'-`,•ii., ,....1.:..) I !:' :it ! r ;'gi• vi., .•:,•,, .....,,,,,i r'l = o ,,:.r,,i,r,',.-•:•3-•,7, 1 1 ' I' ; ,i,E:. Z ! ,.*. ! ; :-; •••4 :• t,: r. t., Ittiri:.4. 0•;' •" g i 4- !i Z-'.;,: i• i.i".."-4-r'.:',.*1..);'-', ..'•'- Ir., I nxt ..< * , ,- i i i 3.'1. * i''° -= t .<!--:-' = kA''iltiii.Z T:' P- 'f•04.Y4 ;' I t '1';ilik-it i 1 ",7' .,,.":"....: i i,:'•••,-•' ''.7.4..::. r _, •-, i t•v.I,• il1,1il,...blT1."It -„fifiI; :1-1 .'i!;.- 1-li4p.•".y.f::;.1 it_;.; :. tiit„i;•:t:41•'• .a..:- -,,- .:, ','.ri., 7 .... ":.: ;, :i.. .i:i.,•;'•. ...,;= '..•V•:. :, i q il t• i '! ;" ..! !-'4 7 1 it '0 .i• ''. : I Li! i ! If i il i ! i ; 3 ;P ' .:3'' t.-- i i'. g 'I;i i4 u IL ;.' i:4:z. ''-'•* ;': I ft .":.:i" ,7;.:.*t1; 0 1 rz: i .1 ''''.;;; i ; '! 1 .1 ';'. ' ',:, i '' ',1i ;•.!i• .0 ',., :;'.i, ,;*: ", ii"- !:P1 1•:' ,' H!. 'i• ::: ;:;!t:-*-27. .•:•;... i ;: '-... - :''''• .,:e, ;'• ', !T -*?1 ..; ':- ;: i*:;? ;,.;,*,.:;:-, 1 *; i.-.,,,t.:.-4 t"':•i..', -':-...,;:::",. '•: 1 ..i f. : :;.f?.. ' *,,' ,! ; :`, ...;.. 74 ! ; '': '''• f.--:•Z , :.- ;•J • tz ,.,;.• ,:••. ! 7 7... '-;- :" ,,__________, i ::i -: ,••••. :: :', - .: .:,• 1 :, .fI .2 .i t .:. .--• ,. T, . •.: , --. .',•• , :". • , .. -,••7. i - ' '1. '•, -. t :.. C, i ; :: : ' , 1 :': ,.. .., , X 7 ''..;1" 5, • ',. -ii ! :'• !!. i g, ,..4. ,,,..,,,,g g , " .s:' ... ..,:, :-.: '...:....._..... .........:•...... , 1.,„ ! , ' ...-. , - . " —• • : .i‘ ; EXHIBIT %) ..:, ., f;:, ii n • -.-:::.HT:7 I . ... .........''','"". "''' :.. l.:1::- ' ' ,•4.,...::•;•i,,..-••;•?:t I k ' ,„..... ....,..•,,,..,...„„,. t ` ' RESIDENTIAL ELEVATION • ash I;it, . Iir* r' ' -� ' •r3 .stt '4111111111111 •//1iI1tfiIt�i1N�r; '. ' y;1,.� • � ' y•; I4f4 .., .iII ` ; 11iii .111744 IF,,,I 'AiiiiiniliiWo'CI., Vi-i': 6t WC ;Si'," 1 f'',11 i111111]UIIIII►\11, _ _:'Y n1; 1'K%NNN%14 Olt'. Ir:;,�1 ,� r o f ;; * . _'1 1 . 1' .1114117 . -*-111 1bi I o <� .' ., .. 111 ;111 -11111111 _ 11111:i iti• - .--• - • i'y�. :",,,11!,;,,,,,./11,:-1 ..r_ ,1,i 1` _ = 1111 1 ::•_,_,.......:.,__.• ,.• ,Il 1 ` 1;11 x - = ■ir _ 1111111 1 ="'c �L 1. i IA o 1',1 1 11;1y/1i/1,0_3,i_ �Ir�� ■,I 991 = w 11'111 ' �_ �' IIIIII Ilk! • \ , - O R to 1111` -_= li,,,_Bi 1 il t__, , O A` ei. 1 11 - •,-,t,571.5:;11,11111`111�`1 ' �. =°_111111 V:'' _11111.,, ---,-,1 I.3 U a 10 2± _,. 111 -= --ii 4 u� • O = A ;'�I;!��1 gyp, I�p : ,: I;�! _ � '� _, .. 1,$� 1i 1��,O�- .i 1� - I Irlti, Ilal; %� :�� mini! ; j;' _ �r`.• . •-; 1I'11y1I t 4c- -.'U• , II 141, 1 M 4, ' t' 1,� -71_ 111 1'''1` — I1 1 I,j ==IIW_ ��, Till 1 1 I•��I 1 H... li ;1' 4 \ 1111 111 .1' 111; I-; I�111 emu 11 I1 Immo I ; =��1 �,YI _=11111 4. 1� 11 - I -�iii .,1,,.',. • ::-._=• �II 1.�, i I `J `=31111. i 0 .c-,5- r :-.rVI 4, .64., s. ff^rr ,, ' .1 T 91Y4 4`44Z).1 `1 EXHIBIT K COMMERCIAL ELEVATION '1 7 1 _ _ • g j 3 ( g I 3 , ` i 1 J 474iif441ri�,� i ! 1 iri:it.341:.:• =N" f i : jS I 1 I 1 V N SSSS 4 3_Y • ' I ipl: u, 1 ;, 1 i i 1 1 I 1 . . , H J . ,_ . 1 ,_, vi )! ; 1 i 1 I i n 1 Li i i1 1 m . • .4___________________ ---____________ _4h �i �:i -L -rte +' • iil • iJ; H I +- V1 _ I I .a rrl i 1 El :..,--:.7-1 ;J 1 I1, , , Pi I • 1 Lk....,.... I , i • z____,_; . ..._. p !. . .. ._., ,„ is 40{+ I-- lut' , _ ii , i i 1..n4 141N4p - {EiAii;{::'{i} t a .�1 �.I �I i , i, f ! i., a 11 I 3 n 'rl ! HI I .4 1 .r t t �r 1 ara , g . r 1 • EXHIBIT L COMMERCIAL ELEVATION 2 ,........ ,....,.._ 1 .'' I j Pramual ji cl 1 ! 'I fr CC 0 1 1 c ., UJ X i , 1 1 i • I i Qt! ! I itil i I cn 3 ,, I I ! .•11r. I, i _ _ _________ ____ _ - . . _ 1 ri, i i 0 fl • i r , 1 . . I : II ! / t er • j —...1.-1 • . .• 0 • .: r , I' ' .r a• • I 1... ; if:' I i ..............1 ...................--N..--...—..—. 1..... ..—.....--........ .—...4.... C 1 7 „, . 1,1 1 40., 63 - E.) / 20 ___'' ._—__1._____ —. ... s. s— s 1 b el 1 i • t ) ,.. i .0 I ,./.......--.....''''''•.N. 4.0 . \ . i f I , — . i •-',!!--' 1 . 1 ; ; . .. ap .0;'It I: i) C.3 •••=rr, 2 • 11 9 5 . m • tu . .- - _,a IMV.M' fIrrrrr'q . ...„„,, rz Ft-,i.-9 ir, u. ..,..„_..... ...c........_ 0 , , .......6. ...,,_.. .............„ %.„,.___... „ t...;;; i ;.. ;....'..r. . ""•"'''——eN :4'4;117" 1 :V.' ....,,t. . til 1, ..„..,._ . 1 a z,....i.- . . ,..... ., ,...„. _ :::;:c., :=. ____... 1••••••••.=:. '.... ;=" 1 :;4 ''.:'-: ..1.1.1 ....... , ....,... _. •",='"-":' 1, .="" , i ,-,..=• .10. I 1 1.1 .1.1,0111*1 • •,"--,.. --- I a ii i *I ; ;:._•-.7,1 1 :1•=-_-.. .,1 ( L ; il_. : : II I!AY&: ........___ .I F77.•-••i'al . R;.':: --A • ,,,,,,,,,,.. _11,•'1....-tms i 2.!-.r—re:ifax , F.31,r,IALL, 1" i I 11 il : ri E . 'I, El : g , . .: ;..,. 4 . 7: iI i IS i i il a 2 .4 4 I . . •---- 1; ......... . )44'....7....Y... ; , .. St 2. ' • j EXHIBIT M .11,6S. ••••