2016-04-26 Planning Comm Agenda Packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSIONAGENDA
April26, 2016 – 7:00 p.m.
Mendota Heights City Hall
1.Call to Order
2.Roll Call
3.Adopt Agenda
4.Approve March22, 2016Planning Commission Minutes
5.Public Hearings:
th
a.Case No. 2016-08: S.D. Custom Homes. Evergreen Knolls 4Addition
Preliminary/Final Plat and Easement Vacation at 1663 Dodd Road.
b.Case No. 2016-09:City of Mendota Heights. Proposed City Code
Amendments concerning Aircraft Noise Attenuation.
6.Verbal Review
7.Staff and Commission Announcements
8.Adjourn
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 120 hours
in advance. If a notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights
will make every attempt to provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short
notice. Please contact City Hall at 651.452.1850 with requests.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 1
1CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
2DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
3
4PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES
5March 22, 2016
6
7The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March
822, 2016in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
9
10The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners Howard
11Roston, Michael Noonan, Doug Hennes, Mary Magnuson,and Brian Petschel. Those absent:
12Christine Costello.Others present were City Planner Nolan Wall andPublic Works Director/City
13Engineer John Mazzitello.
14
15Approval of Agenda
16
17The agenda was approved as submitted.
18
19Approval of February 23, 2016Minutes
20
21COMMISSIONER NOONANMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTONTO
22APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 23, 2016AS PRESENTED.
23
24AYES: 6
25NAYS: 0
26ABSENT: 1
27
28Hearings
29
30PLANNING CASE #2016-05
31Emily Dosh, 1140 Sibley Memorial Highway
32Critical Area Permit, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances
33
34City Planner Nolan Wallexplained that the applicant was requesting a critical area permit,
35conditional use permit, and variances to construct an addition to an existing single-family
36residence. The subject parcel fronts Highway 13 and is zoned R-1 Residential. Being located in
37the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, the subject property requires site plan approval before
38a building permit can be issued.
39
40The subject property contains two parcels totaling 19,555 square feet and contains an existing
41dwelling, which was constructed in 1940, and a detached garage. The proposed project would
42construct an approximately 1,600 square foot addition that would include a living area and deck
43expansion towards the highway and the river on portions of the existing driveway and landscaped
44 area.
45
46Based on the applicable City Code requirements, the proposed project requires three separate
47requests: 1) critical area permit for the general construction activities;2) conditional use permit to
March 22, 2016 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting –DRAFTPage 1
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 2
48disturb slopes between18% to 40%;and 3) three separate variances to expand the existing
49structure towards the river and also to disturb slopes that over both 18% and 40%.
50
51Specific to the critical area permit request, Planner Wall reviewed the applicable dimensional and
52natural resource management standards for development in the critical area. Based on the
53information provided by the applicant, planning and engineering staff determined the proposed
54project was compliantthe setback, building height, wildlife/vegetation management, and surface
55water run-off standards.
56
57Specific to the conditional use permit request, the Code does require a conditional use permit for
58any affected activities on slopes between 18% and 40% in the critical area. It further requires that
59properties developed prior to 2006, which is the case with this site, that only accessory or incidental
60structures are then allowed to disturb slopes that are over 18%. Planner Wall then reviewed the
61four requirements for approval of a conditional use permit in the critical area; this proposed project
62is compliant with each of the requirements.
63
64Planner Wall shared photographs of the site and the existing building provided by the applicant.
65He further described the proposed project and associated grading activities in relation to the
66existing conditions.
67
68Three separate variances are required as part of this application: 1) expansion of an existing
69structure towards the river; 2) construction on slopes greater than 18%; and 3) construction on
70slopes greater than 40%.
71
72At this point, Planner Wall asked the Commission if they had any questions on the application so
73far; there were none.
74
75Planner Wall reviewed the three standards necessary for each of therequested variances and how
76this application meets those standards.
77
78It was also noted that as part of this process, staff notified the City of Lilydale and the Minnesota
79Department of Natural Resources to get their input; neither provided comments regarding this
80application.
81
82Staff recommended approval of the critical area permit, conditional use permit, and all variance
83requests with conditions, based on the findings of fact.
84
85Ms. Emily Dosh, 1140 Sibley Memorial Highway came forward to answer questions from the
86Commission; there were none.
87
88Chair Fieldopened the public hearing.
89
90Seeing no one coming forward to comment at the public hearing, Chair Fieldasked for a motion
91to close the public hearing.
92
93COMMISSIONER NOONANMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO
94CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
95
March 22, 2016 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting –DRAFTPage 2
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 3
96AYES: 6
97NAYS: 0
98ABSENT: 1
99
100COMMISSIONER NOONANMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
101RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2016-05,CRITICAL AREA PERMIT,
102CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND VARIANCES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
103FINDINGS OF FACT:
1041.The proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the City Code and is consistent with
105the Comprehensive Plan.
1062.The proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District,
107including the additional conditional use permit and variance standards.
1083.The proposedproject expands the existing dwelling towards the river in compliance with
109the applicable setbacks and avoids disturbing areas that may reduce the existing natural
110landscape and increase stormwater run-off.
1114.The grades in excess of 18% and 40% impacted by the proposed project appear to have
112been man-made and will not negatively impact the river or the character of the surrounding
113area.
1145.\[Added by the Commission\] The proposed variances are found to be in harmony with the
115general purpose and intent of the ordinance andthe comprehensive plan; that the applicant
116has established practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance because expansion to
117the side or rear yard would require additional land disturbance and/or increase water run-
118off issues; and that the proposed variances will not alter the essential character of the
119neighborhood since there is already a highway, a trail, a rail line, and structures already in
120existence between the property and the river.
121AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1221.Building and grading permits are approved by the City prior to construction of the proposed
123project.
1242.All grading and construction activity will be in compliance with applicable federal, state,
125and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance
126Guidance Document.
127
128AYES: 6
129NAYS: 0
130ABSENT: 1
131
132Chair Fieldadvised the City Council would consider this application at its April 5, 2016meeting.
133
134PLANNING CASE #2016-06
135Northern States Power (d.b.a Xcel Energy) Sibley Propane Plant
136Conditional Use Permit and Critical Area Permit
137
138City Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant was seeking a conditional use permit to bring
139an existing use into compliance with applicable zoning districts, as well as a critical area permit to
140makeimprovements to an existing structure on the subject property within the Mississippi River
141Corridor Critical Area.
142
March 22, 2016 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting –DRAFTPage 3
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 4
143The subject property contains two parcels on approximately 25 acres, operated by Xcel Energy
144formerly Northern States Power. According to the applicant, the use has existed in its current
145location sincethemid-1950’s. Neither the applicant nor the city has record of the appropriate
146permit approvals establishing the existing use. Therefore, it is assumed that it pre-dates the city’s
147incorporation and the current City Code requirements. In order to establish the appropriate permit
148and recognize the existing conditions and use of the property, staff requested that the applicant
149apply for a conditional use permit to ensure that future improvements can be made in compliance
150with applicable standards and procedures.
151
152Planner Wall noted that the subject property contains two zones, B-1A and R-1, and that both
153zoning districts permit essential service structures as a conditional use. Based on the definition,
154the existing use of the subject propertyrequires a conditional use permit.
155
156He then explained the four findings of facts necessary to approve the conditional use permit in the
157critical area: 1) the proposed use is consistent with the intent of the critical area order and the
158comprehensive plan; 2) the proposed use is compatible withuses in the immediate vicinity;3) the
159proposed use is allowed under the applicable ordinances; and 4) requires DNR notification.
160
161Planner Wall described the existing fencing, vegetative/landscapecover,and topography and how
162they relate to the surrounding land uses. He noted that both residential developments in closest
163proximity to the site were platted after the existing use was established. Staff determined that the
164existing use istherefore compliant with the required findings.
165
166At this point, Planner Wall asked if there were any questions specificto the conditional use request;
167there were none.
168
169Specific to the critical area permit request, Planner Wall explained that the proposed project seeks
170to replace an interior compressor within an existing building. As part of that project, there will
171also be re-siding and roofing improvements to the existing structure. There are no proposed
172grading activities or vegetation removal and the existing structure will notbe expanded in size or
173height. The proposed improvements require a building permit, so a critical area permit is also
174required due to the subject property’s location. He shared an image of the existing building and
175noted that due to the limited scope of the proposed project,staff is unaware of any potential impacts
176to the river.
177
178An interagency review is also required as part of this application; the private property owners were
179noticed within 350 feet within the City and the application materials were sent to the Minnesota
180Department of Natural Resources, as well as the City of Lilydaleand the City of St. Paul for
181review; no comments were received.
182
183Staff recommended approval of the critical area permit and conditional use permit with conditions,
184based on the findings of fact.
185
186CommissionerRoston stated that he has a conflict of interest and would not be voting on this
187applicationand will abstainfromparticipating inthe discussion.
188
189Mr. Brian Sullivan with Xcel Energy waspresent to answer any questions from the Commission.
190
March 22, 2016 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting –DRAFTPage 4
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 5
191Commissioners asked questions regarding the site history, service area, purpose of the operation,
192and the proposed building improvements. Mr. Sullivan responded accordingly and indicated that
193the intent was to maintain the existing operation and replace equipment within an existing building.
194
195Chair Field opened the public hearing.
196
197Seeing no one coming forward to comment at the public hearing, Chair Field askedfor a motion
198to close the public hearing.
199
200COMMISSIONER NOONANMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
201CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
202
203AYES: 5
204NAYS: 0
205ABSTAIN: 1 (Roston)
206ABSENT: 1
207
208COMMISSIONER NOONANMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO
209RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2016-06,CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
210AND CRITICAL AREA PERMIT REQUESTS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF
211FACT:
2121.The existing use pre-dates the current City Code and development of the surrounding
213residential uses.
2142.The existing natural vegetative/landscape buffers and fencing provide adequate screening
215without compromising site security.
2163.The existing use meets the purpose and intent of the City Code and is consistent with the
217Comprehensive Plan.
2184.There are no proposed grading activities or vegetation removal and the existing structure
219will not be expanded in size or height.
2205.The proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District
221Chapter of the City Code.
222AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
2231.Future improvementson the subject property that expand, alter, or otherwise change the
224existing use or site conditions in any manner shall require an amendment to the conditional
225use permit, including a critical area permit if applicable.
2262.All applicable permits are obtainedfrom the City prior to construction of the proposed
227project.
228
229AYES: 5
230NAYS: 0
231ABSTAIN: 1 (Roston)
232ABSENT: 1
233
234Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its April 5, 2016 meeting.
235
236Verbal Review
237
238Planner Wall gave the followingverbal review:
March 22, 2016 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting –DRAFTPage 5
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 6
239PLANNING CASE #2016-04
240City of Mendota Heights
241City Code Amendments Concerning Industrial District Uses and Definitions
242•Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission with a few
243minor grammatical changes
244
245Commissioners asked questions regarding the rumored Mendota Plaza developments. Planner
246Wall indicated that preliminary discussions are occurring regarding amendments to the Planned
247Unit Development; however, Mendota Plaza has not submitted any developmentapplications. In
248the event the approved Planned Unit Development is proposed to be amended, additional
249applications will be required to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council.
250
251Commissioner Noonan asked, in light of the Vikings development applicationswith the City of
252Eagan, if the interchange atDelaware Avenue/I-494 is back on the table. Public Works
253Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello replied that staff is reviewing the draft Alternative Urban
254Area-Wide Review(AUAR) document that came out for the proposed Viking development in
255Eagan; the interchange referred to is not mentioned in the AUAR at all. Staff is discussing whether
256or not they want to ask the developer to include a statement that this is not part oftheir development
257plan and is not anticipated to be advanced as any part of their development.
258
259Staff and Commission Announcements
260
261The annual spring clean-up is scheduled for Saturday, May 7. Preliminary information is
262available in the last edition of the Heights Highlights with more to come.
263Commissioners have been invited to attend a seminar on April 6 to be held at the Eagan
264Community Center from 6:00 –9:00 p.m. titled Engineering 101.The Public Works
265Directors and City Engineers from Dakota County are putting on this seminar.
266On Wednesday, March 23 there will be an open house at City Hall from 6:30 –8:00 p.m.,
267where the 90% complete design plans for the 2016 Mendota Road Neighborhood
268Improvements Project \[reconstructing Mendota Road (Highway 110 Frontage Road) from
269Delaware Avenue to Oak Street and rehabilitation of Warrior Drive, High Ridge Circle,
270and Sibley Court\] will be available.
271When questioned, Mr. Mazzitello replied that the pedestrian crossing of Highway 110 has
272been approved by Dakota County; it is going to be an underpass and is scheduled for
273construction in 2017 in conjunction with MnDOT’s project that is going to rebuild
274Highway 110.
275
276Adjournment
277
278COMMISSIONER ROSTONMOVEDTO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:46 P.M.
March 22, 2016 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting –DRAFTPage 6
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 7
Request for Planning Commission Action
MEETING DATE:April 26, 2016
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case 2016-08
Preliminary/Final Plat and Easement Vacation
th
Evergreen Knolls 4 Addition – 1663 Dodd Road
COMMENT:
Introduction
The applicant isseekingpreliminary/finalplat andeasement vacation approvals to divide two existing
rd
single family lots in the Evergreen Knolls 3 Addition into a three-lot plat to be called Evergreen Knolls
th
4 Addition.
Background
The subject property is 1.25acres and contains an existing single-family dwelling and detached garage that
would be demolished. The new plat includes three lots, whichmeet the R-1 District’slotsize and width
requirements.Staff has included several conditions to address grading concerns. If approved, final grading
plans will be required as part of each individual building permit.
Discussion
The City is using its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on subdivision and zoning requests
and has limited discretion; a determination regarding whether or not the request meets the applicable code
standards is required.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission discuss the requests in this caseand make a recommendation
to the City Council.
Action Required
This matter requires a simple majority vote.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 8
Item No. 2016-08
MEMORANDUM
Date:April 26, 2016
To: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
From:Phil Carlson, AICP, Consulting Planner
th
Addition, 1663 Dodd Road
RE:Planning Case 2016-08:Evergreen Knolls 4
Preliminary/FinalPlatand Easement Vacation
Action
Deadline: July 27, 2016 (120 days from complete application submittal)
INTRODUCTION
The applicant,Sean Doyle of SD Custom Homes, on behalf of property owner VeselManagement
rd
II, wises to divide two existing single family lots in the Evergreen Knolls 3Addition (Lots 3 and 4)
th
into a three-lot plat to be called Evergreen Knolls 4Addition(Lots 1, 2, and 3).
BACKGROUND
The property is 1.25acres (54,436 square feet) in area.
The property is guided LR Low Density Residential in the City’s Land Use Plan.
The property is zoned R-1 One Family Residential.
No change in land use or zoning is proposed.
There is an existing house and garage on Lot 3 of the existingplat which would be
removed.
The total existing impervious surface on the site is 6,606 sq. ft.
The total proposed impervious coverage on the site will be approximately 14,950 sq. ft.
(subject to future building plans).
ANALYSIS
1)Lot Size. The R-1 District requires minimum lot width of 100 feet and minimum lot area of
15,000 sq. ft. All three proposed new lots will meet these minimums:
o Lot 1: 100’ width, 18,046 sq. ft.
o Lot 2: 100’ width, 18,046 sq. ft.
o Lot 3’: 124’ width at front setback, 18,343 sq. ft.
There are three lots across the street to the north of this proposed plat that are similar in size
and width that were platted as part of previous additions, with a net density of 2.3
units/acre. The density of the new plat is 2.4 units/acre, less than the Comp Plan maximum
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 9
April 26, 2016
Mendota Heights Planning Commission
Page 2 of 5
Re: 2016-08 Evergreen Knolls
of 2.9 units/acres. The scale of the proposed plat is consistent with the City’s Comp Plan
and in keeping with the surrounding homes.
2)Gradingand Trees.Grading on the south edge of Lot 3 results in the loss of numerous
existing trees. Removal of these trees appears to be necessary to allow reasonable
grading of the property and a reasonable buffer of trees will remain on the golf course side
of the property line.
3)Concept Grading Plan:
The grading plan directs drainage in the general pattern of the existing conditions –
to the north, south and east, and not toward existing neighbors to the west.
Numerous areas are proposed to be graded that are within city and MnDOT ROW.
Grading behind the curb in Mendota HeightsROW is acceptable, but grading in
MnDOT ROW needs a permit from MnDOT.
Grading is shown on city-owned property in the southeast corner on the golf course
property, which is not acceptable.
Silt fence and bio roll are shown in MnDOT ROW and across the property line – this
needs a permit fromMnDOT.
The proposed plan is only required to show that a potential new dwelling could be
constructed that meets the applicable Code standards and is not meant to bind a
future property owner into a specific location or design.
Subdivision Code requires that no construction or grading on slopes over 33%. There
are no slopes over 33% percent on site.
4)Wetland impacts. A wetland delineation report for 1663 Dodd Road was submitted to the
city in December of 2015. The report identified one wetland on the subject property, on
the east side nearest Dodd Road. Historical review of the site has determined that the
wetland was manmade in the 1950s. The applicant is proposing to fill the wetland for this
new plat.City Council approved a no loss application for the wetland in January 2016.
5)Utility Plan. Sewer connection for proposed Lot 3 is assumed to come from existing Dodd
Road stub; this needsto be clarified.
6)Drainage and utility easements in the existing plat will be vacated and new easements
dedicated as part of this process.
7)Existing home. First floor elevation (FFE) should be shown on the existing conditions sheet for
the existing home to be demolished. This needsto be provided for the future demolition
permit.
8)Setbacks. Front yard setbacksfor new homes to be built on the new lots will be determined
per zoning code standards at the time building permits are approved.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 10
April 26, 2016
Mendota Heights Planning Commission
Page 3 of 5
Re: 2016-08 Evergreen Knolls
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the CityCouncil approvalof the
th
Preliminary Plat for Evergreen Knolls 4Addition with the following conditions:
1.The existing single family dwelling and detached garage are demolished prior to the Final
Plat being recorded by Dakota County.
2.Park dedication fee in the amount of $4,000, in lieu of land, is collected after City Council
approval and beforethe Final Platis recorded by Dakota County or issuance of any
additional permits by the City.
3.Street reconstruction assessment fee in the amount of $1,091, aspart of city project 2008-09,
is collected after City Council approval and before theFinal Plat is recorded by Dakota
County or issuance of any additional permits by the City.
4.Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
5.The grading plan isrevised to avoid grading in MnDOT ROW or provide evidence that
MnDOT approves of the grading.
6.The grading plan isrevised to avoid grading on the city golf course property to the south.
7.The erosion control plan shows silt fence and bio roll on the MnDOT ROW. This needs to be
adjusted or provide evidence that MnDOT approves the plan.
8.The utility plan isrevised to clarify the sewer connection for Lot 3, which is assumed to be the
existing connection from Dodd Road.
9.First floor elevation (FFE) isshown on the existing conditions sheet.
10.Building and grading permits are obtained from the City prior to construction.
11.The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with
associated easements, subject to review and approval by the Engineering Department as
part of any building permit application.
12.All grading and construction activity as part of the proposed development will be in
compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in
compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 11
April 26, 2016
Mendota Heights Planning Commission
Page 4 of 5
Re: 2016-08 Evergreen Knolls
13.Future construction on the newly-created parcels will be compliant with all applicable City
Code provisions
REQUESTED ACTION
Following the public hearing and discussion, the Planning Commission may consider the following
actions:
1.Recommend approval of the Preliminary/FinalPlatand easement vacations, based on the
attached findings of factwith conditions.
OR
2.Recommend denial of the Preliminary/FinalPlatand easement vacations, with findingsof
fact as determined by the Planning Commission and/or City Council.
OR
3.Table the request, pending additional information from staff or others.
MATERIALS INCLUDED FOR REVIEW
The following exhibits are attached for your review:
1.Aerial site map
2.Site photos
3.Planning Applications, including supporting materials.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 12
April 26, 2016
Mendota Heights Planning Commission
Page 5 of 5
Re: 2016-08 Evergreen Knolls
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL
th
Preliminary Plat for Evergreen Knolls 4Addition
1663 Dodd Road
1.The proposed plat meets the purpose and intent of the Subdivision Code.
2.The proposed lots meet the minimum standards in the R-1 Zoning District.
3.The wetland on site appears to have been man-made and the City Council has approved
a no loss application for the site.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 13
Planning Case 2016-08
City of
1663 Dodd Road
Mendota
060
Heights
Date: 4/18/2016
SCALE IN FEET
689
695
701
707
EVERGREEN KNL
706
1663
1656
1658
1660
1695
1680
GIS Map Disclaimer:
This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,
survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained
in this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errors
or omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 14
Planning Case 2016-08 Site Photos: 1663 Dodd Road
Existing golf course screening (fence located on city property)
Existinggolf course screening (fence on city property)
Source: Staff (04.20.16)
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 15
Planning Case 2016-08 Site Photos: 1663 Dodd Road
Existing screeningalong south property boundary line(fence located on city property)
Looking west from Dodd Road
Source: Staff (04.20.16)
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 16
March 28, 2016
Mr. Nolan Wall
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
th
Re: Evergreen Knolls 4 Addition
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
P.E.# 116005
Dear Mr. Wall:
th
Please find the following narrative in regards to the proposed Evergreen Knolls 4 Addition Preliminary
and Final Plat application.
Intent
rd
This development proposes dividing two existing lots in the existing Evergreen Knolls 3
th
Addition plat to a three lot plat named Evergreen Knolls 4 Addition.
Existing Condition
The site currently is a two lot parcel occupied by one single family home located near the
western edge of the lots. The current home has driveway access to Evergreen Knolls and Dodd Road.
There is a low area located in the central portion of the eastern lot that has been processed in a
wetland permit. Through the wetland permit process it was determined that the area could be filled, due
to the wetland creation being incidental. The wetland was previously created through digging an
ornamental pond in an upland environment.
Proposed Design Features
The submitted proposed plans show a generalized concept of a development that would work for
the site. The actual development will be constructed on a lot by lot basis with the building permit
process, utilizing the specific lot contours and vegetation to construct a minimally disruptive unit. The
proposed lots will be three single family dwelling units. The lots will front on Evergreen Knolls,
driveway access to Dodd Road will be eliminated. The low area in the eastern most lot will be a fill lot
requiring the majority of the tree removals and land disturbance. Concept plans have been submitted to
show possible final development and potential drainage patterns.
There will be no street/right-of-way dedication or street/alley construction. Utility construction
will consist of installing a sanitary and water service to the middle lot. Street repair and traffic control
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 17
for the construction will be provided by the contractor at the time of building permit for the lot. The
project currently has access at two locations to existing utility services, one off Dodd Road and the other
adjacent to Evergreen Knoll. The western lot will utilize the utility service stubs that are provided near
Evergreen Knoll. The eastern lot will utilize the service stubs located adjacent to Dodd Road.
Other Information
-Provided grading plans are preliminary, final grades will be determined at the time of individual house
plan submittal.
-Use of Lots: three Single Family dwelling units.
- Surface Water disposal, drainage, and flood control:
2
Existing Impervious surface area: 6,606 ft
2
Proposed Impervious surface area (appx): 14,950 ft
2
Total New Impervious surface area (appx.): 8,344 ft – 0.19 ac
The propose project creates 0.19 acres of new cumulative impervious surface. The Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater General permit requirement
(III.D. Permanent Stormwater Management System) requires a stormwater management system
only after creating more than one acre of total cumulative impervious surface area. There is no
requirement for permanent stormwater treatment for a project creating less than one acre of total
cumulative impervious surface area, in the MPCA NPDES/SDS Stormwater Permit.
The Developer and his engineering representative met with the City Engineer and discussed the
project approach. The City Engineer concurred with the project concept at that time and
suggested incorporating stormwater features on a lot by lot basis. The home owner/home builder
will be encouraged to construct on site individual lot stormwater practices that promote
Stormwater Management Performance Measures. These systems may consist of: rain barrels,
raingardens, infiltration/filtration trenches and other small stormwater management practices.
-Zoning Changes: None, existing and proposed zoning is R-1.
-Soil Erosion and Sediment Control: a concept Erosion and Sediment control plan is included in the
submittal.
-Vegetation preservation and protection: concept tree preservation plan shows the trees that will be
saved if the concept grading plan would be constructed. The actual lot/home construction will occur on
a lot by lot basis saving trees and minimizing land disturbance once the actual building plan is finalized.
The property has opportunities to design specific building layouts that minimize tree removal and land
disturbance.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 18
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 19
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 20
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 21
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 22
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 23
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 24
SD COMPANIES, LLC Drawn by:TSS
Folder #: 7905
Description Sketch for:
EASEMENT.dwg
116005-VACATE Cad File:
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 36
Map unit symbolMap unit nameRating
Antigo silt loam, 1 to 8
49BNon-Hydric
percent slopes
189Auburndale silt loamHydric
49B
189
Approximate Review Area
Hydric/Predominantly Hydric
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus
Non-Hydric/Predominantly Non-hydric
DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and
the GIS User Community
Figure 4 - Soil Survey Map
1663 Dodd Rd (KES 2015-157)
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
075150
Feet
¯
Note: Boundaries indicated
on this figure are approximate
and do not constitute an
official survey product.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 37
Athena K ShultzBrian H & Kelly G AukemaCharles E & Mary L Gillin
689 Evergreen Knls707 Evergreen Knolls717 Evergreen Knoll
Mendota Heights Mn 55118Saint Paul Mn 55118-3741Saint Paul Mn 55118-3741
Christine A SalmenCity of Mendota HeightsDaniel W Kotasek
1694 Dodd Rd1101 Victoria Curv706 Evergreen Knls
Mendota Heights Mn 55118Mendota Heights Mn 55118Mendota Heights Mn 55118
David R & Jo M FairbairnHarry J & Margaret KladisJames P & Linda A Stehr
1680 Dodd Rd695 Evergreen Knoll1635 Dodd Rd
Mendota Heights Mn 55118-3726Mendota Heights Mn 55118-3750Saint Paul Mn 55118-3727
James P & Tracy K SteinerLance A BoelterLinda L Lindeke
711 Evergreen Knolls1630 Dodd Rd1656 Dodd Rd
Saint Paul Mn 55118-3741West Saint Paul Mn 55118-3726Saint Paul Mn 55118-3726
Marybeth K HarrisMatt D SteinerMichael J II Moore
1658 Dodd Rd702 Wentworth Ave710 Evergreen Knolls
Mendota Heights Mn 55118Mendota Heights Mn 55118Mendota Heights Mn 55118-3700
Paraskevas S Tste TsobanakisProkosh Brian G & Patricia LivingRobbie Jay Bluhm
726 Evergreen KnlsTst647 Manomin Ave
Mendota Heights Mn 551181650 Dodd RdSaint Paul Mn 55107
Mendota Heights Mn 55118
Robert B & Jane H Ts WinterRobin S & Pamela M EhrlichRobley D & Joan M Evans
1648 Dodd Rd1656 Gryc Ct716 Evergreen Knolls
Saint Paul Mn 55118Saint Paul Mn 55118-3748Saint Paul Mn 55118-3700
Ronald G & Mary Kay NelsonScott D & Dawn M KofoedStephen K & Ruth M Petermann
1660 Dodd Rd701 Evergreen Knoll710 Wentworth Ave W
Saint Paul Mn 55118-3726Saint Paul Mn 55118-3741Saint Paul Mn 55118-2703
Vesel Management II LLCVesel Management II LLC
% Robert J Reidell III 2100 Ford% Robert J Reidell III 2100 Ford
Pkwy Unit 201Pkwy Unit 201
Saint Paul Mn 55116Saint Paul Mn 55116
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 38
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 39
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 40
Request for Planning Commission Action
MEETING DATE:April 26, 2016
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT:Ordinance 494 Concerning Aircraft Noise Attenuation Boundaries
COMMENT:
Introduction
The City is considering amendments to Title 12, Chapter 4 of the City Code concerning aircraft noise
attenuation boundaries.
Background
For the past several months, staff and the Airport Relations Commission (ARC) havebeen discussing
whether the City’s Airport Noise Overlay District should be revised to become a static area rather than
changing with the Metropolitan Airports Commission Noise Contour Map. Staff reviewed ordinances for
the cities of Eagan, Richfield, & Bloomington to determine the overlay district boundaries and noise
attenuation requirements; all three cities have essentially the same ordinance requirements.
All three cities use the boundary established in the 2004 MSP Zoning Ordinance Airspace Zoning Limit to
define the area covered by their respective ordinances. By setting a static boundary for the Noise
Attenuation Zone, it will require a review for development and redevelopment within the designated area.
Only properties that are located withinpublished noise contours will be required to include noise attenuation
in accordance with the regulations.According to the City of Eagan, the review process often results in
noise attenuation installation even if outside the 60db noise contour.
The ARCdiscussed the ordinance amendment approach in February and passed a motion recommending
th
approval of DRAFT Ordinance 494 at theirApril 13meeting. Since the regulations are included within
Title 12 of the City Code and pertaining to zoning, the Planning Commission is conducting the required
public hearing prior to making a recommendation to the City Council.
Discussion
The City is using its legislative authority when considering action on a code amendment request and has
broad discretion; the only limitations are that actions must be constitutional, rational, and in some way
related to protecting the health, safety and general welfare of the public.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission discuss the proposed code amendment and make a
recommendation to the City Council.
Action Required
This matter requires a simple majority vote.
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 41
1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
2 DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
3
4 ORDINANCE NO. 494
5
6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 4 OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY
7 OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, DAKOTA COUNTY,CONCERNING AIRCRAFT
8 NOISE ATTENUATION BOUNDARIES
9
10
11 The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain:
12
13 Section 1.
14
15 Title 12-4-1-C is hereby addedas follows:
16
17 APPLICABILITY: The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all properties located within the 2004
18 MSP Zoning Ordinance Airspace Zoning Limit. Properties located partially within the 2004 MSP Zoning
19 Ordinance Airspace Zoning Limit shall be considered completely inside the limit.
20
21
22 Section 2.
23
24 This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication.
25
26 Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this ## day of Month, 2016.
27
28 CITY COUNCIL
29 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
30
31
32
33 Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
34 ATTEST
35
36
37___________________________
38 Lorri Smith, City Clerk
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 42
Aircraft Noise Attenutation
City of
MSP Airspace Zoning
Mendota
01,750
Heights
Date: 3/18/2016
SCALE IN FEET
LEGEND
Airspace Zone
R-1 One Family Residential
R-1A One Family Residential
R-2 Two Family Residential
R-3 Multiple Family Residential
MR-PUD Medium Density Residential
HR-PUD High Density Residential
MENDOTA
MENDOTA
MU-PUD Mixed Use
B-1 Limited Business
B-1A Business Park
B-2 Neighborhood Business
B-3 General Business
B-4 Shopping Center
I Industrial
State Park
EAGAN
EAGAN
GIS Map Disclaimer:
This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,
survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained
in this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errors
or omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 1of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 43
Chapter 4
AIRCRAFT NOISE ATTENUATION
12-4-1: AUTHORITY AND FINDINGS:
A. Statutory Authority: This chapter is adopted pursuant to Minnesota statutes section
473.192. (Ord. 232, 5-19-1987; amd. 2003 Code)
B. Findings Of Fact: The city finds that development within certain areas of the city is
impacted by aircraft noise; that said noise is beyond the regulatory authority of the city to
control; that certain uses of land are inappropriate in areas of high aircraft noise; that
some structures do not adequately attenuate aircraft noise resulting in negative impacts
on the health, safety and welfare of the residents or inhabitants of the structures; that,
through proper construction methods, the means exist to attenuate aircraft noise to
interior levels which alleviate such negative impacts; and that the requirements of this
chapter are necessary to promote and preserve the health, safety and welfare of the
citizens of Mendota Heights. (Ord. 232, 5-19-1987)
12-4-2: PURPOSE:
The purpose of this chapter is to require that new or redeveloped portions of buildings within
the city be constructed with materials and in such a manner that aircraft noise is attenuated
by the structure to an interior level which has no adverse impact on the health, safety and
general welfare of the residents, all in accordance with the metropolitan council's guidelines
for land use compatibility with aircraft noise. This chapter shall not apply to remodeling or
rehabilitating an existing residential building, nor to the construction of an appurtenance to
an existing residential building. (Ord. 232, 5-19-1987)
12-4-3: DEFINITIONS:
For purposes of this chapter, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them
in this section.
AIRCRAFT NOISE ZONE: Any one of the four (4) zones identified on the map attached to
ordinance 232 and incorporated herein by reference.
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 2of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 44
CONSISTENT: Land uses that are acceptable.
dBA: A unit of sound pressure level weighted by use of the A metering characteristics and
weighting as specified in the American National Standards Institute specification for sound
level meters (ANSI S1.4-1983), which is hereby incorporated by reference. "dBA" is also
referred to as an A-weighted decibel.
DNL: The day-night sound level, or the twenty four (24) hour equivalent continuous sound
level (time averaged A-weighted sound level) from twelve o'clock (12:00) midnight to twelve
o'clock (12:00) midnight, obtained after the addition of ten (10) dBA to sound levels
measured from ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. to seven o'clock (7:00) A.M.
INCONSISTENT: Land uses that are not acceptable even if acoustical treatment was
incorporated in the structure.
INFILL DEVELOPMENT: Pertains to an undeveloped parcel or parcels of land proposed for
development similar to or less noise sensitive than the developed parcels surrounding the
undeveloped parcel (for example, a new house on a vacant lot in a residential neighborhood,
or a new industry on a vacant parcel in an established industrial area).
Ldn: The day-night average level, or the twenty four (24) hour equivalent continuous sound
level (time averaged A-weighted sound level) from twelve o'clock (12:00) midnight to twelve
o'clock (12:00) midnight, obtained after the addition of ten (10) dBA to sound levels
measured from ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. to seven o'clock (7:00) A.M.
Leq: The equivalent continuous sound level which, over the period of one hour, has the
same A-weighted sound energy as the time varying sound.
MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT: A relatively large parcel of land with all structures proposed for
extensive rehabilitation or demolition, and different uses (for example, demolition of a square
block of old office and hotel buildings for new housing, office, commercial uses; conversion
of warehouse to office and commercial uses).
NEW DEVELOPMENT: A relatively large, undeveloped tract of land proposed for
development (for example, a residential subdivision, industrial park or shopping center).
NOISE REDUCTION LEVEL: The difference between the exterior and interior sound level,
expressed in dBA, which is achieved by the intervening structure.
RECOGNIZED ACOUSTICAL SPECIALIST: A person qualified by education and
experience to conduct sound analyses of buildings and approved for such purpose by the
city. The approved individual shall have at least three (3) years of experience in the field of
sound control and a degree from a recognized institute of higher learning in the process of
sound analysis of buildings.
RECONSTRUCTION OR ADDITIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES: Pertains to replacing
a structure destroyed by fire, age, etc., to accommodate the same use that existed before
destruction, or expanding a structure to accommodate increased demand for an existing
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 3of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 45
use, but does not pertain to remodeling or rehabilitating existing residential buildings nor to
the construction of an appurtenance to an existing residential building.
SOUND: Energy that is transmitted by pressure waves in the air or in other materials and is
the objective cause of the sensation of hearing. It is commonly called "noise" if it is
unwanted.
SOUND ATTENUATION: The reduction in sound level which occurs between the source
and receiver.
SOUND LEAK: An opening in a structure through which sound can pass. "Sound leaks" are
often extremely small holes or cracks. In general, an air leak is a "sound leak".
SOUND LEVEL: The level of sound pressure measured with a sound level meter and one of
its weighting (frequency) networks. When A-weighting is used, the "sound level" is
expressed as dBA.
SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS (STC): A single number rating for describing the degree
of sound transmission loss specified for a wall, window, partition or other building element.
The higher the STC, the more attenuation the building element will afford. (Ord. 232, 5-19-
1987; amd. Ord. 440, 12-6-2011)
12-4-4: SCOPE AND EFFECT:
A. Scope: The aircraft noise zones established by this chapter shall overlay the zoning
districts established by chapter 1 of this title, so that any parcel of land lying in an overlay
zone shall also lie on one or more of the established zoning districts. Territory within a
given overlay zone shall be subject to the requirements established by the other
applicable ordinances and regulations of the city.
B. Zoning District Uses: Within each adopted overlay zone, all uses shall be permitted in
accordance with the regulations for the underlying zoning districts; provided, however,
that the appropriate building permit is first obtained; and provided further, that no use
designated as inconsistent on the noise compatibility tables in section 12-4-7 of this
chapter shall be permitted.
C. Application Of Provisions: This chapter applies to all construction and any reconstructed
portion of a building requiring a building permit after the effective date hereof, except
remodeling or rehabilitation of an existing residential building or the construction of an
appurtenance to an existing residential building. (Ord. 232, 5-19-1987)
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 4of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 46
12-4-5: PREREQUISITES TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING OR OCCUPANCY
PERMIT:
Any application for a city building or occupancy permit pertaining to land located in an
aircraft noise zone must demonstrate compliance with the provisions of this chapter prior to
the issuance of such permit. (Ord. 232, 5-19-1987)
12-4-6: PUBLISHED ACTUAL CONTOURS ADOPTED:
A. The Metropolitan Airport commission publishes a map of actual noise contours annually
as a part of their noise contour analysis. The preceding year's actual noise contour map
shall be used to determine the DNL for application of noise attenuation standards. The
MAC annual noise contour analysis is maintained by the Metropolitan Airport
commission. (Ord. 440, 12-6-2011)
12-4-7: NOISE COMPATIBILITY TABLES:
All construction or reconstruction requiring a building permit and located within a designated
DNL contour shall be constructed in such a way that the applicable noise level reduction
requirements contained in the following noise compatibility tables are met or exceeded.
Where a particular structure contains different land uses, the more stringent requirements of
the applicable table shall apply, except where it is architecturally possible to achieve the
appropriate noise reduction level for each different use, and the uses are acoustically
separated by a wall or partition with a minimum STC of twenty five (25).
NOISE COMPATIBILITY TABLE 1
Noise Reduction Level In dBA Required To Meet Standards
For Use In New Development And Major Redevelopment
(The noise reduction level numbers specify for each type of land use the amount of interior
sound level reduction necessary for the use to be compatible in the applicable mitigated
noise contour.)
Land Use Type Actual Noise Contour
Leq(76-(71-(60-
(81+) 80) 75) 70)
Residential:
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 5of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 47
Single/multiplex with individualINCO INCO INCO 25
entrance
Multiplex/apartment with sharedINCO 35 30 25
1
entrance
Mobile home INCO INCO INCO 25
Educational and medical:
Schools, churches, hospitals,INCO INCO INCO 25
nursing homes
Cultural, entertainment, recreational 35 30 25 20
Office, commercial retail 35 30 25 CNST
Services:
Transportation/passenger facilities 35 30 25 CNST
Transient lodging INCO 30 25 20
Other medical, health and35 30 25 CNST
educational services
Other services 35 30 25 CNST
Industrial, communication, utility 25 CNST CNST CNST
Agricultural land, water area, resource CNST CNST CNST CNST
extraction
Note:
1.These uses do not permit "in the wall" air conditioning units in noise contours 71 or above.
NOISE COMPATIBILITY TABLE 2
Noise Reduction Level In dBA To Meet Standard For Use In Infill Development And
Reconstruction Or Additions To Existing Structures
(The noise reduction level numbers specify for each type of land use the amount of interior
sound level reduction necessary for the use to be compatible in the applicable mitigated
noise contour.)
Land Use Type Actual Noise Contour
Leq(76-(71-(60-
(81+) 80) 75) 70)
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 6of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 48
1
Residential:
40 35 30 25
Single/multiplex with individual
2
entrance
Multiplex/apartment with shared40 35 30 25
2
entrance
2
40 35 30 25
Mobile home
Educational and medical:
Schools, churches, hospitals,40 35 30 25
nursing homes
Cultural, entertainment, recreational 35 30 25 20
Office, commercial retail 35 30 25 CNST
Services:
Transportation/passenger facilities 35 30 25 CNST
Transient lodging 35 30 25 20
Other medical, health and35 30 25 CNST
educational services
Other services 35 30 25 CNST
Industrial, communication, utility 25 CNST CNST CNST
Agricultural land, water area, resource CNST CNST CNST CNST
extraction
Notes:
1. Does not apply to remodeling or rehabilitation of existing residential structures, or to
construction of appurtenances to existing residential structures.
2. These uses do not permit "in the wall" air conditioning units in noise contours 71 or
above.
(Ord. 440, 12-6-2011)
12-4-8: ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS:
The provisions of this chapter shall be enforced pursuant to this section.
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 7of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 49
A. Plans And Specifications:
1. Required Plans And Specifications:
a. All applicants for a building or occupancy permit shall include with the application all
plans, specifications or other information required by this chapter. The plans and
specifications shall describe in sufficient detail all pertinent features of the building,
building materials, heating and ventilation systems, including, but not limited to, the
STC ratings of exterior roof/ceilings, walls, windows, and doors; and other pertinent
data as may be requested by the city to indicate conformance with the applicable
noise reduction level requirements as specified in the noise compatibility tables. To
assure the elimination of sound leaks, the plans and specifications shall demonstrate
compliance with the following standards:
(1) A mechanical ventilation system shall be installed that will provide the minimum
air circulation and fresh air supply requirements as provided in the state and
uniform building code for the proposed occupancy without the need to open any
exterior doors or windows.
(2) The perimeter of all exterior windows and doorframes shall be sealed airtight to
the exterior wall construction.
(3) Fireplaces shall be equipped with well fitted chimney closing devices.
(4) All ventilation ducts, except range hoods, connecting interior space to outdoors
shall be provided with a bend such that no direct line of sight exists from exterior
to interior through the vent duct.
(5) Doors and windows shall be constructed so that they are close fitting. Weather
stripping seals shall be incorporated to eliminate all edge gaps.
(6) All penetrations through exterior walls by pipes, ducts, conduits and the like shall
be caulked airtight to the exterior construction.
b. The city shall require that plans and specifications be certified by a recognized
acoustical specialist for compliance with this chapter. (Ord. 420, 1-20-2009)
2. Approval Or Rejection Of Plans:
a. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of appropriate plans and specifications, the city
shall approve or reject the plans based upon the ability of the proposed materials
and construction techniques to adequately attenuate noise. The city shall approve
the plans and specifications if, in the opinion of the code enforcement officer, the
plans and specifications demonstrate a good faith effort to attenuate noise by
meeting the intent of this chapter to the maximum extent possible. In the event that
the drawings are rejected, the reasons for such rejection shall be submitted to the
applicant in writing. (Ord. 243, 10-20-1987; amd. 2003 Code)
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.Page 8of 8
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 50
b. No construction shall occur prior to the approval of the appropriate plans and
specifications. All construction shall be performed in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications as determined by the city and shall be deemed to meet the
noise attenuation requirements of this chapter. (Ord. 243, 10-20-1987)
B. Inspections:
1. All construction or work for which a building permit is required shall be subject to
inspections by the city. Inspections of noise attenuation work shall be performed during
the required building construction inspections specified by this code.
2. When inspection indicates that the construction is not in accordance with the approved
plans, the city may order such corrective action as may be necessary to meet the
noise attenuation requirements of this chapter. In lieu of performing such corrective
action, a building owner may submit a test report based upon field tests showing
compliance with the noise reduction level requirements contained in the applicable
noise compatibility table. The field test shall be performed in accordance with the
"American Society for Testing Materials standard E 336-84, part A1.2.2. outside to
inside (level reduction)". (Ord. 232, 5-19-1987)
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php10/6/2015
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 51
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 52
4/26/16 Planning Commission Packet - Page 53