Loading...
2020-05-05 Council PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA May 5, 2020 – 5:00 pm Mendota Heights City Hall MN Stat. 13D.021 - Meeting by telephone or other electronic means: Conditions - MN stat. 13D.021 provides that a meeting of a public body may be conducted via telephone or other electronic means if meeting in a public location is not practical or prudent because of a health pandemic or declared emergency. At its meeting on March 17, 2020, the Mendota Heights City Council declared a local emergency due to the CO VID-19 pandemic. As a part of this action, until further notice all City Council and committee meetings will be held by telephone, through other electronic means, or with social distancing measures in place. All public meetings will continue to follow the requirements of the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. In compliance with the Governor’s Executive Order No. 20-20 and stay-at-home guidelines, the Council Chambers will not be open to the public during the April 21, 2020 meeting. Interested individuals may a ccess the meeting in real time or later by viewing the meeting replay from Town Square Television (www.townsquare.tv\webstreaming) or the City’s website, or by using the dial-in information below. If the dial-in option is used, the line will be muted, so no outside comments or noise will be recorded. Note that long - distance telephone charges may apply. Because of technological limitations, the number of participants using dial -in cannot exceed 100. As a result, web stream participation is strongly encouraged. Dial in information: 1-312-535-8110 Access Code: 289 928 991 # 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Adopt Agenda 5. Consent Agenda a. Approve April 21, 2020 City Council Minutes b. Approve April 16, 2020 Council Work Session Minutes c. Acknowledgement of March 24, 2020 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes d. Approve Resolution 2020-31 Accepting a Donation of Equipment e. Approve Resolution 2020-32 Accepting a Park Bench Donation f. Approve HealthEast Use Agreements for the Fire Station g. Approve the March 2020 Fire Synopsis Report h. Approve the Claims List 6. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) *See guidelines below 7. Presentations – none 8. Public Hearing - none 9. New and Unfinished Business a. Resolution 2020-33 Approve Variance to ISD #197 for Wider Driveway Access on to Mendota Heights Road for Friendly Hills Middle School, 701 Mendota Heights Rd b. Resolution 2020-34 Approve Lot Line Adjustment for properties at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Rd c. Resolution 2020-35 Approve Variances for New Press-Box / Covered Bleacher Structure and Light Towers for Baseball Field at Saint Thomas Academy campus, 949 Mendota Heights Rd d. Establish a Council Work Session Date / Time 10. Community Announcements 11. Council Comments 12. Adjourn Guidelines for Citizen Comment Period: “The Citizen Comments section of the agenda provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. All are welcome to comment. Comments must be placed in writing, or email, and addressed to the City Clerk at lorris@mendota-heights.com, or sent in writing to City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118. All comments must be received by 4 PM CDT on the day of the meeting. Comments must be identified as “To be read at the May 5TH City Council Meeting”. Comments which are received in a timely manner will be read into the record by staff, at the appropriate point in the meeting, a nd shall be limited to 5 spoken minutes per person and topic. Presentations which require longer than five minutes will need to be scheduled with the City Clerk, and will appear on a future City Council agenda. Comments should not be repetitious. Citizen comments may not be used to air personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council members will not make any decisions regarding comments made under the Citizen Comments section at that presentation. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Citizen comments will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made, but rather for receiving the information only. If appropriate, the Mayor may assign staff for follow up to the issues raised.” CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, April 21, 2020 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. The meeting was held via telecommunications, and in accordance with Minnesota law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilors Duggan (arrived at 7:10 p.m.), Paper, Miller, and Petschel were also present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Petschel moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. A roll call vote was performed by the City Clerk: Councilor Paper aye Councilor Petschel aye Councilor Miller aye Mayor Garlock aye Motion carried. PRESENTATIONS UPDATE ON FIRE STATION EXPANSION/REMODEL BY CPMI City Administrator Mark McNeill noted that the Fire Department took occupancy of the new addition to the building on March 28th, and that work has begun on the remodeling of the original building. He stated that the schedule still anticipates an August completion date. page 3 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented, pulling item g. a. Approval of April 7, 2020 City Council Minutes b. Approval of 2020 Workers Compensation Insurance Renewal c. Approve Purchase Order for Great River Greening 2020 Work Plan d. Approve Ordinance 556 Amending Floodway Code and Land Disturbance Guidance Document e. Resolution 2020-29 Approve Limited Use Permit for Dodd Road Trail f. Approval of COVID-19 Families First Coronavirus Response Act Leave Policy g. Approve Second Amendment to the Real Estate Development Agreement with MH Development, LLC h. Approve of March 2020 Treasurer’s Report i. Approval of Claims List Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. A roll call vote was performed by the City Clerk: Councilor Petschel aye Mayor Garlock aye Councilor Miller aye Councilor Paper aye Motion carried. PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS G) APPROVE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MH DEVELOPMENT, LLC City Administrator Mark McNeill provided background information on the purchase agreement the City entered into with the developer MH Development, LLC (previously known as Grand Real Estate Advisors). He stated that the developer has completed its due diligence, but the financial element was delaying the process. He stated that the number of applicants for programs related to COVID-19 relief has caused a delay in the applicant being able to secure financing and therefore the developer has requested an additional 30-day extension. Staff suggested granting a 60-day extension, but the applicant hopes to move more quickly than that and hopes to be under construction by that time. Councilor Paper asked if staff have seen any changes to the plan. Mr. McNeill replied that the plan remains the same as what was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Councilor Duggan arrived at the meeting. page 4 Councilor Petschel moved to approve the SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MH DEVELOPMENT, LLC. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. A roll call vote was performed by the City Clerk: Mayor Garlock aye Councilor Duggan aye Councilor Miller aye Councilor Paper aye Councilor Petschel aye Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS No one from the public wished to be heard. PUBLIC HEARINGS No items scheduled. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) RESOLUTION 2020-30 ACCEPT BIDS, AWARD CONTRACT FOR THE MARIE AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that the Council was being asked to approve Resolution 2020-30, accepting bids and awarding a contract for the Marie Avenue Street Improvement Project. Councilor Paper asked if there is anything the City can do within the contract and schedule to ensure that the project remains underway and timely once construction has started. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the project provisions specify that a task has to be completed within a certain timeframe and he provided examples. Councilor Duggan asked for more information on the four percent cap on mobilization. Mr. Ruzek explained that a contractor is paid 100 percent for mobilization costs and provided additional details on the method the City uses to reimburse those costs. Councilor Petschel stated that this project will replace watermains as well and asked if the City has a good method of communication with residents related to water shutoffs. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek estimated that five to seven properties would be impacted by the watermain work. He stated that the City and St. Paul Regional Water Supply will work to communicate closely with those properties. Councilor page 5 Petschel suggested that staff find a way to communicate with those property owners early on in the process. Mayor Garlock moved to approve RESOLUTION 2020-30 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE MARIE AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Councilor Duggan aye Councilor Miller aye Councilor Paper aye Councilor Petschel aye Mayor Garlock aye Motion carried. B) CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF THE 2020 FIREWORKS DISPLAY (TABLED FROM APRIL 7, 2020 MEETING) Councilor Paper moved to remove the fireworks display discussion from the table. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Councilor Miller aye Councilor Paper aye Councilor Petschel aye Mayor Garlock aye Councilor Duggan aye Motion carried. City Administrator Mark McNeill provided a brief background on this item. At the April 7th City Council meeting, the Council chose to table for two weeks a decision on whether to have the City sponsor the annual July 4th fireworks display. Councilor Paper referenced agenda Item 9C, which states that the fireworks event is canceled. City Administrator Mark McNeill explained that the Council has not yet made that decision. He noted that this would be a separate decision. Councilor Paper asked how the company, being a nonprofit, would weigh on whether or not the company goes out of business. City Administrator Mark McNeill replied that it is his understanding that this company is a group of individuals that enjoy shooting fireworks and providing the service more as pleasure rather than attempting to make a profit. Councilor Miller commented that the City does not know what the Governor will advise and therefore it would make sense to not spend money on an uncertain event in these uncertain financial times. He stated page 6 that if the Governor provides an option in the future that would allow for this type of activity, he would support looking options at that time. Councilor Duggan commented that 14 years ago, the City celebrated its 50th celebration with its first fireworks display and it has continued since that time. However, we stated that because of COVID-19, he would support holding off on providing the fireworks display this year. Councilor Petschel echoed the comments of Councilor Duggan. She noted that because of budget impacts and social distancing, this would not be a good year to spend money on this type of activity and would therefore defer the event for one year. Mayor Garlock agreed that the fireworks should be deferred for one year. City Administrator Mark McNeill confirmed the consensus of the Council to not hold fireworks this year, and noted that he will advise the vendor as such. C) ANNOUNCEMENT OF CITY EVENT AND RECREATION SCHEDULING City Administrator Mark McNeill read aloud a written comment received from resident Michael O’Hair requesting the city allowing for the use of recreational fields by the residents. City Administrator Mark McNeill commented that this will be an unusual summer. He read aloud a draft statement by the City which addresses the cancelation of City events and recreation programs through July 6th due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Councilor Duggan commented on the importance of the morale of City staff and public safety and the spirit of the community. He congratulated everyone involved in following social distancing guidelines. He recognized a previous Councilor whose husband recently passed away. Councilor Petschel commented that she fully supports the City’s statement. She stated that the portion that addresses organized sports is similar to that of the most immediately adjacent community. She recognized the challenges of having young children at home that are bored but also does not want more children to be impacted by COVID-19. She commented that it is impossible to follow social distancing while playing organized sports. She commented that while some children may become very sick, other children may carry the virus without knowing and pass it on to others. Councilor Miller echoed the comments of Councilor Petschel. He commented that he can relate to having small children at home, which is stressful to manage. He encouraged everyone to try to relax in these uncertain times, noting that the timeline will be dictated by when it is safe. Councilor Paper agreed that it is good to follow the direction from the Governor. He asked for details on the golf course operations. Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence provided details on how the course will operate under the social distance guidelines. page 7 Councilor Paper stated that he would like to see an option for an unlimited punch card for the golf course, whether that is offered to youth golfers or to all golfers. Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence noted that she will provide a fee proposal to the Council at the next meeting. Mayor Garlock commented that the City’s 5K has been postponed, noting that an email was sent out the previous night alerting previous attendees that the event has been postponed. He noted that if the July 11th date does not work, the City could attempt to reschedule again but advised that the City will go by the guidance from the Governor. Councilor Petschel stated that she thinks that the Governor will have a plan that will be phased in and once the phases are identified, it will help the City to plan better. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Mark McNeill provided an update on the availability of takeout food from restaurants. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Miller stated that this Saturday, in accordance with the Governor’s request, community members will have an opportunity to drop off homemade cloth masks at fire stations across the state, noting that the Mendota Heights Fire Department will accept mask donations from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Councilor Duggan wished a happy Mother’s Day to everyone. Councilor Petschel stated that she has received a lot of inquiries from residents related to the current fire risk and whether recreation fires in backyards are allowed. She asked for an update on the car racing activity that took place on city streets the previous Saturday. Councilor Miller replied that residents can have recreational fires in their backyard and provided specifications on the size allowed for fire pits and the supervision requirements. He recommended that residents have a water source nearby if having a recreational fire. Police Chief Kelly McCarthy stated that for quite some time Mendota Heights Road has been used as a racetrack, which has evolved to sometimes having groups of 400 or 500 people. She stated that the City has tried different methods of enforcement and the citizens are growing increasingly weary of the situation. She provided an update on the event the previous weekend where about 200 citations for illegal activity were issued. Councilor Paper thanked all the medical professionals in Mendota Heights for continuing to do their jobs during this time. He commented that the School District and educators that have worked to develop content for distance learning. Mayor Garlock thanked staff and the Council for participation in the virtual meetings, which will continue as long as it needs to until things can get back to normal. page 8 ADJOURN Mayor Garlock moved to adjourn. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Councilor Paper aye Councilor Petschel aye Mayor Garlock aye Councilor Duggan aye Councilor Miller aye Motion carried. Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 8:06 p.m. ____________________________________ Neil Garlock Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk page 9 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Council Work Session Held Tuesday, April 16, 2020 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a work session of the Mendota Heights City Council was held at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall. Council members Duggan, Paper, and Petschel were present via teleconferencing. Councilor Miller joined the meeting, via teleconferencing, at 2:35 p.m. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek, and Finance Director Kristen Schabacker. Staff present via teleconferencing included Police Chief Kelly McCarthy, Community Development Director Tim Benetti, Recreation Coordinator Meredith Lawrence, and City Clerk Lorri Smith. DISCUSSION OF COVID 19 IMPACTS ON THE CITY BUDGET Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director, reviewed with the Council the Marie Avenue reconstruction project scheduled to be completed this summer. Five bids were received, all of which were below the engineer’s estimate. He noted the cost of the total project is estimated to be $3.6 million. He stated that 57 residential properties are proposed to be assessed and that no negative comments have been received from the residents. This project is proposed to be approved at the next Council meeting. Councilor Petschel stated she is concerned about residents being able to pay their assessments during these hard times. She asked how certain the city is that state aid will be received. Mr. Ruzek stated that state aid will be received, but he is unsure of the exact amount. Councilor Paper asked how long the bids are good for. He questioned the unit pricing for the products. Mr. Ruzek stated the bids are good for 60 days. Council Duggan asked if the city could receive and extension for accepting the bids and awarding the project. He asked if St. Paul Water has been notified of this project. Mr. Ruzek stated that an extension of the bids could be discussed with the vendors and an answer would be known by the Council meeting on Tuesday, April 21. He stated that St. Paul Water has been notified. Mr. Duggan noted that no negative comments from the residents to be assessed is a good sign. Mayor Garlock asked about the proposed completion date of this project. Mr. Ruzek stated it is proposed to be completed by the end of October 2020. Council Petschel stated she would be in support of completing this project this year, and stated she would prefer that next year’s budget only include smaller construction projects. page 10 Councilor Paper noted that the city is realizing a significant savings since the bids all came in under the engineer’s estimate. He supports the city moving forward with this project, as long as we remain cautious for next year. Councilor Duggan and Mayor Garlock both stated they favor moving forward with this project. Administrator McNeill noted this project will be included on the April 21st Council agenda. City Administrator McNeill noted that due to the Covid 19 issues, the city is concerned about the receipt of tax revenues. He stated that Dakota County has notified the city that they will be paying the City 100% of the tax revenues collected by May 15. The remaining amount will come at a later date. Councilor Jay Miller joined the meeting at this point. Mr. McNeill noted that the city is not dependent on fees collected for permits and licenses issued. Assistant to the City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson noted that for the Par 3 golf course and recreational programming, the city is in a holding pattern until the Governor says it is ok to proceed with these activities. Recreational staff is working on a plan for opening of the Par 3, to maintain social distancing. She stated the greens are being maintained at this point. The Council discussed the use of the fields by the user groups, and that there may be a need to adjust the fees. Councilor Duggan stated that it is important for the city to keep the golf course maintained. Councilor Petschel noted that most cities are closing their aquatic centers for the summer due to the Covid 19 virus. She stated that it is important for the City to decide how we want to proceed with the opening up of the fields and facilities. Councilor Paper stated that the City should be following the Governor’s lead on opening up of the facilities and fields to public use. Mayor Garlock stated that he would be in favor of the City keeping all recreational programs, events, facilities and fields closed to the public through at least July 6th. He would like the City to put a statement out to this effect, to notify the public. Councilor Petschel and Miller both stated they are in agreement, and that the Par 3 golf course could open sooner, if allowed by the Governor. Councilor Paper stated he would prefer the date be set for May 4. City Administrator McNeill reviewed with the Council a list of notable general fund expenditures that are scheduled to be purchased in 2020. Councilor Petschel stated that during these uncertain times, she would like to see the city pull back on major expenses for the next two years. She would also like to see the budget and levy remain stable over the next two years. Councilor Paper agreed. He stated that the Natural Resources Plan is important for the city, and he would like to see that continue to be funded. page 11 Councilor Miller stated he would also like to see the City continue to update the current Natural Resources Plan. Councilor Duggan stated that employee morale is important to pay attention to and that the City continue to maintain our facilities. He feels it is important for the City to participate with the School District in the reopening of the schools. He suggested the city have representation present at the School District’s meetings in regards to this. Mayor Garlock feels that capital items that have not been ordered should be put on hold. He would like to see the City continue with updating of the Natural Resources Plan. In regards to personnel, it was noted that the Police Department is in the process of hiring one police officer. It was determined that the process will be delayed as long as possible. Ms. Jacobson noted that the hiring of seasonal positions has been put on hold. Mr. McNeill noted that a plan is being worked on for the reopening of City Hall to the public. Final Comments: Councilor Duggan noted the importance of working with the School District on the reopening up of the schools. He noted the importance of employee morale. Councilor Miller noted that communication is key. Councilor Paper asked about the status of the annual Officer Scott Patrick 5K walk/run and the Parks Celebration. Mayor Garlock noted these events will be rescheduled for a time after July 6th. Councilor Petschel thanked Mr. McNeill, staff, and the other Council members for their leadership during this time. ADJOURN Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 3:57 pm. ____________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 12 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 24, 2020 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 24, 2020 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Mary Magnuson, Commissioners Patrick Corbett, Michael Toth, Brian Petschel, and Andrew Katz. Those absent: Commissioners John Mazzitello and Litton Field. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of February 27, 2020 Minutes COMMISSIONER TOTH MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 27, 2020 AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 Hearings A) PLANNING CASE 2020-04 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, 2121 DODD ROAD – CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the Mendota Heights Fire Department is seeking a conditional use permit to provide a new freestanding electronic (LED) message display sign, located on the fire station property at 2121 Dodd Road. The property is generally located at the NW corner of Dodd Road and Mendakota Drive. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; no comments or objections to this request were received. Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation on this planning item to the Commission. Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Katz asked if there would be electric run underground to power the sign and whether there has been consideration of solar power. page 13 Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the fire station has solar panels on the roof already which make the building self-sufficient in terms of energy needs. Commissioner Toth stated that it appears the sign would be setback 40 feet from Dodd Road and wanted to ensure that the lighting for the sign would not be distracting to drivers. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the ordinance has a brightness threshold for signs and the City would ensure that it meets the Code requirements. He noted that if there are any complaints, the City could easily make the necessary adjustments. He provided additional details on the messaging that would be posted on the sign. Chair Magnuson opened the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Magnuson asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, WHICH ALLOWS THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW FREESTANDING (MONUMENT) ELECTRONIC DISPLAY SIGN AT THE FIRE STATION PROPERTY, LOCATED AT 2121 DODD ROAD, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THE NEW FREESTANDING MESSAGE SIGN SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STANDARD UNDER CITY CODE SECTION 12-1D-15: SIGNS: SUBSECTION h. SIGNS IN R DISTRICTS, SUBPAR. 7. 2. THE FINAL LANDSCAPED PLANS FOR THE NEW SIGN AREA SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE MASTER GARDENERS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY’S POLLINATOR FRIENDLY POLICY. ANY PLANTINGS OR REVISIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE MASTER GARDENERS WILL BE INCORPORATED (AS BEST ASS POSSIBLE) BY THE CITY’S CONTRACTOR. 3. A NEW SIGN PERMIT FOR THE ELECTRONIC SIGN SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND CITY STAFF PRIOR TO ANY WORK ON THE SIGN. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 Chair Magnuson advised the City Council would consider this application at its April 7, 2020 meeting. page 14 B) PLANNING CASE 2020-05 SEAN HOFFMAN AND JEFF WIELAND, 2030 DODD ROAD – VARIANCE Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Sean Hoffman and Jeff Wieland, manager and owner of Mendota Heights BP-Amoco Station, are requesting consideration of a variance to the provisions of City Code Section 12-1D-1 related to nonconforming uses, structures and lands. This variance would allow the owners to expand a legal nonconforming structure and use at this location. The property is located at 2030 Dodd Road. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; no comments or objections to this request were received. Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation on this planning item to the Commission. Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Corbett asked where the findings of fact could be found. Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided clarification on where those details can be found in the staff report. Commissioner Katz referenced the project scope plan, noting that it appears an existing service bay would be converted to a carwash. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that is an outdated plan (old survey from 1966) that is not a part of this plan. Commissioner Katz stated that the existing cashier and convenience store area are being turned into a service bay and asked if the pumps would need to be relocated. Chair Magnuson asked what the Commission is being asked to vary. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the variance is the expansion of a nonconforming structure that does not meet setbacks. He stated that the main goal with an expansion is not to increase any nonconforming elements. He stated that the established footprint would not be expanded as the expansion would be filling in a notched area with more building. Chair Magnuson stated that if the setback requirements for today were imposed on the site, there could not be a gas station at that location. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that to be true. Chair Magnuson opened the public hearing. page 15 Sean Hoffman, 2030 Dodd Road, stated that they want to expand into a third bay, under the existing roofline, to increase flexibility in scheduling. He stated that the pumps are not going to be moved, but the first pump nearest the garage doors may be eliminated if it becomes nonviable. Commissioner Toth stated that it appears the storage area will become part of the convenience store and asked where the storage would occur. Mr. Hoffman provided details on the storage that would occur, noting that they follow a similar model at another location. Commissioner Toth asked for input on the statement in the applicant’s narrative that there is demand for an additional service bay. Mr. Hoffman replied that they have had an increase in business as the residential areas in the community continue to grow. He stated that he has had to delay appointments because of scheduling, which sometimes causes customers to go to another business. Commissioner Toth commented that the parking space is condensed onsite. Mr. Hoffman noted that they also rent parking spaces from the adjacent mall. Commissioner Toth commended the business for keeping a clean site. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Magnuson asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS TO SUPPORT THE GRANTING OF SAID VARIANCE, WITH THE CONDITIONS NOTED THEREIN. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 Chair Magnuson advised the City Council would consider this application at its April 7, 2020 meeting. page 16 Staff Announcements / Updates Community Development Director Tim Benetti gave the following verbal review: • The City is still in the midst of changing conditions due to COVID-19 and staff will advise the Commission if conditions change. Chair Magnuson stated that she would be concerned that people would be concerned with attending to provide public comments. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that staff continues to communicate to the public to encourage residents to reach out via telephone or email. He explained that residents can submit comments via telephone or email that could then be presented to the Commission. Chair Magnuson stated that comments sent directly to the Commission members are read and encouraged residents to use that method as well. Adjournment COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:36 P.M. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 page 17 DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator FROM: Kelly McCarthy, Chief of Police SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-31 FORMALLY ACCEPTING DONATION OF EQUIPMENT INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve a resolution which accepts a donation of equipment to the Police Department. BACKGROUND Minnesota State Statute 465.03 “Gifts to municipalities” requires all donations be acknowledged by Resolution. This requested action meets Minnesota State Statutory requirements by having the City Council formally accept the gift and recognizing the donor. Local business owner Rod McKay facilitated the donation of 11 “Body Armorvent” body armor ventilation systems for the police department. This equipment is designed to allow better air flow with an officer’s body armor, thereby keeping them cooler and more comfortable. A thank you letter will be sent along with a copy of the signed resolution. BUDGET IMPACT The estimated value of the donated equipment is $800. RECOMMENDATION If Council desires to implement the recommendation, a motion will need to be passed adopting RESOLUTION NO. 2020-31 FORMALLY ACCEPTING DONATION OF EQUIPMENT. page 18 City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION 2020 - 31 A RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACCEPTING A DONATION OF EQUIPMENT WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute 465.03 “Gifts to Municipalities” requires a resolution to be approved by the governing body to accept gifts to municipalities; and WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has previously acknowledged gifts by resolution as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights encourages and supports citizens and organizations who wish to participate in government; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights have duly considered this matter and wish to officially recognize the donation. NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights hereby gratefully accepts the donation of eleven “Body Armorvent” body armor ventilation systems, valued at an estimated $800, from Rod McKay. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of May 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS _________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 19 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Park Bench Donation – Caren Ponds COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked accept a park bench donation from Kenneth Herrmann and neighbors. BACKGROUND The Park Bench Donation program was adopted in 2001. Through the program, a resident may donate $1000 to the city to offset the costs to purchase and install a park bench. Any costs above the donated amount would be the responsibility of the city. DISCUSSION Kenneth Herrmann and nine other neighbors have submitted a request to make a donation through the City’s Park Bench Donation Program in memory of Katherine Thompson. Mr. Herrmann has requested to place the bench at the Caren Ponds across from Caren Court. It is an area which is being landscaped and maintained by the neighborhood. The desired language for the plaque is: In memory of our dear friend and neighbor Katherine Thompson (1972-2020) “Come, Sit and Enjoy the Day” Hugs, Kathy BUDGET IMPACT The $1000 donation will be used toward the purchase and installation of the park bench. Costs exceeding $1000 may be drawn from the Parks Equipment/Maintenance budget. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends accepting the park bench donation. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion pass RESOLUTION 2020-32, A RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACCPETING A DONATION. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 20 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-32 FORMALLY ACCEPTING A GIFT FOR A PARK BENCH DONATION WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights desires to follow Minnesota Statute 465.03 “Gifts to Municipalities”; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Statute requires a resolution to accept gifts to municipalities; and WHEREAS, the City has previously acknowledged gifts with a resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights has duly considered this matter and wish to acknowledge the civic mindedness of citizens and officially recognize their donations. NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights formally accepts $1,000 from Kenneth Herrmann in memory of Katherine Thompson for a park bench donation. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this fifth day of May, 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST _________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 21 1636 992 991 1631 1643 985 1639 979 1640 975 1645 995 996 CAREN RDJAMES RDCA R E N C T Park Bench DonationCaren Ponds Date: 4/28/2020 City ofMendotaHeights060 SCALE IN FEET 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 containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor 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. Approximate Bench Location page 22 DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: HealthEast Use Agreements—Fire Station Comment: Introduction: The City Council is asked to approve three documents with HealthEast for the use of space by ambulance crews at the Mendota Heights Fire Station. This is in exchange for the provision of medical training and related services by HealthEast. Background: For many years, the City has allowed HealthEast to station ambulance crews at the Fire Station. This arrangement has provided Mendota Heights residents with quicker emergency response times, and has allowed the Fire Department access to related assistance and training from Health East. As part of the 2020 construction project, two additional garage bays and additional spaces were built, which will allow ambulances to be parked indoors and for the crews to be quartered in the Station. This will eliminate the need to constantly keep the ambulance engines running to assure the rigs are heated or cooled during outdoor temperature extremes. The construction project also provided for space for use by ambulance crews, so that those employees will have space separate from the firefighters. No rent payment will be paid under this agreement. However, in exchange, HeathEast will provide continuing education training and miscellaneous services to the MHFD for up to 4 hours each month, plus it will conduct an additional 18 hours of medical training annually. HealthEast will restock the medical supplied which are used by the MHFD when responding to medical calls. Finally, HealthEast will provide for its own material “consumables” and provide for the daily upkeep of its share of facilities used. There are three documents to be approved: • Lease Agreement o This covers the specifics of HealthEast’s occupancy of the physical space in the MHFD. • Agreement for Services o This includes the services of the Medical Director, and other related services to be provided to the Fire Department. Specifics of expectations are outlined in its Exhibit A—Statement of Work. This is dated January 23, 2020, the date of HealthEast’s signature, but the City Council is asked to approve it at this time. • Health East Business Associates Agreement page 23 o This is required by HealthEast of all of its business partners, and provides the expectations and assurances that confidentiality and other mandated protocols will be observed. The proposed agreements formalize the “handshake” relationship that the City and HealthEast has had for years. Budget Impact: There is no direct additional impact on the City’s operating budget as a result of these documents. However, while not tied to these agreements, there will be added costs to the Fire Department’s budget as a result of operating a larger number of square feet of space in FY 2021. This is because the total size of the building has more than doubled. That impact will need to be addressed in upcoming budget discussions. Recommendation: We are pleased with the ongoing relationship that the City has had with HealthEast. As such, we recommend that the Council approve the three documents, formalizing its past working relationship. Action Required: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize entering into the following agreements with HeathEast Care System, dba HealthEast Medical Transportation, and the City of Mendota Heights: • Lease Agreement • Agreement for Services • HealthEast Business Associates Agreement Dave Dreelan Mark McNeill Fire Chief City Administrator page 24 LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE AGREEMENT ("Lease"), is made and entered into this _______day of ________, 2020, by and between the City of Mendota Heights, a municipal corporation and political subdivision under the laws of the State of Minnesota, which includes the Mendota Heights Fire Department ("Lessor"), and HealthEast Care System, doing business as HealthEast Medical Transportation ("Lessee") (collectively "Parties"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Lessor is the owner of real property located at 2121 Dodd Road, Mendota Heights, MN 55118 ("Station"); and WHEREAS, Lessee desires to lease portions of the Station to store and operate its ambulances; and WHEREAS, this Lease is in conjunction with the Agreement for Services (including Medical Director Services) (“Agreement”), dated as of January 23, 2020, which has been agreed by the Parties; and WHEREAS, Lessor is willing to lease a portion of the Station to Lessee upon such terms and conditions as are expressed herein. NOW, THEREFORE, Lessor and Lessee hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. LEASED PREMISES: Subject to, and upon the terms, provisions, and conditions hereinafter set forth, Lessor does hereby lease and demise unto Lessee, the following ("Leased Premises" or "Premises"): Station: The space Lessor has made available to Lessee is described in Exhibit A of this Lease Agreement. Additionally, Lessee shall have the non- exclusive right to use the following areas of the first floor of the Station: dayroom, kitchen, restrooms, dispatch/staging room, decontamination restroom as needed, and the hallways. Lessee shall also have the right to use the apparatus bay for one ambulance, with immediate emergency access to an exit (specific location to be assigned by the Lessor’s Public Safety Director), as well as two exterior parking stalls for Lessee's employees. The use of all areas is subject to the rules, regulations and policies of Lessor, which may change from time to time. There is no leased space above the first floor of the Station. 2. TERM OF LEASE: The term of this Lease shall align with the Agreement agreed between the Parties. Any prior lease between the Parties for any portion of the Leased Premises is hereby terminated. No rent shall be payable for the lease of the Leased Premises, it being the intent of the Parties for Lessee to provide certain services to Lessor under the page 25 Agreement, in lieu of rent. 3. EARLY TERMINATION OF LEASE: This Lease may be terminated without cause prior to the end of the term by either Party by providing 180 days’ written notice to the other Party. Upon termination of the Agreement, Lessee will promptly and peaceably surrender the Premises to Lessor in substantially the same condition existing on the commencement date of this Lease, ordinary and reasonable use, damage and wear excepted. 4. MAINTENANCE: a. Lessor shall be responsible for maintenance and repair of all structural components, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, electrical, plumbing and mechanical systems of the Premises. b. Lessor shall be responsible for maintaining the exterior and surrounding areas of the Station, including lawn care and snow removal. c. Lessee shall maintain and clean the Leased Premises and shall otherwise clean any mess or clutter created by Lessee in all other areas to which it has access (including dishes, counters, refrigerator, etc.). d. Lessee shall be responsible for all damage arising out of its use of the Leased Premises, ordinary wear and tear excepted. 5. VISITOR AND PET RESTRICTIONS: Lessee shall not allow anyone other than its own personnel into any portion of the Station unless authorized in advance by the Lessor’s Public Safety Director. Lessee shall not allow any pets or other non-service animals into any portion of the Station. 6. LESSOR PROPERTY: Lessee acknowledges that this Lease does not grant Lessee unfettered access to Lessor's tools, equipment, furniture or fixtures outside of the Leased Premises and common areas. Lessee shall not use, borrow or take any Lessor tools or equipment without express prior authorization from the Lessor’s Public Safety Director. Tools and equipment include hand tools, power tools, audio visual equipment, computers, and firefighting and EMT apparatus and supplies. 7. INSURANCE: Each Party represents that it has and will continue to have appropriate levels of insurance to cover its operations, vehicles, equipment and personnel during the term of this Lease. Certificates of insurance shall be provided from one Party to the other upon request. 8. INDEMNITY: Lessee agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Lessor harmless from and against any and all claims, actions, liabilities, and damages of every kind and nature, and from and against all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, to the extent proximately caused by the negligence or intentional torts of Lessee, its agents, employees, licensees, or page 26 invitees, in or about the Station. In the event of any action or proceeding brought against Lessor, by reason of any such claim, upon notice from Lessor, Lessee covenants to defend such action or proceeding by counsel satisfactory to Lessor. Lessor agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Lessee and its directors, officers, employees, agents and representatives harmless from and against all loss, liability, damages and expense (including reasonable attorney's fees) caused by any act or omission of Lessor, its officers, employees, agents, invitees and representatives, except to the extent such loss, liability, damage or expense is covered by insurance maintained by Lessor. Lessor and Lessee hereby waive against the other any claims, liabilities or damages arising from or caused by any hazard covered by the insurance maintained or required by the waiving party. 9. NON-LIABILITY OF LESSOR: Except in the event of negligence or an intentional act by Lessor, its agents, employees, or contractors, Lessor shall not be liable to Lessee for any loss or damage resulting from or caused by any failure to furnish heat, electricity, water, gas, air conditioning or sprinkler system to the Leased Premises, nor for any consequential damage arising from interruption of any utility or services. 10. ASSIGNMENT: Lessee shall not assign or transfer any of its rights under this Lease or sublease any part of the Premises. 11. DEFAULT: a. Should any voluntary or involuntary petition in bankruptcy be filed by or against Lessee, Lessor may, by written notice to Lessee, immediately terminate this Lease and terminate Lessee's right to possession of the Premises. If Lessee does not voluntarily quit the Premises upon receipt of a notice of termination, Lessor may, in its discretion, recover sole possession of the Premises in an eviction (unlawful detainer) proceeding, and recover from Lessee all attorney fees, costs, and expenses relating to such proceeding. In addition, Lessor shall be entitled to recover all damages and other claims arising prior to the date of termination, including without limitation damages and attorney fees. b. If Lessee defaults in the prompt and full performance of any provision of this Lease and such default continues for 30 days after Lessor's written notice thereof to Lessee, or if Lessee makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, or if a receiver is appointed for the property of Lessee, or if Lessee abandons the Premises, then, and in any such event, Lessor may by written notice to Lessee, immediately terminate this Lease and terminate Lessee's right to possession of the Premises. If Lessee does not voluntarily quit the Premises upon receipt of notice of termination, page 27 Lessor, may, in its discretion, recover sole possession of the Premises in an eviction (unlawful detainer) proceeding, and recover from Lessee all attorney fees, costs, and expenses relating to such proceeding. In addition, Lessor shall be entitled to recover all damages and pursue all claims arising prior to the date of termination, including without limitation all damages and attorney fees. 12. RIGHT OF ENTRY: Lessor and its employees or agents shall have the right to enter the Premises at all reasonable times and upon reasonable notice for the purpose of inspection, cleaning, repairing, altering or improving the same or the Premises, but nothing contained in this provision shall be construed so as to impose any obligation on Lessor to make any repairs, alterations or improvements. 13. USE BY LESSEE: Lessee agrees to comply with all laws, ordinances, orders, rules, and regulations promulgated by all government agencies which relate to the use, condition, or occupancy of the Premises by Lessee. Lessee warrants that it will abide by Lessor's workplace policies and the Premises will remain tobacco and chemical free. Lessee acknowledges and agrees that Lessor has the exclusive authority to modify and/or change its rules and regulations at any time. Lessee shall not make any alterations or improvements to the Premises without prior written consent of Lessor. All alterations and improvements to the Premises and fixtures shall become the property of Lessor. 14. SAFETY AND SECURITY: Lessee is solely responsible for the safety and security of its employees, guests, and invitees while they are on the Premises. The Lessee is also responsible for maintaining security of the structure as well as the confidentiality of any door codes, keys, entry devices and the like used to gain access into the structure. 15. SIGNS: Lessee agrees that no exterior or interior window or door sign, advertising media, window or door lettering, placards, or other signs or advertising materials shall be installed, erected, attached or affixed to any portion of the interior or exterior of the Premises or the Station buildings, without the express prior written consent of Lessor. 16. DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION OF PREMISES: If the Premises are damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, Lessee shall have the right to terminate this Lease provided it gives written notice thereof to Lessor within 60 days after such damage or destruction, unless such fire, damage, or destruction is proved to be the fault of Lessee. page 28 17. SUCCESSORS: It is agreed that the covenants, terms and conditions of this Lease shall extend, apply to and firmly bind the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the respective parties. 18. SEVERABILITY: Should any one or more of the provisions of this Lease for any reason be declared invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision of this Lease, and this Lease shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. 19. RELATIONSHIP: This Lease does not create the relationship of principal and agent, partnership, joint venture, or any other association between Lessor and Lessee. 20. CONSTRUCTION OF LEASE: It is agreed that this Lease shall be governed by, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 21. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Lease shall constitute the entire agreement relating to the lease of the Premises between the Parties. Any prior understanding or representation of any kind preceding the date of this Lease shall not be binding upon either party except to the extent incorporated in this Lease. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto caused these presents to be validly executed in their respective names, as of the day and year first above written. LESSOR: LESSEE: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS HEALTHEAST CARE SYSTEM By: _______________________________ By: _______________________________ Title: Mayor Title: _______________________________ Date: _______________________________ Date: _______________________________ By: _______________________________ Title: City Clerk Date: _______________________________ page 29 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 1 of 8 HEALTHEAST BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT This HealthEast Business Associate Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into by and between HealthEast Care System, doing business as HealthEast Medical Transportation, with offices at 799 Reaney Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55106 (“Covered Entity” or "HealthEast") and City of Mendota Heights with offices at 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118 (“Business Associate” or "Vendor"). RECITALS Covered Entity is a health care provider that includes certain affiliated entities under common ownership or control, which together are treated as a single affiliated covered entity for purposes of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountabilit y Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"). The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued final regulations, pursuant to HIPAA and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), governing the privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information obtained, created or maintained by certain entities, including health care providers. Business Associate, through the provision of certain services for or on behalf of the Covered Entity is a “business associate ” of the Covered Entity, as that term is defined in 45 C.F.R. § 160.103. The arrangement(s) by which Business Associate is providing the services may be documented in one or more separate contracts or by other business arrangements (“Underlying Agreement(s)”). Covered Entity is required by HIPAA to obtain satisfactory assurances that Business Associate will appropriately safeguard al l PHI disclosed by, or created or received by Business Associate on behalf of, Covered Entity. Business Associate is required b y HITECH to directly comply with HIPAA privacy regulations. With the execution of this Agreement, t he parties hereby terminate any existing business associate agreements between them, whether oral or written, and incorporate the terms of this Agreement into the Underlying Agreement. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, if another business associate agreement (past or future) between the parties by its own terms is limited to a specified engagement or scope of work then that business associate agreement sha ll survive with respect to that limited engagement or scope of work. In consideration of the mutual promises and agreements below and in order to comply with all legal requirements, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. DEFINITIONS FOR USE IN THIS AGREEMENT “Breach” shall have the same meaning as defined in 42 U.S.C. § 17921, and as amended in 45 C.F.R. § 164.402. "Business Associate" shall include the company acting as the Business Associate, including but not limited to its directors, officers, employees, contractors and agents. “Designated Record Set” shall have the same meaning as defined in 45 C.F.R. § 164.501. "Effective Date" shall be the earlier of (i) the date this Agreement is fully signed by the parties, or (ii) the date PHI has been provided to the Business Associate pursuant to a business relationship which is subject to this Agreement. “HIPAA” shall mean the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, and the regulations there under, as amended from time to time. “HITECH” shall mean the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, and the regulations there under, as amended from time to time. “HIPAA Security Rule” means the Security Standards published on February 20, 2003 at 68 Fed. Reg. 8334 et seq. (45 C.F.R. Parts 160, 162 and 164) as hereafter amended, and “e -PHI” means electronic protected health information as defined in the HIPAA Security Rule that is created, received, maintained or transmitted by or on behalf of Covered Entity. “Individual” means the person who is the subject of protected health information, and shall include a person who qualifies as a personal representative in accordance with 45 C.F.R. § 164.502(g). DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 page 30 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 2 of 8 “Individually Identifiable Health Information” shall mean information that is a subset of health information, including demographic information collected from an individual, and (i) is crea ted or received by a health care provider, health plan, employer, or health care clearinghouse; and (ii) relates to the past, present, or future physical or mental health or conditi on of an individual; the provision of health care to an individual; or the past, present or future payment for the provision of health care to an individual; and (a) identifies the individual, or (b) with respect to which there is a reasonable basis to believe the information can be used to identify the individual. “Privacy Rule” shall mean the Standard for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information, 45 C.F.R. Parts 160 and 164. “Protected Health Information” (“PHI”) shall mean Individually Identifiable Health Information that is (i) transmitted by electronic media; (ii) maintained in any medium constituting Electronic Media; or (iii) transmitted or maintained in any other form or medium. “PHI” shall not include (i) education records covered by the Family Educational Right and Privacy Act, as amended, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g; (ii) records described in 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(a)(4)(B)(iv); and (iii) employment records held by a covered entity in its role as employer. As used in this Agreement, PHI shall mean PHI received, generated, accessed, or otherwise obtained by the Business Associate in order to perform services or other functions on behalf of the Covered Entity as part of a business relationship. “Electronic Protected Health Information” (“e -PHI”) shall mean PHI that is (i) transmitted by electronic media; and (ii) maintained in any medium constituting Electronic Media. When applicable, all references to PHI in this Agreement shall refer to e-PHI as well. “Required by Law” shall have the same meaning as defined in 45 C.F.R. § 164.103. “Secretary” shall mean the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “Security Incident” shall have the same meaning as defined in 45 C.F.R. § 164.304, except that it shall not include unsuccessful attempts, such as port scans or probes. “Subcontractor” shall have the meaning of a person or compa ny to whom a business associate delegates a function, activity or services, other than in the capacity of a member of the workforce of such business associate. Section 2. OBLIGATIONS OF BUSINESS ASSOCIATE 2.1 Use and Disclosure and Data Security Review. 2.1(a) Use and Disclosure of PHI. Business Associate may use and disclose PHI only (i) as permitted or required to satisfy its obligations under any current Underlying Agreement(s) in place between the parties, (ii) as permitted herein, or (iii) as Required by Law. Business Associate shall not, and will require that its agents shall not, use or disclose PHI received from the Covered Entity in violation of HIPAA or HITECH or any other privacy or similar law applicable to Business Associate or in a manner that the Covered Entity cannot use or disclose such PHI . This includes but is not limited to, the Business Associate adhering with the minimum necessary regulation standards in HIPAA or HITECH and applicable guidance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Servi ces as well as policies and procedures of the Covered Entity (provided Business Associate has been given sufficient notice of such policies and procedures). Additionally, Business Associate may disclose PHI for the proper management and administration of the Business Associate, provided that (i) the disclosures are Required by Law, or (ii) Business Associate obtains reasonable assurances from the person to who m the information is disclosed that it will remain confidential and used or further disclosed only as Required by Law or for the purpose for which it was disclosed to the person and the person notifies the Business Associate of any instances where the confidentiality of the information has been breached. Examples of reasonable assurances would include confidentiality training for internal employees who access such PHI and/or sub-contracts with business associate requirements for third parties who access such PHI. Business Associate hereby acknowledges that, as between Business Associate and the Covered Entity, all PHI shall be and remain the sole property of the Covered Entity, including any and all forms thereof developed by Business Associate in the course of its fulfillment of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement or other arrangements between the parties. If applicable, Business Associate shall use and disclose PHI for marketing and fundraising purposes on behalf of, and only as expressly directed by Covered Entity, and in DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 page 31 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 3 of 8 accordance with HIPAA and HITECH and any applicable guidance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Business Associate is prohibited from receiving remuneration for disclosure of PHI as described in § 13405(d). 2.1(b) Data Security Review Program. To monitor the security of PHI, Covered Entity may require Business Associate to participate in a reasonable data security review program pursuant to HealthEast’s Data Sharing with Third Party Policy. The intent of the review is to help both parties better define what PHI is being accessed and to better understand the Business Associate's access and security processes and controls with respect to HealthEast's PHI. For example, if Business Associate will be accessing PH I via remote access, then identifying secure gateway protocols which will apply to such remote access, or if Business Associate staff are on site to access PHI, ensuring that such personnel are aware of laptop use restrictions and encryption requirements. The review shall not be an undue burden to Business Associate, but merely a process which allows both parties to validate that sensitive data will be protected in accordance with HealthEast’s applicable information privacy and security policies, and data sharing procedures. Such review may be performed prior to the receipt of PHI by Business Associate and/or during an ongoing relationship between the parties. Although HealthEast may review Business Associate's data security procedures, the parties agree that Business Associate is independently responsible for the security of PHI and is not acting under an agency relationship with Covered Entity with respect to such data security procedures. 2.2. Additional Activities of Business Associate. In addition to using PHI to perform services under any arrangements between the parties, with prior Covered Entity permission Business Associate may: a) Aggregate the PHI in its possession with the PHI of other covered entities that Business Associate has in its possession through its capacity as a Business Associate to other covered entities, provided that the purpose of such aggregation is to provide Covered Entity with data analyses relating to the Health Care Operations of Covered Entity; and b) Create de-identified information from PHI. If such permission is granted, Business Associate warrants it will: a. Comply with HIPAA/HITECH rules and relevant Office for Civil Rights guidance in de-identifying the data; b. Not provide a “key” or include other data elements with the de-identified data which would allow data recipients and users to re-identify the data; and c. Not use third party or other external data sources to re -identify the data. 2.3. Safeguards Against Misuse or Disclosure of Information. Business Associate agrees that it will use all appropriate safeguards to prevent the inappropriate use or disclosure of PHI other than pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Business Associate also agrees to ensure that individual employees, Subcontractors or agents of the Business Associate will have their access to PHI revoked in a timely manner when such access is no longer needed to satisfy the Business Associate's obligations under this Agreement. Also, if Business Associate knows of a pattern or practice of activity of Business Associate that is a material breach of this Agreement, Business Associate must take steps to cure the breach or end the violation and report this to Covered Entity pursuant to Section 2.4. Business Associate recognizes that, under HITECH, and certain provisions of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, apply to a business associate of a covered entity in the same manner that such sections apply to the covered entity. Further, Business Associate will work diligently and cooperatively with Covered Entity to establish procedures and to take appropriate steps which mitigate, to the extent reasonably possible, deleterious effects of any unauthorized use and/or disclosure of PHI. 2.4. Reporting Obligations. 2.4(a) Report to Covered Entity, in writing, any use and/or disclosure of Protected Health Information that is not permitted or required by this Agreement, or any Security Incident, (whether or not such access, use or disclosure or Security Incident constitutes a Breach or involves Unsecured Protected Health Information as defined in 45 CFR 164.402) (“Incident”) within ten (10) calendar days of the Business Associate’s becoming aware of such unauthorized use and/or disclosure or Security Incident. 2.4(b) After an initial report is made by the Business Associate under Section 2.4(a) above, the Business Associate shall provide a detailed report which includes the information below. Such detailed report shall be provided within ten (10) calendar days of the initial report unless otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties. a) the date of the Incident; b) the date of the discovery of the Incident; c) the identification of each individual whose PHI has been, or is reasonably believed by Business Associate to have been, accessed, used or disclosed during such Incident; d) identify the nature of the Incident; DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 page 32 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 4 of 8 e) identify the nature and extent of the PHI accessed, used or disclosed, including the types of identifiers and the likelihood of re-identification; f) identify the type of employee who made the access, use or disclosure and provide Covered Entity with information as to how the Incident was addressed with the employee; g) identify who received or viewed the access, use or disclosure and the extent to which they actually acquired or viewed the PHI; h) identify what corrective action Business Associate took or will take to prevent further Incidents; i) identify what Business Associate did or will do to mitigate any deleterious effect of the Incident and the extent to which the Business Associate believes that the effect has been mitigated; and j) provide such other information as Covered Entity may request. 2.4(c) In the event of a Breach or other required notification and reporting under any other law, Business Associate agrees to pay actual costs for the notification and/or any associated mitigation incurred by Covered Entity, such as credit monitoring, if Covered Entity determines that the Breach is significant enough to warrant such measures. Business Associate agrees to establish procedures to investigate the Breach, mitigate losses and protect against any future Breaches, and to provide a description of these procedures and the specific findings of the investigation to Covered Entity in the time and manner reasonably requested by Covered Entity. If the Breach was caused by an act or omission of the Business Associate, Covered Entity shall determine if Business Associate is responsible to provide notification to individuals whose PHI has been accessed, used or disclosed, as well as the Secretary and the media, as required by HITECH. Covered Entity will use its best efforts to keep costs hereunder reasonable. 2.5. Agreements by Third Parties; Subcontractor Obligations. Business Associate shall obtain and maintain an agreement (a sub-business associate agreement) with each agent or Subcontractor that has or will have access to the PHI, pursuant to which such agent or Subcontractor agrees to be bound by the same (or functionally similar) restrictions, terms and conditions that apply to Business Associate with respect to PHI covered by this Agreement. Such sub-business associate agreement will obligate such agent or Subcontractor to comply with the applicable terms of HIPAA and HITECH, including the Security Rule to the extent the agent or Subcontractor has access to electronic PHI. Business Associate shall adhere to the HIPAA minimum necessary standards when sharing PHI with such third parties. Furthermore, Business Associate recognizes that there may be situations whereby Covered Entity (HealthEast) is acting as a business associate to external third party covered entities. In these situations, HealthEast must pass down its business associate obligations (or functionally similar requirements) to HealthEast's vendors who may be maintaining, accessing or otherwise using the PHI of these external covered entities as a Subcontractor to HealthEast. The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement and its terms and obligations shall apply to both situations (i) when HealthEast is a Covered Entity and Vendor is acting as a Business Associate to HealthEast, and (ii) when HealthEast is acting as a business associate to an external covered entity and Vendor is acting as a Subcontractor to HealthEast. 2.6. Access to Information. If this section applies because the Business Associate is maintaining PHI records in a Designated Record Set (meaning the records of the Business Associate are considered part of the Covered Entity's medical record), then within ten(10) calendar days of a request by the Covered Entity for access to PHI about an individual contained in a Designated Record Set, Business Associate shall make available to the Covered Entity such PHI for so long as such information is maintained in the Designated Record Set in accordance with 45 C.F.R. § 164.524. In the event any individual requests access to PHI directly from Business Associate, Business Associate shall within ten (10) calendar days forward such requests to the Covered Entity. Any denials of access to the PHI requested shall be the responsibility of the Covered Entity. 2.7. Availability of PHI for Amendment. If this section applies because the Business Associate is maintaining PHI records in a Designated Record Set (meaning the records of the Business Associate are considered part of the Covered Entity's med ical record), then within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of a request from the Covered Entity for the amendment of an individual’s PHI or a record regarding an individual contained in a Designated Record Set (for so long as the PHI is maintained in the Designated Record Set), Business Associate shall provide such information to the Covered Entity for amendment and incorporate any such amendments in the PHI as required by 45 C.F.R. § 164.526. In the event any individual directs a req uest for amendment to PHI directly to Business Associate, Business Associate shall within ten (10) calendar days forward such requests to the Covered Entity or direct the individual to contact the Covered Entity directly. 2.8. Accounting of Disclosures. Within ten (10) calendar days of notice by the Covered Entity to Business Associate that it has received a request for an accounting of disclosures of PHI, Business Associate shall make available to the Covered Entity DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 page 33 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 5 of 8 such information as is in Business Associate’s possession and is required for the Covered Entity to make the accounting required by 45 C.F.R. § 164.528. At a minimum, Business Associate shall provide the Covered Entity with the following information: (i) the date of the disclosure, (ii) the na me of the entity or person who received the PHI, and if known, the address of such entity or person, (iii) a brief description of the PHI disclosed, and (iv) a brief statement of the purpose of such disclosure which includes an explanation of the basis for such disclosure. In the event that an individual requests such an accounting directly to Business Associate, Business Associate shall, within ten (10) calendar days, forward such request to the Covered Entity. Business Associate hereby agrees to implement an appropriate record-keeping process to enable it to comply with the requirements of this section. Covered Entity shall determine if Business Associate will be responsible to provide the accounting of disclosures to individuals requesting such information. 2.9. Availability of Books and Records. Business Associate hereby agrees to make its internal practices, books and records relating to the use and disclosure of PHI received from, or created or received by Business Associate on behalf of the Covered Entity, available to the Secretary for purposes of determining the Covered Entity’s compliance with the Privacy Rule. Business Associate will maintain records relating to disclosure of PHI for at least six (6) years. In addition, upon prior written request by Covered Entity, Business Associate will provide assurances which show its data security safeguards and procedures are HIPAA/HITECH compliant. This may take the form of an audit conducted by HealthEast reviewing Business Associate's agreements, policies and procedures related to the use and disclosure of PHI or may be a HIPAA compliance certification by a reputable third party vendor (similar to a third party audit of financial statements) or an alterna tive form which is mutually acceptable to the parties. 2.10. Notice of Request for Data. Business Associate agrees to notify the Covered Entity within five (5) business days of Business Associate’s receipt of any request or subpoena , or any other legal request, for PHI. To the extent that the Covered Entity decides to assume responsibility for challenging the validity of such request, Business Associate agrees to cooperate fully with the Covered Entity in such challenge. 2.11. Carrying Out Covered Entity Obligations. To the extent Business Associate is to carry out Covered Entity’s obligations under the Privacy Rule, it will comply with the Privacy Rule requirements that apply to the Covered Entity in performance of such obligations. 2.12. Return or Destruction of PHI. Within thirty (30) calendar days (or other mutually agreed upon time) upon the termination of this Agreement or any underlying agreement or business arrangement between the parties where PHI is used, or when PHI is no longer needed, Business Associate shall return or destroy all PHI related to the terminated agreement or arrangement, maintained in any form, including any PHI in the possession of a Subcontractor of Business Associate, in a manner that ensures its nondisclosure. If return or destruction is not feasible, Business Associate shall notify Covered Entity in writing. Such notification shall include (i) a statement that Business Associate determined that it is infeasible to return or destroy the PHI in its possession, and (ii) the specific reasons for such determination, which shall include record retention requirements. Covered Entity may in its sole discretion request Business Associate to provide a Certification of Destruction to Covered Entity. To the extent such PHI is retained by the Business Associate, Business Associate will limit its uses and disclosures to those purposes that make the return or destruction of PHI infeasible, and the terms of this Agreement shall survive and continue to apply to the PHI for as long a s the Business Associate maintains such PHI. 2.13. Injunction. Business Associate hereby agrees that the Covered Entity may suffer irreparable damage upon Business Associate’s breach of this Agreement and that such damages may be difficult to quantify. Business Associate hereby agrees that the Covered Entity may file an action for an injunction to enforce the terms of this Agreement against Business Associat e, in addition to any other remedy the Covered Entity may have. 2.14. Insurance. Business Associate has and will maintain sufficient insurance to cover its obligations under this Agreement and breaches thereof. This shall include specific coverage for a breach of data security. For the purposes of this Agreement, sufficient insurance shall mean Business Associate will maintain (or self-insure to the same extent) coverage, which may include a network security policy, a general liability policy or other commercial liability insurance with coverage limits not less than $1,000,000/occurrence and $3,000,000/aggregate, and commercial umbrella liability insurance with excess coverage of not less than $5,000,000. 2.15. No Limitation of Liability. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Underlying Agreement(s) between the parties, there shall be no limitation of liability for a breach of this Agreement and Business Associate shall be fully liable for any such breach. DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 page 34 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 6 of 8 Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF COVERED ENTITY 3.1. Privacy Practices. If and only to the extent applicable, Covered Entity shall notify Business Associate of any limitation(s) in its notice of privacy practices of Covered Entity in accordance with 45 C.F.R. § 164.520, to the extent that such limitation may affect Business Associate’s use or disclosure of PHI. 3.2. Individual’s Request. If and only to the extent applicable, Covered Entity shall notify Business Associate of any changes in, revocation of, permission by Individual to use or disclose PHI, to the extent that such changes may affect Business Associate’s use or disclosure of PHI. 3.3. Restrictions of Covered Entity. If and only to the extent applicable, Covered Entity shall notify Business Associate of any restriction to the use or disclosure of Protected Health Information that Covered Enti ty has agreed to in accordance with 45 C.F.R. § 164.522, to the extent that such restriction may affect Business Associate’s use or disclosure of PHI. Section 4. CONFIDENTIALITY; INFORMATION SAFEGUARDS; STANDARD TRANSACTIONS 4.1. Confidentiality. Business Associate shall keep all PHI strictly confidential and PHI shall not be used or disclosed by Business Associate for any purpose other than as specifically permitted under this Agreement. Business Associate shall requir e its employees, Subcontractors and agents to maintain the confidentiality of PHI as required by HIPAA and HITECH and to abide by the terms of this Agreement. Business Associate shall also ensure that its employees, Subcontractors and agents who access and/or use Covered Entity PHI have received training regarding confidentiality and privacy laws and regulations in addition to awareness of proper handling of confidential information. 4.2. Security. Business Associate agrees: (a)to develop, implement, maintain and use appropriate administrative, technical and physical safeguards, in compliance with HIPAA and HITECH, to preserve the integrity, confidentiality and availability of and to prevent non-permitted or violating use or disclosure of all forms of PHI, including, but not limited to, electronic and paper, that Business Associate creates, receives, maintains or transmits on behalf of the Covered Entity as required by 45 C.F.R. Pa rt 164, Subpart C (“Security Rule”), (b) to document and keep these safeguards current, (c) If necessary to move, transport or communicate PHI, Business Associate agrees to establish a secure method of transportation if necessary to email a secure email method will be utilized. Business Associate will ensure that any Subcontractor or agent to whom to it provides PHI agrees to implement reasonable and appropriate administrative, technical and physical safeguards to protect the PHI. Business Associate agrees to alert Covered Entity of any Security Incident (as defined by the HIPAA Security Rule) of which it becomes aware. 4.3. Use and Disclosure in Connection with Standard Transactions. If Business Associate conducts standard transactions for or on behalf of Covered Entity, Business Associate will comply, and will require any relevant Subcontractors or agents to comply, with each applicable requirement of 45 C.F.R. Part 162. Business Asso ciate will not enter into, or permit its Subcontractors or agents to enter into, any Trading Partner Agreement in connection with the conduct of standard transactions for or on behalf of Covered Entity that: (i) changes the definition, data condition, or u se of a data element or segment in a Standard Transaction; (ii) adds any data elements or segments to the maximum defined data set; (iii) uses any code or data element that is marked “not used” in the standard transaction’s implementation specification or is not in the standard transaction’s implementation specification; (iv) changes the meaning or intent of the standard transaction’s implementation specification. Section 5. TERM AND TERMINATION 5.1. Term. This Agreement is effective on the Effective Date and will continue for as long as the Business Associate uses and/or maintains PHI of the Covered Entity. 5.2. Termination Upon Breach of Provisions Applicable to PHI. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement or the Underlying Agreement(s), any material breach of this Agreement shall give rise to a termination option unless such breach is cured within (10) calendar days or other mutually agreed upon terms. Despite such cure option, Covered Entity may, in its sole discretion, choose to terminate this Agreement and the Underlying Agreement(s) if it determines that such breach is of a severity which cannot be cured or such breach represents substantial material risk to Covered Entity or its patients. In the event DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 page 35 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 7 of 8 terminating this Agreement and/or the Underlying Agreement(s) is not feasible, Covered Entity may restrict future disclosures of PHI to and usage of PHI by Business Associate to ameliorate against any effects of the breach. Section 6. GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1. Effect; Super Authority. With respect to the Underlying Agreement(s) and access, use and confidentiality of PHI, and the associated obligations of the parties contained herein, this Agreement supersedes any and all agreements or arrangements, whether oral or written, between the parties. This includes any and all agreements or arrangements which are entered into between the parties subsequent to this Agreement unless such subsequent agreement is a new business associate agreement. Any conflicts between the terms of other agreements or arrangements and this Agreement shall be resolved in favor of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the parties agree outside of this Agreement to additional obligations which specifically apply to the access and use of PHI (such as specific encryption security standards), then such specific additional obligations shall not be superseded by this Agreement and shall apply in full force and effect. 6.2. Amendment. This Agreement shall be deemed automatically amended to the extent necessary to comply with changes in applicable law. 6.3. Mutual Indemnification. The Parties agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless each other and each other’s respective employees, directors, officers, Subcontractors, agents or other members of its workforce, each of the foregoing hereinafter referred to as “indemnified party” against all actual and direct losses suffered by the indemnified party and all liability t o third parties arising from or in connection with and to the extent of any breach of this Agreement or of any warranty hereunder or from any negligence or wrongful acts or omissions including failure to perform its obligations under the Privacy Rule, by the indemnifying party or its employees, directors, officers, Subcontractors, agents or other members of its workforce. Accordingly, on demand, the indemnifying party shall reimburse any indemnified party for any and all actual and direct losses , liabilities, fines, penalties, costs or expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) which may for any reason be imposed upon any indemnified party by reason of any suit, claim, action, proceeding or demand by any third party which results from the indemnifying party’s breach hereunder. The Parties’ ob ligation to indemnify any indemnified party shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement for any reason. 6.4. Miscellaneous Terms: (a) Definitions. All capitalized terms used herein, but not defined above, shall be defined by HIPAA. (b) No Third Party Beneficiaries. Business Associate and Covered Entity understand and agree that the terms of this Agreement shall apply only to themselves and are not for the benefit of any third party beneficiaries. Individuals who are the subject of PHI are not intended to be third party beneficiaries of this Agreement. (c) Interpretation. In the event that any provision of this Agreement violates any applicable statute, ordinance, or rule of law in any jurisdiction that governs this Agreement, such pr ovision shall be ineffective to the extent of such violation without invalidating any other provision of this Agreement. Any ambiguity in this Agreement shall be resolved in favor of a meaning that permits both parties to comply with the then most current version of HIPAA and HITECH and their associated regulations. (d) No Waiver. No provision of this Agreement may be waived except in a writing signed by the waiving party. A waiver of any term or provision shall not be construed as a waiver of any other term or provision. (e) Governing Law. To the extent that federal law does not govern this Agreement, this Agreement shall be governed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, excluding its conflict of law provisions. (f) Assignment. This Agreement shall not be assigned by Business Associate without the prior written consent of the Covered Entity. (g) Relationship of the Parties. The Business Associate is acting as an independent contractor under this Agreement and all acts performed by Business Associate shall be in its capacity as an independent contractor. The parties agree that Business Associate is independently responsible for its PHI obligations under this Agreement and that , unless otherwise expressed stated in the Underlying Agreement(s), Business Associate is not acting under an agency relationship with Covered Entity. (h) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by facsimile, .pdf or hard copy and/ in counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same binding instrument. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties authorized representatives have executed this Agreement. BUSINESS ASSOCIATE COVERED ENTITY DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 page 36 Template Reviewed 10/12/18 Page 8 of 8 Sign: ___________________________________ Sign: __________________________________ Print: ___________________________________ Print: _________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Title: _________________________________ Date: ___________________________________ Date:__________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: 0EA6068E-2927-4745-94BB-F556B067A825 Chief, Shared Clinical Services Robert Beacher 1/29/2020 | 6:51:02 AM CST page 37 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D page 38 AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES (including Medical Director services) THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into effective as of January 23, 2020 (the “Effective Date”), by the City of Mendota Heights (the “City”) and HealthEast Care System, doing business as HealthEast Medical Transportation (the “Group”), but signed on the dates set forth below. RECITALS A. The City is a nonprofit municipality that includes the Mendota Heights Fire Department (“MH Fire”) that desires to contract with the Group to provide certain services, including medical director services, as set forth in this Agreement. B. The Group employs qualified employees, including physicians, and desires to contract with the City to provide certain services, including medical director services, to MH Fire as required by and set forth in this Agreement. AGREEMENT In consideration of the Recitals, the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the City and the Group hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE I GROUP 1.01 Retention of the Group. A. City hereby engages the Group to provide certain services, including medical director services (the “Services”) to MH Fire under the terms of this Agreement, and the Group hereby accepts such engagement and agrees to designate qualified employees for this purpose, including qualified physician employees to provide the medical director services (the “Medical Director”). A more detailed description of the Services is set forth in the Statement of Work atta ched hereto as Exhibit A. B. The Group will designate up to two physician employees who will share in the performance the Medical Director duties. The Group has the right to change its designation of a Medical Director from time to time by notice to MH Fire; provided that the Group shall change its designation of the physician serving as a Medical Director if MH Fire or the City reasonably object, for any reason, to the Group’s selection of such physician. If MH Fire or the City object to a physician serving as Medical Director, the parties shall discuss the objection and will attempt to work collaboratively to resolve any issues before the Group shall be obligated to find a replacement Medical Director. C. The Group shall comply with all governmental laws, rules and regulations relating to licensure and operation of MH Fire. The Group and the Medical Director shall also comply with the compliance programs and policies of the City and MH Fire, to the extent the program and policies, and any changes thereto, are made available to the Group. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D page 39 2 D. During the term of this Agreement, the Group shall be the only provider of medical director services to MH Fire. 1.02 Representations and Warranties; Quality; Medical Staff; Reporting. The Group represents and warrants that: (a) the Medical Director is, and will continue to be throughout the term of this Agreement, duly registered and in good standing with the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice and duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of Minnesota; (b) the Group and the Medical Director shall comply with all state, federal and local laws, regulations, rules and ordinances applicable to this Agreement or the services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement; and (c) the Group and the Medical Director (i) are, and will continue to be throughout the term of this Agreement, eligible to participate in the Medicare program, the Medicaid program and all other federal health care programs (the “Federal Programs”), and (ii) have not been sanctioned by or excluded from any of the Federal Programs and will not, during the term of this Agreement, be sanctioned by or excluded from any of the Federal Programs. The Group shall promptly notify MH Fire of any loss or suspension of, or material limitations on, the license of a Medical Director, of any malpractice or professional disciplinary action against a Medical Director which is initiated, pending, settled, or results in a judgment or adverse decision, and of any exclusion from participation in or sanction by a Federal Program. 1.03 Group Employees. At all times during the term of this Agreement, the individuals providing the Services will be employees of the Group or Fairview Health Services, or one of its affiliates, and shall be subject to the direction and contro l of the Group. ARTICLE II INSURANCE, INDEMNIFICATION AND PERSONNEL 2.01 Insurance. Each party represents that it has and will continue to have appropriate levels of insurance to cover its operations, vehicles, equipment and personnel during the term of this Agreement. 2.02 Indemnification. A. The Group agrees to indemnify and hold City and its officers, directors and employees (the “City Indemnities”) harmless from and against all claims, causes of action, damages, loss, costs and expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees) suffered or incurred by any of the City Indemnities and arising out of or related to the Group’s breach of this Agreement or the negligent acts or omissions of the Group or its employees. B. City agrees to indemnify and hold the Group and its officers, directors and employees (the “Group Indemnities”) harmless from and against all claims, causes of action, damages, loss, costs and expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees) suffered o r incurred by any of the Group Indemnities and arising out of or related to City’s breach of this Agreement or the negligent acts or omissions of City or its employees or volunteers. 2.03 Personnel. All personnel, such as supervisors, technologists, technicians, aides, janitors and other personnel, other than Group’s employees, including the Medical Director, and any other independent providers, required for operation of the City or MH Fire will be employed or engaged by the City, which retains full administrative control of such personnel. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D page 40 3 ARTICLE III TERM AND TERMINATION 3.01 Term. The initial term of this Agreement (the “Initial Term”) shall begin on and include the Effective Date and continue thereafter until the first anniversary of the Effective Date, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 3.02. This Agreement shall automatically renew for additional terms of one (1) year each (each a “Renewal Term”), unless either party gives the other party notice of its intent not to renew this Agreement at least ninety (90) days prior to the end of the Initial Term or a Renewal Term, as the case may be. 3.02 Termination. This Agreement may be terminated as follows: A. If either party shall default in its obligations under this Agreement (other than as described in subsection 3.02B) and shall fail to cure such default within ten (10) days after written notice from the non-defaulting party describing the default, then the non-defaulting party may terminate this Agreement at any time after the ten (10) day cure period while the default continues by written notice to the defaulting party; or B. City may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the Group at any time if the Group breaches or fails to meet any of the covenants, agreements, warranties and requirements set forth in Section 1.02 or if any representation contained in Section 1.02 shall be or become untrue; or C. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time upon at least ninety (90) days’ prior written notice to the other party. ARTICLE IV COMPENSATION 4.01 Compensation. There will be no exchange of funds between the parties in connection with the provision of Services hereunder. Rather, the parties agree that it would be mutually beneficial to exchange the performance of certain services as payment for the Services performed under this Agreement. The parties shall work together to determine an acceptable in-kind exchange that is agreeable to both parties, which may be modified from time to time. ARTICLE V GENERAL PROVISIONS 5.01 Confidentiality. If the Group or the Medical Director has access to or knowledge of information of a confidential or proprietary nature, including, but not limited to, medical records, business or financial records, or other matters or practices of the City or MH Fire, neither the Group nor the Medical Director shall, directly or indirectly, disclose, permit the disclosure of, or use any such information for purposes other than as necessary for the performance by the Medical Director of the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. The Group agrees to execute and comply with the terms of a mutually agreeable business associate agreement, which agreement is required under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and regulations promulgated thereunder. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D page 41 4 5.02 Agreement Terms. The parties agree that this Agreement and all of its terms are confidential and agree not to release any information concerning this Agreement or its terms to any person without the prior, written consent of the other party. This prohibition shall not apply to (a) any information required to be released by contracts existing as of the date of this Agreement or to fiscal intermediaries or governmental agencies having the lawful right to such informatio n, (b) any information otherwise compelled to be released by law, or (c) any information which is common knowledge or is in the public domain, other than by reason of unauthorized disclosure by either party. 5.03 Independent Contractor. The Group is, and at all times during the term of this Agreement shall remain, an independent contractor and not a partner of or joint venturer with the City. The City shall neither have nor exercise any control or direction over the methods by which the Group shall accomplish its duties. No relationship of employer or employee is created by this Agreement, and neither the Group nor the Medical Director shall have any claim against the City for any incidents of employment, including, but not limited to, salary, vacation pay, sick leave, retirement benefits, social security contributions, workers’ compensation payments, disability benefits, unemployment insurance benefits, or employee benefits of any kind. ARTICLE VI MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 6.01 Notices. All communications, notices and demands of any kind (“Notices”) which either party may be required or elect to give or serve upon the other party shall be made in writing and shall be delivered in person or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requeste d, to the following addresses: If to CITY: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Attn: Fire Chief If to GROUP: HealthEast Medical Transportation 779 Reaney Avenue St. Paul, MN 55106 Attn: Chief of EMS Notices delivered in person shall be effective upon delivery. Mailed Notices shall be effective when received, as conclusively evidenced by the return receipt. Either party may change its address by giving the other party written notice of its new address as here in provided. 6.02 Waiver. The failure of either party to insist in any one or more instances upon strict performance of any covenant of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of the right to enforce or require compliance with such covenant thereafter, and the same shall continue and remain in full force and effect. 6.03 Severability. Should any one or more of the provisions of this Agreement for any reason be declared invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D page 42 5 shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. 6.04 Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 6.05 Other Agreements. This Agreement, together with the attached Exhibit , constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and it supersedes any and all prior agreements, understandings, promises and representations, whether written or oral, made by either party to the other concerning the subject matter hereof. 6.06 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the City and the Group. 6.07 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or supplemented only by a writing executed by the parties. 6.08 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and such counterparts shall together constitute one and the same agreement. 6.09 Headings. The headings at the beginning of each numbered article or section of t his Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties, and are not a part of this Agreement. 6.10 Survival. The provisions of Sections 2.01 (for all statute of limitations periods), 2.02, 5.01, 5.02, 5.03 and 6.04 shall survive termination of this Agreement. City of Mendota Heights By: Its: Date: HealthEast Care System, doing business as HealthEast Medical Transportation By: Its: Date: DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D 1/23/2020 | 3:26:30 PM CST Chief, Shared Clinical Services page 43 EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF WORK The Group shall provide the following Services to MH Fire:  Medical Director services for up to four (4) hours per month unless the parties agree to an alternative number of hours based on the needs of MH Fire, including but not limited to the following: o Develop and approve patient care protocols o Oversee patient care quality improvement activities o Approve provider competency on a regular basis o Authorize the procurement of medical supplies and medications requiring physician authorization o Approve and participate in continuing education  Up to 18 hours of annual medical training provided to MH Fire staff  Restocking of medical supplies used by MH Fire in responding to medical scenes  Continuous exchange of medical equipment used by MH Fire at medical scenes  Such other duties as may be agreed to by the parties from time to time In exchange for the provision of the Services, the City will make the following available to the Group:  Bay Space and adjoining operational areas – Specifically room numbers 120, 121, 122, 123, 125, 126 and 127. The City shall maintain responsibility for all systems that are integrated into the building such as power, water, HVAC, Wi-Fi access points, access control software and hardware, appliances, plumbing, etc. The Group shall provide:  Daily upkeep of the space and associated costs for janitorial equipment and janitorial supplies.  Independent management of key card access for its employees.  Independent garage door openers. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D page 44 ND: 4839-0748-4179, v1 2  Independent domestic system’s such as computers, televisions, furniture, coffee maker, microwave oven, etc. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A5A59EE-8528-44E0-9F75-50A2C926681D page 45 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Scott Goldenstein, Assistant Fire Chief SUBJECT: March 2020 Fire Synopsis COMMENT: Fire Calls For the month of March the Mendota Heights Fire Department responded to 26 calls for service. The calls reflected the following geographic locations: Mendota Heights 16 call(s) Lilydale 2 call(s) Mendota 3 call(s) Sunfish Lake 0 call(s) Other 5 call(s) Types of calls: Medical/Extrication: 4 The Fire Department responded to three medicals in March. (Due to privacy issues, details about medical calls are not released in this document). In addition, we responded to one extrication involving a 20 month child that was locked in a bathroom. Good Intent: 3 In March, the department was paged for a smell of gas. Upon investigation, we were unable to detect any gas in the area. On a second call, we were paged to an outside fire but upon arrival no fire could be located. Finally, we were paged originally as an odor investigation that in reality was a call from a homeowner that realized a cooking pan with oil was left on a burner after they had left their home. As they were returning, they thought that smoke coming from the chimney was actually smoke from a fire due to the cooking oil. Fortunately, the oil had not yet ignited and there was no actual fire. False Alarms: 6 The Mendota Heights Fire Department responded to six false alarms. Of those eight false alarms: one was due to a manual pull station having been activated, two calls were for sprinkler system issues that caused the dry portion of the sprinkler system to become charged with water, two were due to cooking smoke, and a third was due to a food heater that was inadvertently left on. page 46 Dispatched and Cancelled Enroute: 8 The Mendota Heights Fire Department had eight different calls that we were dispatched for, but the calls were cancelled before our arrival. There were two additional dispatched and cancelled while enroute but those are listed under mutual aid calls. Mutual Aid Requests: 5 The Fire Department was requested five times for mutual/auto-aid by neighboring departments. Of those five requests, three were cancelled before our arrival, one was cancelled upon our arrival, and one involved our personnel being involved with a garage fire in South Saint Paul. Geographically, we had two calls from Eagan, and three from South Metro fire. March Training March 11 18.30 SCBA Option 2 This drill goes over proper usage and familiarity with our SCBA. It is a mandatory training. March 12 07:00 SCBA Option 3 This drill goes over proper usage and familiarity with our SCBA. It is a mandatory training. March 18 18:30 This training is an OSHA mandated training and includes bloodborne pathogen training as well as our Right-to-Know program. It is mandatory for all firefighters to have on an annual basis. March 23 18:30 Water Supply Postponed March 24 07:00 Water Supply Postponed Please note that our March 23rd and 24th training opportunities were postponed along with our upcoming April training opportunities that require close interaction or classroom setting instruction due to the current pandemic. Our training department is in the process of posting opportunities for online based training to help replace the traditional hands-on training. page 47 Number of Calls 26 Total Calls for Year 72 FIRE ALARMS DISPATCHED:NUMBER STRUCTURE CONTENTS MISC.TOTALS TO DATE ACTUAL FIRESStructure - MH Commercial $0Structure - MH Residential $0Structure - Contract Areas $0Cooking Fire - confined 1 $0Vehicle - MH $0Vehicle - Contract Areas $0Grass/Brush/No Value MHGrass/Brush/No Value Contract TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSESOther Fire OVERPRESSURE RUPTURE $0 $0 $0Excessive heat, scorch burns MEDICALEmergency Medical/Assist 3Vehicle accident w/injuriesExtrication ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH)$0Medical, other HAZARDOUS SITUATION MEND. HTS. ONLY STRUCT/CONTENTS $0Spills/LeaksCarbon Monoxide Incident MEND. HTS. ONLY MISCELLANEOUS $0Power line downArcing, shorting MEND. HTS. TOTAL LOSS TO DATE $0Hazardous, Other SERVICE CALLSmoke or odor removal CONTRACT AREAS LOSS TO DATE $0Assist Police or other agencyService Call, other 1 GOOD INTENTGood Intent 1Dispatched & Cancelled 8 Current To Date Last YearSmoke Scare 16 44 68HazMat release investigation 1 2 5 8Good Intent, Other 0 4 1 FALSE ALARMS 3 4 0 False Alarm 5 15 7Malfunction2Total:26 72 84Unintentional3False Alarm, other 1 FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH MUTUAL AID 5 INSPECTIONS Total Calls 26 INVESTIGATIONS RE-INSPECTION WORK PERFORMED Hours To Date Last Year MEETINGS FIRE CALLS 441.5 1178.5 1381.5 MEETINGS 62 294 215 ADMINISTRATION TRAINING 136.5 683.5 903.5 SPECIAL ACTIVITY 99 158 56.5 PLAN REVIEW/TRAINING FIRE MARSHAL 0 48.5 TOTAL:0 TOTALS 739 2314 2605 REMARKS:SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SYNOPSIS LilydaleMendotaSunfish LakeOther MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT MARCH 2020 MONTHLY REPORT FIRE LOSS TOTALS LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS Mendota Heights page 48 page 49 page 50 page 51 page 52 page 53 page 54 page 55 page 56 page 57 page 58 page 59 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor Garlock and City Council, City Administrator McNeill FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2020-33 Approving a Variance to ISD #197 for Wider Driveway Access on to Mendota Heights Road, located at Friendly Hills Middle School, 701 Mendota Heights Road – [Planning Case No. 2020-06] Introduction City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution approving a Variance to Independent School District No. 197, for a wider driveway access to Friendly Hills Middle School, 701 Mendota Heights Road. Background The middle school is accessed by two openings off Mendota Heights Rd. The 30-ft. wide westerly access is for bus service only; while the easterly 28-ft. wide entrance serves as access to the main parking lot for staff and visitors. The school is seeking approval of a variance to widen the easterly driveway by 10-ft. to 38-ft. in width, in order to accommodate the dual, outbound turn lanes with one single entrance lane. On April 28, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public hearing by means of a remote Webex and web- streamed meeting, whereby a planning staff report was presented and received by the commission, and the Applicant was present to answer questions. The city received two (2) comments on this item; one objection and one favorable. A copy of the 04/28/2020 planning report is appended to this memo, along with meeting minutes and written public comments. Discussion The City can use its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on certain land use or zoning decisions, such as this variance, and has broad discretion. A determination regarding whether or not the request meets the applicable code standards is required. Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve the Variance to ISD #197 / Friendly Hills Middle School allowing the wider 38-ft. driveway access, with certain conditions and specific findings of fact to support said approval (noted in the proposed resolution). Action Requested If the City Council wishes to affirm this recommendation, make a motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-33 APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ISD #197 / FRIENDLY HILLS MIDDLE SCHOOL, 701 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD. Action on the proposed resolution requires a simple majority vote. If the Council wishes to over-turn this recommendation, make a motion to table this matter; and direct city staff to prepare an alternative resolution of denial for final consideration at the May 19th 2020 regular meeting. The 60-day statutory review period expires May 17, 2020, so an extension would be needed. page 60 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-33 RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 197 FOR WIDER DRIVEWAY ACCESS LOCATED AT FRIENDLY HILLS MIDDLE SCHOOL - 701 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD [PLANNING CASE NO. 2020-06] WHEREAS, Independent School District No. 197 (the “Applicant”) applied for a Variance for the property generally identified as Friendly Hills Middle School, located at 701 Mendota Heights Road, and which is legally described in attached Exhibit A (the “Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is guided under the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as Institutional – “S-School” and zoned R-1 One Family Residential, according to the city’s official Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, the Applicant is seeking a Variance to the provisions of City Code Section 12-1D-16, Subpart E.1, related to driveway access widths in residential districts, whereby the variance would allow the Applicant to widen an existing driveway access from 28-feet in width to 38-feet in width, as presented under Planning Case No. 2020-06; and WHEREAS, Title 12-1L-5 of the City Code (Variances) allows for the Council to grant variances or certain modifications from the strict application of the provisions of the City Code, and impose conditions and safeguards with variances if so needed or granted: and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2020, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter, and whereupon closing the hearing and follow-up discussion on this item with staff and the Applicant, the Planning Commission recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve the application for Variance, with certain findings of fact to support such approval. page 61 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the recommendation from the Planning Commission is hereby affirmed, and the Variance requested by Independent School District No. 197 under Planning Application Case No. 2020-06, for Friendly Hills Middle School, 701 Mendota Heights Road, is hereby approved with the following findings of fact: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of the Variance to City Code Section 12- 1D-16, Subpart E.1, as it relates to a driveway access exceeding the twenty-five foot (25') width standard for uses in a residential district, specifically for the easterly main access driveway to be 38-feet in width, located at Friendly Hills Middle School, 701 Mendota Heights Road, and with the following supporting findings- of-facts: i.) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, as this school use functions more like an institutional use rather than a typical single-family use in the underlying R-1 One Family Residential District, and therefore warrants increased, but reasonable allowances for granting a wider driveway access on to a public roadway system. ii.) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods; since the school is and has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community, and there is an accepted expectation that this improved wider driveway access can be considered a reasonable improvement for the overall safety, benefit and enjoyment of the school, its students, faculty, and the community. iii.) The general limitedness, scale and scope of this variance needed to approve this wider driveway access for this school site, can be considered consistent with the spirit and intent of the City Code and Comprehensive Plan for the community, and may be approved as presented herein. iv.) The Applicant has proven a reasonable justification and demonstrated a practical difficulty in this case for granting of the variance presented herein. page 62 C. The City has considered the factors required by Title 12-1L-5E1 of the City Code, including but not limited to the effect of the Variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of the Variance on the danger of fire and the risk to public safety, and upon the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan, and has determined this Variance will not affect or pose any negative impacts upon the neighborhood or the community in general. D. Approval of the Variance noted herein are for Friendly Hills Middle School/ISD #197 (701 Mendota heights Road) only, and does not apply or give precedential value to any other properties throughout the City. All variance applicants must apply for and provide a project narrative to the City to justify a variance. All variance requests must be reviewed independently by city staff and legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code. E. The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2020-06, dated and presented April 28, 2020, on file with the City of Mendota Heights, is hereby fully incorporated into this Resolution No. 2020-33. F. The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject to his Variance request. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact created by the variance. Conditions related to this transaction are as follows: 1. The Applicant shall not deviate from the site plan under this application review; nor increase the width of this driveway access (or other access) beyond the approved 38-ft. measurement without first seeking and receiving city approvals, unless City Code provides for certain or allowable improvements to be made without any special application review process. 2. All grading and construction activity 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. 3. Approval of the variance is contingent upon City Council approval of the application and corresponding site plan. If the variance is approved, the Applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for construction of the proposed access improvements within one-year from said approval date. If after one year no work has commenced, the Applicant may request an additional extension (to be determined by the City Council) if needed. page 63 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Variance of a 38-ft. wide driveway access at Friendly Hills Middle School, 701 Mendota Heights Road, is hereby approved. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of May, 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 64 EXHIBIT A Property Address: 701 Mendota Heights Road Mendota Heights MN 55120 Friendly Hills Middle School Parcel ID: 27-03600-52-012 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED (Per Warranty Deed Numbers 344343 and 344342) All that part of the Northeast Quarter (NE I/ 4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW I/ 4) of Section Thirty-six (36), Township Twenty-eight (28), Range (23), lying North of the proposed Mendota Heights Road, containing 33 acres more or less, Dakota County, Minnesota. [Abstract Property] Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 page 65 Planning Staff Report DATE: April 28, 2020 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case No. 2020-06 Variance for Driveway-Access Width APPLICANT: ISD #197 – Friendly Hills Middle School PROPERTY ADDRESS: 701 Mendota Heights Road ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential / S-School (Institutional) ACTION DEADLINE: May 17, 2020 (60-Day Review Period) INTRODUCTION ISD #197 is seeking to widen its main entrance driveway access off Mendota Heights Road, from its current width of approximately 28-ft. to a proposed 38-ft. in width. This legal notice of this public hearing was published in the Pioneer Press; and notice letters were mailed to all properties within approx. 500-feet from the outer perimeters of the school boundary lines. The city received one email letter of objection on this item (attached), and no other comments or objections. BACKGROUND The property is located in the R-1 One Family Residential zone, but guided for S-School (Institutional) use. The subject parcel consists of approximately 30 acres in area, and contains a 90,000 sq. ft. school facility, with parking and various play fields (see aerial image – right). The school is accessed by two openings off Mendota Heights Road (see red circled images – below). The westerly entrance is approx. 30- ft. in width with a circular turn-around at its end, and is for bus service only. The second entrance is approx. 28-ft. in width and is a two- way driveway located across from Lockwood Drive, and provides dual access to the delivery area on the east side of the school, and leads to the main surface parking lot for staff, visitors and parent drop-offs in front of the school. page 66 On May 21, 1996, when the city was considering the approval of the building permit for new Friendly Hills Middle School at this site, a question arose on the proposed widths of the two access drives onto Mendota Heights Road. The concern was if the two access points designed at 30-feet in width would be wide enough to accommodate busses. The school’s architect indicated the design for these two access points was originally for 24 to 26 foot in width, but city staff recommended to widen to 30-feet instead. Then Public Works Dir. Jim Danielson further stated “…that a 30-foot curb cut is the maximum allowed by ordinance and a variance would be necessary for a wider cut.” The council eventually approved the permit, but with the following added condition: “…if it is determined by the school district traffic engineer that width of the entrances from Mendota Heights Road should be increased for safety reasons, that a variance from the 30- foot curb cut requirement of the zoning ordinance is granted to 36-feet.” Apparently this added driveway width was not needed in 1996, as the two driveways today measure 30-ft. and 28-ft., respectively. (note: the meeting minutes from the May 21, 1996 council meeting are attached for reference). Recently on March 5, 2019, the City Council adopted Res. No. 2019-78, approving a separate variance to build the new gymnasium addition on the back side of the school. As part of this request, the school district provided an overall Site Improvement Plan, which include a proposal to join the two existing driveway accesses off Mendota Heights Road into one singular, restricted access for busses and delivery vehicles, and a proposal to install a new driveway access out on to Huber Drive (east of the school) for staff/parents/visitor traffic only (see plan image – below). page 67 Staff recommended this proposed access/ driveway onto Huber Drive needed more study and analysis; and the city council agreed to allow the school district more time to prepare a study or present their findings later to the council, in which they stated they would make a final determination on the requested opening. This access to Huber Drive was not approved under the 2019 variance decision-making. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST At this time, the school district has decided to forgo adding the new driveway/access onto Huber Drive, and has instead elected to only widen the easterly access off Mendota Heights Road. The existing two-way access is approximately 28-feet in width, and the school is requesting to add 10-feet of extra driveway to include a new turn lane, which will widen the access/drive to 38-ft. in width (see plan image-below). There are no changes being made to the westerly bus driveway access. ANALYSIS of VARIANCE Pursuant to City Code Section 12-1D-16, Subpart E.1 (below): Parking areas shall be designed so as to provide an adequate means of access to a public alley or street. Said driveway access shall not be more than twenty-five feet (25') in width at the property line in residential districts and no more than thirty feet (30') in width at the property line in all other districts, and shall be so located as to cause the least interference with traffic movement. Since this school is located in the R-1 One Family Residential District, driveways are normally limited to only 25-ft. in width. However, as noted in the previous discussion and approvals from 1996, the city stated that “that a 30-foot curb cut is the maximum allowed by ordinance…” which may have been made on the belief or assumption the school was not part of a residential district or was considered a use other than residential (possibly institutional?), and therefore allotted the extra 30-ft. width access. page 68 In any event, the wider access to 38-feet is wider than both the 25-ft. and 30-ft. allowances, and therefore a variance to approve this added driveway width is in order. City Code Section 12-1L-5 governs variance requests. The city must consider a number of variables when recommending or deciding on a variance, which generally fall into two categories: (i) practical difficulties; and (ii) impact to the community. The “practical difficulties” test contains three parts: (i) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance; (ii) the plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality or neighborhood. It is also noted that economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. In addition, variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Section 12-1L-5(E)(1) further provides other issues the city may consider when granting or denying a variance, noted as follows: • Effect of variance upon health, safety, and welfare of the community. • Existing and anticipated traffic conditions. • Effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety. • Effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan. • Granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant, but necessary to alleviate undue hardship or difficulty. When considering a variance request, the Planning Commission must determine if these standards have been met in granting a variance, and provide findings of facts to support such a recommendation to the City Council. If the Planning Commission determines the Applicant has failed to meet these standards, or has not fully demonstrated a reasonableness in the granting of such variance, then findings of fact supporting a recommendation of denial must be determined. As part of any variance request, Applicants are required to prepare and submit their own responses and findings, which for this case, are noted in the application letter-narrative from AJA, dated April 2, 2020 (included in the attachments and noted below in italic text). 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance. Applicant’s Response: Practical difficulties exist in complying with the ordinance because of circumstances unique to the property. The current width of the driveway allows for two lanes- 1 in and 1 out. The proposed variance would allow for widening of the driveway from 2 lanes to 3 lanes: 1 inbound lane, 2 outbound lanes which we feel is reasonable. The variance request (and proposed driveway widening) is not based on economic considerations. Staff’s Response: The proposed use of the property as a public school is a permitted use in the R-1 District, and its continued use as a school, even with the proposed access driveway improvements can be viewed as reasonable request, especially when better traffic safety measures for the users and visitors of the school site are called for or warranted. The widening of this driveway with one inbound lane plus two outbound (turning lanes) should help alleviate some of the traffic congestions and tie-ups regularly seen or experienced at this school during peak [demand] periods. The variance requested in this case should therefore be considered a reasonable request and an appropriate means to allowing the continued and successful use of this property. 2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner. page 69 Applicant’s Response: Existing grades, drive alignment with the opposing street (Lockwood Drive) and maintaining safe visibility for incoming and outgoing cars, buses, and service trucks all combine as unique circumstances which were not created by the property owner. Staff’s Response: To the contrary, these existing access points and driveways for this middle school were actually designed and installed by the property owners (the school district) in 1996, thus creating a unique situation (i.e. impacts to safe traffic movements in and out of the site) that exist today. The owners however, are now taking the proactive approach and responsible action to resolve and alleviate some of these ongoing traffic issues caused by the school use by means of this variance. The wider driveway will hopefully provide better turning movements for the large number of parents’ and visitors’ vehicles that enter/exit this site during daily peak operational hours on regular school days. It is unclear why the school and/or city in 1996 did not press forward with making the driveways wider at the suggested 36-ft. width at time of their building permit review. It is now apparent from review by traffic engineering professionals and school officials, along with long time observations by public works and public safety staff, plus the growing number of local resident complaints, that the traffic in and out of this school site during peak hours can be frustrating and difficult to deal with and manage. The school and their consultants however, anticipate and believe this wider, 3-lane access driveway will help minimize congestion and back-up issues s in and around this main access point to the school and along this busy collector roadway system. Therefore, city staff believes there are certain circumstances unique to this property that lend support to granting this variance. 3. The variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Applicant’s Response: The general character and use of the facility will remain as is and will not alter the essential character of the area nor will it be injurious to the use or enjoyment of other properties in the vicinity. If granted, the proposed variance will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or of those utilizing the property or nearby properties. Staff’s Response: The variances, if granted, should not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods, as this school has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community, and there is a general expectation that any access improvement can be considered a reasonable improvement to the overall functionality, safety, benefit and enjoyment of the school, including its students, faculty, and the community. Staff believes the essential character of the neighborhood would not be altered by the granting of this variance. 4. Restrictions on Granting Variances. The following restrictions should be considered when reviewing a variance: a) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. This variance for wider access is being requested to provide better traffic safety for the users and visitors to this school site. Staff agrees this request is not being based on any economic factors alone, and therefore this request appears to meet this variance test restriction. b) Variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff finds that the requested access improvement plans for the subject property as requested by the Applicant, are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of school [or institutional] uses in the R-1 One Family Residential District. page 70 The subject property is designated S-School in the current 2030 Comp Plan and scheduled for P/S Public/Semi-Public Use in the proposed 2040 Comp Plan. Certain land use goals and policies are noted below (note: LUG= Land Use Goal; LUP = Land Use Policy): • 2030 LUG #1: Maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and character of the community • 2030 LUP #5: Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level in community development and building. • 2040 LUP #2.2.2: Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level in community development and building. • 2040 LUP #2.2.5: Public buildings and properties will be designed, constructed and maintained to be a source of civic pride and to set a standard for private property owners to follow. • 2040 LUP #3.1.5: Developers will be required to provide the transportation facilities within and adjacent to new subdivisions, including rights-of-way, roadways, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities necessary to support their development. These, and other guiding principles in both comprehensive plans provide for supporting school improvements, development and innovative solutions in the community. The requested variance appears to meet these goals and policy statements established under the comprehensive plans for the community; and will provide an opportunity for substantial investment to the existing school use, and will enhance the overall traffic safety needs for the school property. The proposed addition poses no threat or any effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety. This new wider driveway access and request for variance can be viewed or considered in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the current and proposed land use plans for the community. ALTERNATIVES for ACTION 1. Recommend approval of the variance to allow a reconstructed driveway and access to be 38-feet in width along Mendota Heights Road, based on the following findings-of-fact that support the granting of said variances, noted as follows: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of the Variance to City Code Section 12-1D-16, Subpart E.1, as it relates to a driveway access exceeding the twenty-five foot (25') width standard for uses in a residential district, specifically for the easterly main access driveway located at Friendly Hills Middle School, 701 Mendota Heights Road, and with the following supporting findings-of-facts: i.) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, as this school use functions more like an institutional use rather than a typical single-family use in the underlying page 71 R-1 One Family Residential District, and therefore warrants increased, but reasonable allowances for granting a wider driveway access on to a public roadway system. ii.) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods; since the school is and has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community, and there is an accepted expectation that this improved wider driveway access can be considered a reasonable improvement for the overall safety, benefit and enjoyment of the school, its students, faculty, and the community. iii.) The general limitedness, scale and scope of this variance needed to approve this wider driveway access for this school site, can be considered consistent with the spirit and intent of the City Code and Comprehensive Plan for the community, and may be approved as presented herein. iv.) The Applicant has proven a reasonable justification and demonstrated a practical difficulty in this case for granting of the variance presented herein. C.The City has considered the factors required by Title 12-1L-5E1 of the City Code, including but not limited to the effect of the Variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of the Variance on the danger of fire and the risk to public safety, and upon the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan, and has determined this Variance will not affect or pose any negative impacts upon the neighborhood or the community in general. D.Approval of the Variance noted herein are for Friendly Hills Middle School/ISD #197 (701 Mendota heights Road) only, and does not apply or give precedential value to any other properties throughout the City. All variance applicants must apply for and provide a project narrative to the City to justify a variance. All variance requests must be reviewed independently by city staff and legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code. E.The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2020- 06, dated and presented April 28, 2020, on file with the City of Mendota Heights, is hereby fully incorporated into Resolution No. 2020-____. (final number to be assigned later) F.The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject to his Variance request. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact created by the variance. Conditions related to this transaction are as follows: i.) The Applicant shall not deviate from the site plan under this application review; nor increase the width of this driveway access (or other access) beyond the approved 38-ft. measurement without first seeking and receiving city approvals, unless City Code provides for certain or allowable improvements to be made without any special application review process. ii.) All grading and construction activity 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. iii.) Approval of the variance is contingent upon City Council approval of the application and corresponding site plan. If the variance is approved, the Applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for construction of the proposed access improvements within one-year from said approval date. If after one year no work has commenced, the Applicant may request an additional extension (to be determined by the City Council) if needed. page 72 2. Recommend denial of the variance request, based on the findings of fact that confirm the Applicant failed to meet the burden(s) of proof or standards in granting of the variance requested herein, noted as follows: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The Applicant has not met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of the variance to allow the wider (38-ft.) driveway access in this R-1 District. These proposed access improvements do not appear to be essential or critical to the overall enjoyment and continued use of the property; and the fact remains this driveway access can remain in place and continue to function as it has since 1996, even without the need of this variance, which may be contrary to the general spirit and intent of the Zoning Code. C. Because the City finds that the first prong of the three-part test (reasonable use of the property) is not met by the Applicant, the City need not consider the remaining two prongs of the test (unique circumstances of the property and essential character of the neighborhood). 3. Table the request and direct staff to extend the application review period an additional 60 days, in compliance with MN STAT. 15.99. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission give careful consideration to Alternative No. 1, approval of the Variance to allow the wider (38-ft.) driveway access on to Mendota Heights Road, with findings-of- facts to support this recommendation, along with the conditions as noted herein. The commission has the authority to revise or modify these findings, and provide additional but reasonable conditions if necessary. Attachments 1. Aerial/Site Location Map 2. Applicant/Consultant Narrative Letter of Request 3. Site Plans – AJA Assoc. 4. Council Meeting Minutes (05/21/1996) page 73 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone I 651.452 .8940 fax www.mendota -heights.com • ,< CITY OF 1 n 1 MENOOT A HEIGHTS VARIANCE APPLICATION -CHECKLIST & RESPONSE FORM Applications will be scheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission and/or City Council only after all required materials have been submitted. Application submittal deadlines are available on the City's website or by contacting the City Planner. Late or incomplete applications will not be put on the agenda. Office Use Only: Case#: ---------- App Ii cant: ________ _ Address: ---------- The City Council may grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the City Code and impose conditions and safeguards in the variances so granted in cases where there are practical difficulties in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. "Practical difficulties", as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Please consider these requirements carefully before requesting a variance. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: • Electronic and hard copies of all the required materials must be submitted according to the current application submittal schedule. • Submit 1 electronic copy and 2 hard copies (full-size/to-scale) of all required plans. The following materials must be submitted for the application to be considered complete: D Fee, as included in current Fee Schedule (check payable to City of Mendota Heights). NOTE: Planning Application fees do not cover building permit fees, utilities, or other fees which may be required to complete the project. D Completed Application Form(s). D Letter of Intent. D Required Plans. APPLICANT MUST CHECK ALL APPLICABLE ITEMS INCLUDED IN THE SUBMITTAL Sketch Plan (to-scale drawing or certified survey, if determined necessary): D Location and setbacks of all buildings on the property in question including both existing and proposed structures. D Location of any easements having an influence upon the variance request. Variance Application (2019) Page 1 of4 2020-08 AJA Assoc. Inc. / ISD #197 701 Mendota Heights Rd. page 74 D Written consent and waiver of public hearing, in a form prescribed by the city, by the owners of property within one hundred feet (100') of the boundaries of the property for which the variance is requested, accompanied by a map indicating the location of the property in question and the location of the property owners who have given consent; or, lacking such consent, a list of names and addresses of the owners of property within one hundred feet (100') of the boundaries of the property for which the variance is requested. D If topography or extreme grade is the basis on which the request is made, all topographic contours shall be submitted. D If the application involves a cutting of a curb for a driveway or grading a driveway, the applicant shall have his plan approved by the city public works director prior to construction. Please complete the attached questions regarding your request. Responses will be presented to the Planning Commission & City Council. Please answer the following three questions as they relate to the variance request. (Note: you may fill-in this form or create your own) 1. Are there any practical difficulties that help support the granting of this variance? (Note: ''practical difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by City Code. Economic considerations along do not constitute a practical difficulty). ~ YES D NO Please describe or identify any practical difficulties and/or how you plan to use the property in a reasonable manner below: Practical difficulties exist in complying with the ordinance because of circumstances unique to the property. The current width of the driveway allows for two lanes-1 in and 1 out. The proposed variance would allow for widening of the driveway from 2 lanes to 3 lanes: 1 inbound lane, 2 outbound lanes which we feel is reasonable. The variance request (and proposed driveway widening) is not based on economic considerations. Variance Application (2019) Page 2of4 page 75 2. Are there any circumstances unique to the property (not created by the owner) that support the granting of this variance? IXI YES ONO Please describe or identify any unique circumstances below: Existing grades, drive alignment with the opposing street (Lockwood Drive) and maintaining safe visibility for incoming and outgoing cars, buses, and service trucks all combine as unique circumstances which were not created by the property owner. 3. If the variance was granted, would it alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 0 YES ~ NO Why or Why Not? Please explain how the request fits with the character of the neighborhood. The general character and use of the facility will remain as is and will not alter the essential character of the area nor will it be injurious to the use or enjoyment of other properties in the vicinity. If granted, the proposed variance will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or of those utilizing the property or nearby properties. The City Council must make affirmative findings on all of the criteria listed above in order to grant a variance. The applicant for a variance has the burden of proof to show that all of the criteria listed above have been demonstrated or satisfied. Variance Application (2019) Page 3of4 page 76 Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 MIDDLE SCHOOL PageNo. 6 May 21, 1996 Councilmember Krebsbach pointed out that the back of the property is not on the bluff line and the proposed construction will not affect he bluff at all. She stated that there is a drive behind the Fleming home and another house between it and the bluff line. Councilmember Krebsbach moved to approve the modified critical area site plan to allow construction of a fourteen by sixteen foot screen porch addition at 1902 Glen Hill Road, along with waiver of the critical area application fee. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a memo from Administrative Intern Hollister regarding an application for building permit from Independent School District 197 for a new middle school to be located on Mendota Heights Road at Huber Drive and for a tree removal permit. Council also acknowledged a letter from Mr. Chuck Stroebel, Environmental Scientist with the Minnesota Department of Health, to Mr. Thomas Smith regarding EMF concerns and letters of support from eleven residents. School Superintendent Dr. Robert Monson and the project architect, Todd Wichman, were present for the discussion. Dr. Monson informed Council that the school district is requesting approval of a building permit for the $12 million middle school and a tree removal permit relative to the construction. He also submitted the current schematic design for the project. Mayor Mertensotto noted that there are two traffic cuts into Mendota Heights Road, one for buses and one for general traffic, but was concerned that the cuts are only 30 feet wide. He felt that the width is very narrow for buses. Mr. Wichman responded that the plans had originally shown 24 to 26 foot curb cuts at each entrance to the site but they were widened to 30 feet at the request of city staff. He stated that the curb cuts could be widened if Council desires, and although he is comfortable with the thirty foot width, the question could be referred to a transportation specialist for review. He explained that the buses will be one way traffic movement in and out and that there are wide turning radiuses. Public Works Director Danielson informed Council that a 30 foot curb cut is the maximum allowed by ordinance and a variance would be necessary for a wider cut. page 77 PageNo. 7 May 21, 1996 Mayor Mertensotto stated that costs would be minimal to widen the cuts now. Dr. Monson responded that he would discuss the matter with the district's transportation staff. He explained that the plan is to have the buses come in at one time and then they will go to the traffic circle and come back out again in single file in and out. Councilmember Smith stated that the turn radius is important and that she would like to have a transportation specialist review the plan. Mr. Wichman stated that the district does not want to put itself into the position where a variance would be needed and has worked very hard to avoid variances or conditional use permits. He stated that the basis of the design was the safety of the students, and that all of the buses must come in at the same time and wait until all are ready to leave. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the issue is one of safety and practical limitations and now is the time to look at widening the cuts, as the philosophy on what is needed may change in the future. He stated that if a variance is needed, he would think there is very good reason for granting one. He pointed out that there is a notation on the construction drawing that the driveway cuts are by city code, and stated that he does not want the district to come back in the future and say that the cuts are too small because of the city's requirement and changing it would be very costly. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she understood that the exterior of the structure would have more of a residential look. Dr. Monson reviewed the concept design, stating that the building will be presented with the most residential feeling possible, and that it is the intent to keep the deciduous trees on the perimeter of the property as must as possible. He explained that there will be minimal view of the building from the road. Mr. Wichman stated that he wanted to bring down the scale of the building as much as possible, and put in several jogs in the building. He stated that for long-term maintenance, the exterior will be brick. He explained that there is striping on the building to bring down the scale and there is a lot of texture in the brick on the lower level and different brick colors. Councilmember Krebsbach asked if there has been any discussion about the roof line. page 78 \ ) PageNo. 8 May 21, 1996 Dr. Monson responded that the district tried to come up with something that would give a residential appearance but could not do so within the economics of the project. He explained that the cost for a different type of roof from the flat roof proposed was absolutely prohibitive. He further stated that the structure is approximately 129,000 square feet in size. Dr. Monson informed Council that the neighbors have been involved at several points in the planning process and that representatives of the district have met with neighborhood groups. He stated that the neighbors' concerns over drainage and retention of trees, etc., have been dealt with. He explained that along the pond is a very steep hill, and moving down towards Huber Drive where the building will be. He stated that he believes that the residents on the west side of the pond will have minimal siting of the building, and the plan maximizes the existing characteristics of the land and retention of the forested areas. Mr. Wichman informed Council that there will be a six foot fence along the soccer area to keep balls off of Huber, and larger trees which must be moved from other areas of the site will be relocated to the end of the field also. He stated that the district would prefer to locate trees as closely as possible to each other to screen the field and keep balls on the site while avoiding high fencing. He informed Council that the soccer parents had recommended trees. He stated that the district will do as much as possible to relocate trees along Huber and to the north of the property, and as many of the trees to the north side that can be left will be left. He stated that grading will be done so as to keep water from draining to the north, and the soccer field was located as far south as possible so as to provide a significant amount of green space to the north. He informed Council that the district had intended to provide a track to the west of the site but right now the plan does not show the track. He stated that he believes the grades have been worked out to loop a path outside the perimeters of the exercise area, and the path will hook up to the city trail. Responding to a question about the neighborhood's opportunity to respond to the exterior, Dr. Monson stated that the district has been very sensitive to the neighbors concerns and input and that he believes when the building is built everyone will be very pleased with the exterior of the building as well as to the total development of the site. Councilmember Smith asked Mr. Wichman to provide copies of the color slides of the computer image of the proposed building as well as a color board to give an accurate representation of the colors. page 79 ) ( PageNo. 9 May 21, 1996 She stated that the architect has done a very good job of breaking up a very large building and asked if this treatment was more costly than a simple design. Mr. Wichman responded that the main reason for the building is the students, and the district set up parameters, one of which was that every classroom must have a window. Given that value, he stated that the building begins to take on a certain shape and it has been his experience in designing school buildings that extra comers and other things that break up a building do not add significant cost. Councilmember Smith stated that there are areas of ingress and egress that could be affected by the screening in terms of sight line and safety at the site entrance. Mr. Wichman responded that the vegetation has been held back so that there can be sight lines on the road, and the only concern is the east edge of the bus area where there is a slight height variation that helps the sight line. He stated that this entrance will be signed for buses only. Councilmember Smith informed Mr. Wichman that the comer of Dodd and Mendota Heights Road is a focal comer for this part of the city, and that the city is developing a park across the street. She stated that she hopes that the school district will make that comer as attractive as possible. She asked Mr. Wichman to look at cleaning out the underbrush and cleaning up the comer. Responding to a comment from Mayor Mertensotto that the boxelder and cottonwood trees should not be relocated, Mr. Wichman responded that most of the trees that will be relocated are ash trees, as they have the best chance of survival. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that silt fences must be put in place during construction and that the wetlands must be protected. He asked if there are any easements around the ponds or if the ponds will be brought into the city's drainage system. He also stated that he would like to see an additional three feet of width on each side of each of the entry drives. With respect to the drive width, Dr. Monson stated that he will talk to the transportation staff, and that as long as the city is willing to work with the school district on the variance he would look into widening. page 80 PageNo. 10 May 21, 1996 Councilmember Smith stated that she would like a traffic engineer's report on the issue, and she asked ifbusses would be allowed to use the other entrance. Dr. Monson responded that it is possible ifthere were a large event at the school that the other entrance may be needed, but that would be the extreme. He informed Council that he will meet with the transportation staff and if they think wider curb cuts are needed he will come back for a variance. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he would not want the district to go through any extra hoops and would want Council to grant approval for wider curb cuts tonight if the district feels wider cuts are needed. He pointed that there is a problem at Lake Drive, and the buses going into St. Thomas have problems getting in and out. He informed Dr. Monson that the city staff must review the building and drainage plans and wetlands requirements and determine if there is a need for the city to reserve easements. Mr. Wichman stated that it would help him considerably, if the whole building is being reviewed for ordinance requirements, if Council would grant footing and foundation and site work permits so that he can state at an earlier time if there is any delay for consideration of easements. Mr. Thomas Smith, who was present for the discussion, reiterated concerns he had expressed to Council at past discussions. He stated that he had expressed that the bus entrance and exit is located in the worst place on Mendota Heights Road for visibility and drivers will be unable to see buses turning in or out. Mayor Mertensotto responded that Council has received requests to change the speed limit along Mendota Heights Road and tried to reduce the limit to 30 mph, but the Commissioner of Highways only approved a reduction to 35 mph. He felt that once traffic increases and the school is running, the state will allow the 30 mph limit, which will improve traffic conditions. He did not feel that the grade change is significant and pointed out that there will be a cleared area between the road right-of-way and the tree line. Mr. Smith again expressed his concern over the proximity of the school to the high voltage power lines that traverse the site. He stated that he has provided the city with copies of much communication on the issue, and he reviewed articles from scientific journals on the risks of EMF exposure. He also responded to the letter from Mr. Stroebel, stating that based on the evidence available, page 81 Page No. 11 May 21, 1996 he believes the site is a cancer risk zone. He also reviewed and responded to a letter to the editor published in the Sun Newspaper. He stated that in his opinion it is just plain dumb to build a school near power lines, and that the Council has a responsibility to address the risk if the school district is unwilling or unprepared to do so. He explained that there are simple steps the school district could take - they could collect readings by an independent body on the footprint of the building itself. He stated that none of the NSP readings were taken on the footprint, and that the readings should be taken after the power lines have been raised. He further stated that it is likely that EMF exposure will be reduced when the power lines are raised, but readings should be taken. Mayor Mertensotto responded that Council is being asked to approve a building permit within Council's level of authority, and that Council did ask the district to address the EMF issue. He explained that Council told the school district to use an independent firm for readings rather than NSP, but the most Council could do is to adopt an ordinance directed to the power company saying that it cannot increase the potential EMF of any transmission line within the city without Council approval. He stated that in response to Mr. Smith's concern, the school district raised the power lines, and that while there should perhaps be on-going monitoring, Council does not run the school district. He felt that an independent report on the milligauss readings would possibly be a comfort to parents, and may determine that the poles need to be raised higher. He stated that Mr. Smith's concerns are legitimate, but that the Council meeting is not the appropriate forum for the debate. Ms. Mary Lemons, a resident on Apache Lane, expressed concern about the amount of noise that will be absorbed by the site from 1- 494. She stated that with the development of this site, the noise generated by the freeway will increase to the north when some of the berms and topography change and trees are removed. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the most likely result will be that it will be quieter, as the building will block the noise. Councilmember Huber moved to approve the issuance of a building permit and tree removal permit subject to staff review of all code requirements including Building Code, drainage easements needed for any ponds brought into the city's drainage system, and if there are any delays for easement preparation, plan review, etc., staffis authorized to issue a footing and foundation permit; and, if it is determined by the school district traffic engineer that width of the entrances from Mendota Heights Road should be increased for page 82 Vote on Amendment: Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Vote on Original Motion: Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 TREE RESTORATION PageNo. 12 May 21, 1996 safety reasons, that a variance from the 30 foot curb cut requirement of the zoning ordinance is granted to 3 6 feet. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that the school district contact the MAC for decibel levels over the site. Councilmember Smith stated that the school is something the community has been waiting for and wants, and for those reasons, she is excited as well, but there has been an issue raised over whether the city should issue a permit because of the power lines. She stated that people do not have a choice where they send their children for school, and there have been studies which have recommended a maximum EF level of two milligauss. She felt that while the information is inconclusive, it would be prudent to pay attention to the concerns. She expressed concern over the health of the community's children, and stated that her concern could be considerably reduced by simple testing. She stated that she is also concerned about the increasing regulatory nature of government, but the potential huge cost to the school district should be considered if in the future the school does not meet the guidelines. She stated that there are suggested standards that can be followed and the issue could be put to rest if there were additional monitoring. Mayor Mertensotto recommended that the school district investigate the economic feasibility of testing annually for milligauss readings for the safety of those who will use the facility. Councilmember Krebsbach moved to amend the original motion to recommend to the school district that it investigate the feasibility of monitoring the milligauss affect of the transmission lines traversing the property. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion Council acknowledged a letter from Mr. James Losleben and Mr. Bill Simek requesting the city's assistance in acquiring and planting nine Linden or Ash trees along Pagel Road and Keokuk to enhance the landscaping on a parcel of Mn/DOT right-of-way. Council also acknowledged a memo from Civil Engineer Mogan. Mr. Losleben and Mr. Simek were present for the discussion. page 83       page 84 EXISTING LACROSSE FIELD (180' x 330')EXISTING SOCCER FIELD (180' x 340')EXISTINGSOFTBALL FIELDSOFT PLAYAREAREPAIRED BUSCORRAL & WALKSHARD-SURFACEPLAY/EMERGENCYVEHICLETURN-AROUNDNORTHPARKINGLOT (100 + 4 HCSTALLS)PARKING /DROP-OFF(22 + 1 HC STALLS)PROPOSEDBUILDINGADDITIONREFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANSFOR LAYOUT AND DIMENSIONS3635138SERVICEPARKING(8 STALLS)EVENTPARKING(~39 STALLS)QUEUE LANEQUEUE LANEDROP OFF DROP OFFONE WAYONE WAY22+1 HC16+4 HCADD TURN LANE(WIDEN ~10')ADD BUSPARKING(2 STALLS)ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo. DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129C1.00JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05SITEREFERENCEPLANBID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOLNOTES:1. REFER TO SHEET C1.42- GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN (SOUTH) FOR GENERAL NOTES.2. CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.3. SIGNAGE SHALL GENERALLY BE INSTALLED 18" BEHIND THE BACK OF CURB.4. ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PAD WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED TO BEPAVED SHALL RECEIVE AT LEAST 6" OF TOPSOIL AND SHALL BE SODDED OR SEEDED.5. WHERE NEW SOD MEETS EXISTING TURF, EXISTING TURF EDGE SHALL BE CUT TO ALLOW FORA CONSISTENT, UNIFORM STRAIGHT EDGE. JAGGED OR UNEVEN EDGES WILL NOT BEACCEPTABLE. REMOVE TOPSOIL AT JOINT BETWEEN EXISTING AND NEW AS REQUIRED TOALLOW NEW SOD SURFACE TO BE FLUSH WITH EXISTING.6. FAILURE OF TURF DEVELOPMENT: IN THE EVENT THE CONTRACTOR FAILS TO PROVIDE ANACCEPTABLE TURF, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RE-SOD OR RE-SEED ALL APPLICABLE AREAS,AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER, TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEER.Friendly Hills Middle School701 Mendota Heights Rd,Mendota Heights, MN 55120West St. Paul-Mendota Hts.-Eagan School District - ISD #197THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R-1 - One Family ResidentialEXISTING PARKING: 135 + 5 HC STALLSPARKING REQUIREMENT:ONE (1) SPACE FOR EACH FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE (70 staff): 70 SPACES REQ'DPROPOSED PARKING COUNTS:STAFF, VISITOR, PUBLIC/ VOLUNTEER PARKING = 130 + 5 HC STALLSEVENT PARKING (in bus corral, after hours)= ~ 38 STALLSBUS PARKING = 14 Large/ 5 SPED/ 3 Vans NeededSITE STATISTICS:020 40LEGENDREFERENCE KEY TO SITE DETAILS DETAIL I.D NUMBER (TOP) DETAIL SHEET NUMBER (BOTTOM)PROPOSED CONCRETE WALKPROPOSED REINFORCED CONCRETE SLABPROPOSED LIGHT DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED MEDIUM DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED PAVEMENT RECLAIM /NEW PAVEMENT (HEAVY-DUTY)PROPOSED PAVEMENT RECLAIM /NEW PAVEMENT (MEDIUM-DUTY)PROPOSED PLAY AREAPROPOSED TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNSIGNAGE KEY NOTEPAINTED ACCESSIBLE SYMBOLPROPOSED MANHOLE (MH)PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (CB)PROPOSED BUILDING STOOP - REFER TOARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPERTY LINEA1C2.118C2.1210C2.123C2.1216C2.1217C2.1220C2.1212C2.1221C2.1214C2.1215C2.127C2.1211C2.1215C2.1210C2.119C2.1121C2.1103.04.2020Site Reconfiguration03.12.2020City Variance App30.04 ftpage 85 R11R11R11R11R11R11R8R8R5R5R13R14R11R19R17R18R18R3R3R3R3R3R3R4R4R4R4R4R4R4R4R4R4R4R4P6P4P1P1R1R1R11R11R11R1R1R2R2R2R6R6R1R1R2R2R4R4R4R4R4R4R4R4R6R2X1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R2R2R2X1R3R2R2REPAIRED BUSCORRAL & WALKSR1R1X1P8P8P9P8P6P4P1P1R2R2R18R2REMOVE/ REPLACE CONCRETEAPRON PER CITY REQUIREMENTSR11R11R11R11ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo.DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129C1.11JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05SITEREMOVALSPLANBID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOL020 40NOTES:LEGENDCONCRETE PAVEMENT REMOVALSCONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER REMOVALSBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVALSBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT RECLAIMGRAVEL SURFACE REMOVALSMASS TREE REMOVALSFENCING REMOVALSRETAINING WALL REMOVALSUTILITY REMOVALSTREE REMOVALSSAWCUTREMOVALS KEY NOTEPROPERTY LINE1. REFER TO SHEET C1.42 = GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN (SOUTH) FORGENERAL NOTES.2. MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE TO SITE AND PROTECT EXISTING VEGETATION ANDSITE FEATURES (CURBS, WALKS, PAVEMENTS, OVERHEAD ANDUNDERGROUND UTILITIES, SIGNAGE, FENCING, ROADWAYS, ETC.) WHICHARE TO REMAIN.3. REPAIR OR REPLACE EXISTING PROPERTY AND SITE FEATURES, INCLUDINGGRASS AND VEGETATION, WHICH IS TO REMAIN THAT IS DAMAGED BY THEWORK, TO OWNER'S SATISFACTION AND AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THEOWNER.4. VISIT THE SITE PRIOR TO BIDDING; BE FAMILIAR WITH ACTUAL CONDITIONSIN THE FIELD. EXTRA COMPENSATION WILL NOT BE ALLOWED FORCONDITIONS WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN DETERMINED OR ANTICIPATED BYEXAMINATION OF THE SITE, THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS AND THEINFORMATION AVAILABLE PERTAINING TO EXISTING SOILS, UTILITIES ANDOTHER SITE CHARACTERISTICS.5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HIRE THE SERVICES OF A UTILITY LOCATORCOMPANY TO LOCATE ALL PRIVATELY OWNED UTILITIES THAT MAY BEDISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS.6. TREE PROTECTION: INSTALL 4' HIGH ORANGE SNOW FENCE AT THE DRIPLINE OF ALL TREES TO BE PROTECTED. MAINTAIN THROUGHOUT DURATIONOF CONSTRUCTION.KEY NOTE LEGENDPROTECT CONCRETE PAVEMENTPROTECT CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER / VALLEY GUTTERPROTECT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTPROTECT FENCING (INCLUDING FOOTINGS AND GATES)PROTECT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGN AND POSTPROTECT GRAVEL SURFACEPROTECT RETAINING WALLPROTECT STORM SEWERPROTECT STORM SEWER STRUCTUREPROTECT TREE - REFER TO NOTE 6 ABOVEPROTECT LANDSCAPING (MULCH, SHRUBS, ETC.)PROTECT WATERMAINPROTECT GATE VALVEPROTECT SANITARY SEWERPROTECT SANITARY SEWER STRUCTUREPROTECT FIRE HYDRANTPROTECT UNDERGROUND UTILITYR1R1R2R3R4R5R6R7R8R9R10R11R12R13R14R15R16R17P1P2P3P4P5P6P7P8P9P10P11P12P13P14P15X1REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT, WHERE APPLICABLE, TO NEAREST JOINTREMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER / VALLEY GUTTERREMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTRECLAIM/ MILL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT- REFER TO DETAIL 11/C2.12REMOVE CHAIN LINK FENCING (INCLUDING FOOTINGS AND GATES)REMOVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGN AND POSTREMOVE GRAVEL SURFACEREMOVE RETAINING WALLREMOVE STORM SEWERREMOVE STORM SEWER STRUCTUREREMOVE TREE INCLUDING STUMPREMOVE LANDSCAPING (MULCH, SHRUBS, ETC.)REMOVE, AND SALVAGE FOR RE-USE, RUBBER LANDSCAPE TIMBERS PLAY CURBREMOVE PLAYGROUND STRUCTURE / EQUIPMENTREMOVE PLAYGROUND MATERIAL (MULCH, EDGING, ETC.)REMOVE BASKETBALL HOOPREMOVE HYDRANT, GATE VALVE AND PIPE LEADSAWCUTREMOVE WATERMAINREFER TO SHEET C1.51 - UTILITY PLANS FOR TREATMENTR18R19P16P1702.19.2019Addendum 307.02.2019PR 1003.12.2020City Variance App30.72ftpage 86 EXISTING LACROSSE FIELD (180' x 330')EXISTING SOCCER FIELD (180' x 340')EXISTINGSOFTBALL FIELD24.00'24.00'R4.00'R5.00' 35.91'R30.00'R145.00'R129.00'R100.00'R50.00'R25.00'R20.00'16.00'R13.0 0'80.00'48.64' 14.76'25.01'R19.88'10.00'SOFT PLAYAREAARD-SURFACEPLAY/EMERGENCYVEHICLETURN-AROUNDNORTH PARKING LOT (100 + 4 HC STALLS)PARKING / DROP-OFF(22 + 1 HC STALLS)PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITIONREFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LAYOUT AND DIMENSIONS434.00'27.41'VERIFYR43.05'R4.00'16' WALK5C2.1100'R5.00'R20.00'R5.00'118.00'R6.00'R6.00'R20.00'R12.00'R3.00'R10.00'R18.00'R20.0 0' R50.00'R50.00'R12.00'R5.00'R4.00'R5.00'R5.00'R3.50' R4.00'R5.00'12.65'24.00'10.04'64.34'13.00'182.06'106.50'40.00'35.64'162.00' 9.00'18.00'MATCH LINEMATCH LINEProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo. DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129C1.21JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05SITE LAYOUTPLAN (NORTH)BID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOL015 30NOTES:LEGENDBASELINE FOR DIMENSIONSBUILDING STOOP - REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPERTY LINE1. REFER TO SHEET C1.42- GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN (SOUTH) FOR GENERAL NOTES.2. ALL APPLICABLE DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB, EDGE OF PAVEMENT OR PROPERTYLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3. CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.4. SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED 18" BEHIND THE BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT.BASIS FOR DIMENSIONS = NORTHEAST PROPERTYCORNER AND NORTH PROPERTY LINE. ALLDIMENSIONS SHALL BE PARALLEL ORPERPENDICULAR TO NORTH PROPERTY LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.02.015.2019Addendum 203.12.2020City Variance Apppage 87 24.00'24.00'R4.00'R5.00'R30.00'R19.88'PAIRED BUS CORRAL &WALKS16' WALKR8.00'R43.05'16' WALKR4.00'16' WALKR20.00'R4.00'R8.00'R8.00'R45.00'R8.00'MATCHEXISTINGMATCHEXISTING61.01'56.99'8.36'WALKBIG BLOCK RETAININGWALL WITH 4' CHAINLINK FENCESERVICE PARKING(8 STALLS)EVENT PARKING(~39 STALLS)ADD TURN LANE (WIDEN ~10')ADD BUS PARKING (2 STALLS)R20.00'R5.00'R50.00'R35.00'R20.00'R156.32'R45.43'R3.00'R5.00'R20.00'R5.00'118.00'R20.00'R12.00'R4.00'R5.00'12.65'106.50'40.00'35.64'18.00'80.48'38.00'42.51'ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo. DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129C1.22JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05SITE LAYOUTPLAN (SOUTH)BID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOL015 30NOTES:LEGENDBASELINE FOR DIMENSIONSBUILDING STOOP - REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPERTY LINE1. REFER TO SHEET C1.42- GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN (SOUTH) FOR GENERAL NOTES.2. ALL APPLICABLE DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB, EDGE OF PAVEMENT OR PROPERTYLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3. CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.4. SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED 18" BEHIND THE BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT.MATCH LINEMATCH LINE03.12.2020City Variance Apppage 88 EXISTING LACROSSE FIELD (180' x 330')EXISTING SOCCER FIELD (180' x 340')EXISTINGSOFTBALL FIELDSOFT PLAYAREA4" WIDE SINGLEWHITE PAINT STRIPE20C2.12PAINTED ACCESSIBLESYMBOL (TYP)4" WIDE SINGLEWHITE PAINT STRIPE4" WIDE WHITE PAINT STRIPE@ 3' O.C. (TYPICAL)PAINTEDACCESSIBLESYMBOL (TYP)4" WIDE WHITEPAINT STRIPE@ 3' O.C.(TYPICAL)20C2.129C2.129C2.1215C2.1216C2.1216C2.1215C2.1216C2.1216C2.127C2.127C2.127C2.127C2.121C2.121C2.121C2.1217C2.1217C2.1212C2.1219C2.1219C2.128C2.1214C2.128C2.12ARD-SURFACEPLAY/EMERGENCYVEHICLETURN-AROUNDNORTH PARKING LOT (100 + 4 HC STALLS)PARKING / DROP-OFF(22 + 1 HC STALLS)PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITIONREFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LAYOUT AND DIMENSIONSPROVIDE PLAYAREA STRIPING:HREE 4-SQUAREOUR HOPSCOTCH22C2.1223C2.1284.00'50.00'16C2.1216C2.12EC2.1221CC2.1221BC2.12215C2.111C2.1215C2.12363513QUEUE LANEQUEUE LANEDROP OFF DROP OFFONE WAYONE WAY22+1 HC16+4 HC1C2.127C2.124C2.12MATCH LINEMATCH LINEProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo. DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129C1.31JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05SITEFINISHINGPLAN (NORTH)BID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOL015 30NOTES:1. REFER TO SHEET C1.42- GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN (SOUTH) FOR GENERAL NOTES.2. CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.3. SIGNAGE SHALL GENERALLY BE INSTALLED 18" BEHIND THE BACK OF CURB.4. ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PAD WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED TO BEPAVED SHALL RECEIVE AT LEAST 6" OF TOPSOIL.LEGENDREFERENCE KEY TO SITE DETAILS DETAIL I.D NUMBER (TOP) DETAIL SHEET NUMBER (BOTTOM)PROPOSED CONCRETE WALKPROPOSED REINFORCED CONCRETE SLABPROPOSED LIGHT DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED MEDIUM DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED PAVEMENT RECLAIM /NEW PAVEMENT (HEAVY-DUTY)PROPOSED PAVEMENT RECLAIM /NEW PAVEMENT (MEDIUM-DUTY)PROPOSED PLAY AREAPROPOSED TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNSIGNAGE KEY NOTEPAINTED ACCESSIBLE SYMBOLPROPOSED MANHOLE (MH)PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (CB)PROPOSED BUILDING STOOP - REFER TOARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPERTY LINEA1C2.118C2.1210C2.123C2.1216C2.1217C2.1220C2.1212C2.1221C2.1214C2.1215C2.127C2.1211C2.1215C2.1210C2.119C2.1121C2.1102.015.2019Addendum 205.13.2019PR NO. 4203.12.2020City Variance Apppage 89 PAINTED ACCESSIBLESYMBOL (TYP)20C2.129C2.129C2.1217C2.1215C2.1215C2.1215C2.1215C2.1215C2.128C2.128C2.128C2.129C2.129C2.1215C2.12PROVIDE UNIT PRICE FORREMOVAL AND REPLACEMENTOF B-612 CURB AND GUTTER.BASE BID TO INCLUDE 450LINEAR FEET.16C2.127C2.127C2.121C2.12PAIRED BUS CORRAL &WALKS8C2.1216C2.121C2.129C2.12BC2.122117C2.121C2.1215C2.1215C2.1215C2.1215C2.1211C2.1211C2.128C2.1217C2.118C2.12138SERVICE PARKING(8 STALLS)EVENT PARKING(~39 STALLS)DROP OFFADD TURN LANE (WIDEN ~10')ADD BUS PARKING (2 STALLS)1C2.121C2.1215C2.123C2.129C2.1217C2.1217C2.12AC2.12211C2.12ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo. DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129C1.32JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05SITEFINISHINGPLAN (SOUTH)BID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOL015 30NOTES:1. REFER TO SHEET C1.42- GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN (SOUTH) FOR GENERAL NOTES.2. CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.3. SIGNAGE SHALL GENERALLY BE INSTALLED 18" BEHIND THE BACK OF CURB.4. ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PAD WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED TO BEPAVED SHALL RECEIVE AT LEAST 6" OF TOPSOIL.MATCH LINEMATCH LINELEGENDREFERENCE KEY TO SITE DETAILS DETAIL I.D NUMBER (TOP) DETAIL SHEET NUMBER (BOTTOM)PROPOSED CONCRETE WALKPROPOSED REINFORCED CONCRETE SLABPROPOSED LIGHT DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED MEDIUM DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTPROPOSED PAVEMENT RECLAIM /NEW PAVEMENT (HEAVY-DUTY)PROPOSED PAVEMENT RECLAIM /NEW PAVEMENT (MEDIUM-DUTY)PROPOSED PLAY AREAPROPOSED TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNSIGNAGE KEY NOTEPAINTED ACCESSIBLE SYMBOLPROPOSED MANHOLE (MH)PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (CB)PROPOSED BUILDING STOOP - REFER TOARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPERTY LINEA1C2.118C2.1210C2.123C2.1216C2.1217C2.1220C2.1212C2.1221C2.1214C2.1215C2.127C2.1211C2.1215C2.1210C2.119C2.1121C2.1102.015.2019Addendum 203.12.2020City Variance Apppage 90 M.E.(79.3)M.E. (79.0)78.878.386.478.578.277.578.578.3PAIRED BUS CORRAL &WALKS78.376.078.278.077.578.979.779.779.879.079.378.979.280.478.078.078.378.678.579.879.587988087987977.878.478.0M.E.(79.9)879M.E.(83.6)886 887 M.E.(88.6)87.0TW=85.5BW=83.5TW=87.5BW=82.5TW=88.8BW=85.0SERVICE PARKING(8 STALLS)EVENT PARKING(~39 STALLS)ADD TURN LANE (WIDEN ~10')ADD BUS PARKING (2 STALLS)79.087877.878.379.378.879.479.687980.1ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo.DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129C1.42JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05GRADING ANDDRAINAGEPLAN (SOUTH)BID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOL015 30GENERAL NOTES1. ALL CONSTRUCTION MUST COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE STATE AND LOCAL ORDINANCES.2. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL PAY FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING / LAYOUT.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY FOR ALL RELATED CONSTRUCTION PERMITS, INCLUDING THE NPDESPERMIT FROM THE MPCA. SUBMIT A COPY OF ALL PERMITS TO THE CITY.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAGE (CONSTRUCTION ZONES)NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. ALL SIGNAGE LAYOUTS MUST BE DESIGNED BY THECONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES.5. INSTALL CONTROL FENCING AND BARRICADING AS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC.6. INSPECT SITE AND REVIEW SOIL BORINGS TO DETERMINE EXTENT OF WORK AND NATURE OF MATERIALS TO BEHANDLED.7. REFER TO SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEWATERING REQUIREMENTS.8. CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.9. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR BUILDING AND STOOP DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT.10. REFER TO THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) NARRATIVE, PART OF SECTION 01 89 13,FOR EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS. SECTION 31 00 00 SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FULL IMPLEMENTATIONOF THE SWPPP.11. MAINTAIN ADJACENT PROPERTY AND PUBLIC STREETS CLEAN FROM CONSTRUCTION CAUSED DIRT AND DEBRISON A DAILY BASIS. PROTECT DRAINAGE SYSTEMS FROM SEDIMENTATION AS A RESULT OF CONSTRUCTIONRELATED DIRT AND DEBRIS.12. MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL DURING GRADING OPERATIONS.13. ALL EROSION CONTROL METHODS SHALL COMPLY WITH MPCA AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.14. CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE TO SITE AND PROTECT EXISTING SITE FEATURES (INCLUDING TURFAND VEGETATION) WHICH ARE TO REMAIN.15. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN TO FINISH GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.16. PROPOSED ELEVATIONS SHOWN TYPICALLY AS 10.1 OR 10 SHALL BE UNDERSTOOD TO MEAN 910.1 OR 910.17. SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN IN PARKING LOTS, DRIVES AND ROADS INDICATE GUTTER GRADES, UNLESS NOTEDOTHERWISE. SPOT ELEVATIONS WITH LABELS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PERIMETER INDICATE PROPOSED GRADESOUTSIDE THE BUILDING. SPOT ELEVATIONS WITH LABELS INSIDE THE BUILDING PERIMETER INDICATE PROPOSEDFINISH FLOOR ELEVATIONS.18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING QUANTITIES OF CUT, FILL AND WASTEMATERIALS TO BE HANDLED, AND FOR AMOUNT OF GRADING TO BE DONE IN ORDER TO COMPLETELY PERFORMALL WORK INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL AND EXPORT UNSUITABLE / EXCESS /WASTE MATERIAL AS REQUIRED. ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPORTING AND EXPORTING MATERIALS SHALLBE INCIDENTAL TO THE CONTRACT.19.NO FINISHED SLOPES SHALL EXCEED 3' HORIZONTAL TO 1' VERTICAL (3:1), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.20. ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PAD WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED TO BE PAVED SHALL RECEIVEAT LEAST 6" OF TOPSOIL.21. ANY MANHOLE, CATCH BASIN, STORM SEWER, SANITARY SEWER, DRAINTILE OR OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCE FORCONTAMINATION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT LEAST 10 FEET HORIZONTALLY FROM ANY WATERMAIN PERMINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE. THIS ISOLATION DISTANCE SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE OUTER EDGE OF THEPIPE TO THE OUTER EDGE OF THE CONTAMINATION SOURCE (OUTER EDGE OF STRUCTURES OR PIPING ORSIMILAR).22. LOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE AND INVERT ELEVATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES.VERIFY LOCATIONS, SIZES AND ELEVATIONS OF SAME BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.23. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN DRAINAGE FROM EXISTING BUILDING AT ALL TIMES. PROVIDE TEMPORARYSTORM SEWER (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CATCH BASINS, MANHOLES, PIPING, ETC.) AS REQUIRED.EXISTING STORM SEWER SHALL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STORM SEWER ISINSTALLED AND FUNCTIONAL. COORDINATE ALL REMOVALS WITH APPROPRIATE TRADES (SITE UTILITYCONTRACTOR, MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR, ETC.) AS REQUIRED.LEGEND1.)TOP OF TOP NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CEDAR LAKE ROAD, 225FEET +/- SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SCHOOL.ELEVATION = 943.65 FEET2.)TOP OF TOP NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT LOCATED 68 FEET +/- SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHWESTCORNER OF THE SCHOOL.ELEVATION = 944.55 FEETBENCHMARKS (FIELD VERIFY BEFORE USING)MATCH LINEMATCH LINEREFERENCE KEY TO SITE DETAILS DETAIL I.D NUMBER (TOP) DETAIL SHEET NUMBER (BOTTOM)EXISTING CONTOUREXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONPROPOSED CONTOURPROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONME = MATCH EXISTINGEOF = EMERGENCY OVERFLOWAPPROXIMATE SOIL BORING / TEST PIT LOCATIONPROPOSED MANHOLE (MH)PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (CB)PROPOSED BUILDING STOOP - REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPERTY LINE95554.61C2.1110C2.119C2.1121C2.1103.12.2020City Variance Apppage 91 8688668658708758738738708798788778778784CO3CO1TC1TCSEED AND BLANKETSEED AND BLANKETSEED ANDBLANKETSEED ANDBLANKETSEED AND MULCH883880874878876879880879879SEED ANDMULCHSEED ANDMULCH875879886 887 8798778768758758748778781TC879ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo. DateRevision DescriptionKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervision,and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.Printed Name:Signature:Date: License #:Copyright © 2018 by LSE Architects, Inc.These drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenpermission of LSE Architects, Inc. ©LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129L1.11JRPJRPFebruary 1, 201918.1007.05LANDSCAPEPLANBID DOCUMENTS02/01/201923543Jay R. Pomeroy1701 Mendota Heights Rd.Mendota Heights, MN 55120FRIENDLY HILLSMIDDLE SCHOOL020 40NOTES:LEGENDREFERENCE KEY TO SITE DETAILS DETAIL I.D NUMBER (TOP) DETAIL SHEET NUMBER (BOTTOM)PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREEPROPOSED CONIFEROUS TREEPROPOSED MINERAL SOD (FILTRATION AREA)PROPOSED SEED MIX AND BLANKETPROPOSED SHRUB / MULCH BEDPLANT KEY (REFER TO PLANT SCHEDULEABOVE)TOP = QUANTITYBOTTOM = PLANT SYMBOLPROPERTY LINE1. REFER TO SHEET C1.42- GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN (SOUTH) FOR GENERAL NOTES.2. REFER TO SWPPP NARRATIVE FOR CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING AND EROSION CONTROLREQUIREMENTS.3. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST INSPECT AND APPROVE FINISH GRADING BEFORE CONTRACTORPROCEEDS WITH SEEDING.4. ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PAD WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED TO BEPAVED OR RECEIVE AGLIME SHALL RECEIVE AT LEAST 6" OF TOPSOIL AND SHALL BE SEEDEDOR SODDED.5. FAILURE OF TURF DEVELOPMENT: IN THE EVENT THE CONTRACTOR FAILS TO PROVIDE ANACCEPTABLE TURF, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RE-SOD OR RE-SEED ALL APPLICABLE AREAS,AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER, TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEER.6. BEGIN TURF ESTABLISHMENT IMMEDIATELY AFTER SODDING AND SEEDING, REFER TOSPECIFICATION FOR PROCEDURE.7. ALL TREES TO BE BALLED AND BURLAPPED.8. ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL RECEIVE 4" DEPTH OF CLEAN SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH,UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.9. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE NO. 1 QUALITY, NURSERY GROWN AND SPECIMENS MUST BEMATCHED. ALL OVERSTORY TREES ADJACENT TO DRIVE AND IN PARKING LOT SHALL BEGINBRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 6'.1L1.11CONIFEROUS TREE6"1'-0"MIN1'-0"MIN2.5 X BALL DIA. MIN.GENERAL NOTES:xTREES SHALL BE ALIGNED AND PLUMB AFTERWATERING AND SETTLINGxPRUNE TREES AS REQUIRED AND AS DIRECTED BY THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT/ENGINEERxCONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THREE STEEL POSTSWITH THREE HORIZONTALLY OPPOSED REINFORCEDRUBBER HOSE SECTIONS WITH A DOUBLE STRAND OF#11 WIRE AND FLAGGING. WRAP THE WIRE A MINIMUMOF TWO TIMES AROUND EACH POST.3'-0"(MIN.)4'-0"(MIN.)SHREDDED HARDWOODMULCH (4" MIN. DEPTH)PLANTING SOIL (MIN. DIMENSIONSHOWN)SOIL SAUCER: USED PREPAREDSOIL (4" MIN.)ROPES AT TOP OF BALL SHALLBE CUT. REMOVE TOP 1/3 OFBURLAP. NON-BIODEGRADABLEMATERIAL SHALL BE TOTALLYREMOVED.PREPARED SUBSOIL TO FORMPEDESTAL TO PREVENT SETTLING.RUBBER HOSE AT BARK2L1.111'-0"MIN1'-0"MIN2.5 X BALL DIA. MIN.DECIDUOUS TREEGENERAL NOTES:xTREES SHALL BE ALIGNED AND PLUMBAFTER WATERING AND SETTLINGxPRUNE TREES AS REQUIRED AND ASDIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT/ENGINEERxCONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THREESTEEL POSTS WITH THREEHORIZONTALLY OPPOSEDREINFORCED RUBBER HOSE SECTIONSWITH A DOUBLE STRAND OF #11 WIREAND FLAGGING. WRAP THE WIRE AMINIMUM OF TWO TIMES AROUND EACHPOST.3'-0"(MIN.)4'-0"(MAX.)RUBBER HOSE AT BARKSET TREE AT ORIGINAL GRADESHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH(4" MIN. DEPTH)PLANTING SOIL (MIN. DIMENSIONSHOWN)SOIL SAUCER: USED PREPAREDSOIL (3" MIN.)PREPARED SUBSOIL TO FORMPEDESTAL TO PREVENT SETTLING.FLAGGINGL1.111SHRUB BED EDGING6" MIN.4" MIN.FINISH GRADETOPSOILEDGINGFINISH GRADEMULCH BEDCOMPACTED SUBGRADEGEOTEXTILE WEED BARRIER -WRAP SIDES, TYPICAL3L1.111L1.112L1.113L1.115QB07.02.2019PR 1003.12.2020City Variance Apppage 92 A) PLANNING CASE 2020-06 ANDERSON-JOHNSON ASSOC. INC (ON BEHALF OF ISD #197), 701 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD – VARIANCE Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that ISD #197 is seeking to widen its main entrance driveway access off Mendota Heights Road, from its current width of approximately 28 feet to a proposed 38-foot width. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; no comments or objections to this request were received. Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s website). Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Field asked if this change would surcharge or impact the concerns that have been heard over the years with traffic in the neighborhood. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that this separation will help with the flow of traffic in the school parking lot and will better align with the Lockwood intersection. He noted that the City will also review possible striping changes on Mendota Heights Road to increase pedestrian safety. Commissioner Field stated that it does not then appear that this change would increase the issues of traffic safety. Commissioner Toth stated that there are more parents dropping children off and picking them up on a daily basis. He asked if there has been a study to determine if a traffic light would be needed. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the School District completed multiple studies during the design of the middle school and a traffic signal, or other intersection improvements, were not warranted. Commissioner Toth asked if approval of this variance would exclude the option for another entrance/exit onto another roadway in the future. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that at this time there are no plans for another access location onto a different roadway. Acting Chair Mazzitello asked if the applicant was present, and would they like to add anything to the presentation or discussion. page 93 ISD #197 Superintendent Peter Olson-Skog spoke on behalf of the applicant, and replied that he has nothing to add but is present to address any questions. Acting Chair Mazzitello opened the public hearing. Community Development Director Tim Benetti read aloud two emails one from the resident at 2530 Wilshire Court in opposition of the request and one from the residents at 2542 Concord Way in support of the request. Both emails were entered into the record. COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS PERFORMED: COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL AYE COMMISSIONER TOTH AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD AYE COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO AYE COMMISSIONER KATZ AYE COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FIELD, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE WIDER 38 FOOT DRIVEWAY ACCESS ON TO MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD, WITH FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT THIS RECOMMENDATION, ALONG WITH THE CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN IN THE STAFF REPORT. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS PERFORMED: COMMISSIONER TOTH AYE COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO AYE COMMISSIONER KATZ AYE COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD AYE Acting Chair Mazzitello advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 5, 2020 meeting. page 94 From:Mary & Jim Dietz To:Tim Benetti Subject:IDS #197 Date:Thursday, April 23, 2020 1:05:34 PM Regarding the request for variance to exceed the maximum access width. We are NOT in favor of allowing that drive to be made bigger as the traffic out of there is always a problem in the afternoon. By adding a left turn lane it will most likely cause accidents and then the next thing will be a round about! Please consider making it a right turn only IN and OUT of that driveway. It would be for the safety of the children. Jim and Mary Dietz 2530 Wilshire Ct MH, MN 55120 page 95 From:Mary Kietzmann To:Tim Benetti Subject:Friendly Hill Variance Date:Tuesday, April 28, 2020 4:30:53 PM I'm in favor of this school widening its access. Thanks, Mary Kietzmann 2542 Concord Way Mendota Hts, MN 55120 page 96 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor Garlock and City Council, City Administrator McNeill FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2020-34 Approving a Lot Line Adjustment for 1865 & 1883 Dodd Road - [Planning Case No. 2020-07] Introduction City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution approving a Lot Line Adjustment between two properties located at 1865 & 1883 Dodd Road, both owned by Mr. Matt Gustafson. Background The two parcels were created from three (3) platted lots under the original Somerset Hills subdivision in 1947. Each parcel was later developed as one full platted lot plus ½ of the abutting lot. Mr. Gustafson is requesting to return to the three platted lot set-up, and have another “buildable” lot between both properties. With the lot line adjustment, Lot 37 returns to its original platted shape as a 29,095 sf. area parcel with 102- ft. of roadway frontage; Lot 36 becomes a 31,350-sf. sized parcel with 103.5-ft. of frontage; and Lot 35 returns to a 31,970-sf. sized parcel with 100-ft. of frontage. All three lots meet the minimum 100-ft. width and 15,000-sq. ft. in size for R-1 One Family Residential District lot standards. On April 28, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public hearing by means of a remote Webex and web- streamed meeting, whereby a planning staff report was presented and received by the commission, and the Applicant was present to answer questions. The city received two (2) letters of objection on this item. A copy of the 04/28/20 planning report is appended to this memo, along with meeting minutes and comments. Discussion The City is using its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on subdivision requests and has limited discretion; a determination regarding whether or not the request meets the applicable subdivision code standards is required. Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve the application from Matt Gustafson requesting the Lot Line Adjustment between the properties located at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road, with certain conditions and specific findings of fact to support said approval. Action Requested If the City Council wishes to affirm this recommendation, make a motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-34 APPROVING A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR 1865 & 1883 DODD ROAD This action on the resolution requires a simple majority vote. page 97 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-34 RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1865 AND 1883 DODD ROAD (PLANNING CASE NO. 2020-07) WHEREAS, Matt Gustafson (as “Applicants”) has applied for a Lot Line Adjustment as proposed under Planning Case No. 2020-07, for the two parcels located at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road (the “Subject Properties”), and legally described on attached Exhibit A and the attached survey Exhibit A-1, and WHEREAS, the Subject Properties are both guided LR-Low Density Residential in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and are situated in the R-1 One Family Residential District; and WHEREAS, Title 11-1-5C of the City Code (Subdivision Regulations) allows for the readjustment of lot lines between or within legal parcels of records, provided the resulting lots are compliant with the requirements of the applicable and underlying zoning district; and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2020, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter, and whereupon closing the hearing and follow-up discussion on this item with staff and the Applicant, the Planning Commission recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve the Lot Line Adjustment application between 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road, with certain conditions and findings of fact to support such approval. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Lot Line Adjustment as proposed under Planning Case No. 2020-07 and for the properties located at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road is hereby approved, with the following findings of fact: A. The proposed lot line adjustment request meets the general purpose and intent of the City Code and is considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. page 98 B. Approval of the lot line adjustment will have no visible impact on the subject properties; and poses no threat or creates any negative impacts on the character of the neighborhood. C. The proposed adjustment does not cause any non-conformities on either parcel, based on the applicable zoning district standards for lot size and frontage requirements, except for the driveway encroachment issues as identified and noted in this report, which issues should not preclude the approval of this lot line adjustment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Lot Line Adjustment as proposed under Planning Case No. 2020-07 and for the properties located at 1865 and 1883 Dodd R, is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1) The Applicant shall be responsible for recording with Dakota County any city resolution of approval and any and all necessary transfer or deed documents which convey the portion of lands under the lot line adjustment requested herein. 2) Applicant shall either saw-cut and remove that part of the driveway/apron that encroaches over the shared lot lie between Lots 35 and 36 to meet the 5-ft. setback required for driveway; or must prepare a written agreement that acknowledges and accepts the driveway encroachment issue between both properties, and such agreement shall be recorded with Dakota County. 3) The Applicant shall remove the privacy fence for 1883 Dodd Road and relocated/re-install along the shared lot line boundary between Lots 35 and 36. 4) No development activities, including grading/filling work, landscaping, tree removals, retaining walls, fencing, stairway or walkways, or any structure requiring a zoning and/or building permit will be allowed unless authorized under a separate critical area permit application. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of May, 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 99 EXHIBIT A page 100 EXHIBIT A-1 page 101 Planning Staff Report DATE: April 28, 2020 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case No. 2020-07 Lot Line Adjustment APPLICANT: Matt Gustafson PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1865 & 1883 Dodd Road ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One-Family Residential/SF Residential ACTION DEADLINE: July 31, 2020 (120-day Review Period) INTRODUCTION Mr. Matt Gustafson is requesting consideration of a lot line adjustment between two properties located at 1865 & 1883 Dodd Road. This item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing on this item was published in the Pioneer Press newspaper; and notice letters of this hearing were mailed to all owners within 350-feet of the affected parcels. The city has not received any comments or objections on this item. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST Mr. Gustafson owns both properties at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road, which are generally located on the west side of Dodd Road between Willow Lane to the north and Hilltop Road to the south (see GIS Map aerial image – right). The 1865 Dodd Road (north parcel) is legally described or consists of the original platted Lot 37 and the North-Half of Lot 36, Somerset Hills addition. This parcel is 44,458-sf. (1.04 ac.) in size, and contains an 1,862-sf. single story rambler built in 1957. Front setback is indicated at 83.9-ft. with side-yard setback of 74.17 ft. and 15.3 ft. 1883 Dodd Road (south parcel) is legally described as Lot 35 and the South-Half of Lot 36 Somerset Hills addition. The parcel is 48,456-sf. (1.11 ac.) in size, and contains an 1,855-sf., 1-1/2 story dwelling built in 1950. page 102 Front setback is noted at 94.4-ft. with a side-yard setback at 71.65-ft. and 14.8-ft. These existing homes are intended to remain in place. ANALYSIS The two subject properties were created from three (3) original platted lots under the original Somerset Hills subdivision (refer to Somerset Hills plat map – attached). Mr. Gustafson has indicated he wants to return to the three platted lot set-up, and provide for another “buildable” lot between both residential properties. With the line adjustment, Lot 37 will reduce and return to its original platted shape and area of 29,095 sf. (0.67 acres) with 102-ft. of roadway frontage; Lot 36 (shown in yellow highlight – image below) become 31,350-sf. (0.72 acres) of area with 103.5-ft. of frontage; and Lot 35 will reduce back to 31,970-sf. (0.73 acres) in area with 100-ft. of frontage. New side-yard setbacks for the existing 1865 Dodd Rd. dwelling are indicated at 22.7 and 23.3 ft. from the adjusted line (north line of Lot 36); while the setbacks for 1883 Dodd Rd. are indicated at 19 – 19.2-ft. from the adjusted line (south line of Lot 36). These setbacks easily meet the 10-ft. setbacks required for R-1 District properties. Title 11-1-5.C of the City Code (Subdivision Ordinance) allows lot line adjustments to take place, provided the following standards are met: Lot line adjustment request to divide a lot which is a part of a recorded plat where the division is to permit the adding of a parcel of land to an abutting lot and the newly created property line will not cause the other remaining portion of the lot to be in violation with this title or the zoning ordinance. page 103 The lot line adjustment being proposed under this application is not requesting any divisible tract of land to be added to another abutting lot or parcel. Moreover, the Applicant is simply adjusting the shared parcel line back to their respective and “original” legally platted locations, which essentially re-establishes the lots as they were originally platted. More importantly, the resulting lot line adjustment does not cause the other remaining lots to be in violation of the zoning ordinance for minimum lot size/area and required street frontage (15,000-sq. ft. min. lot size and 100-ft. min. lot frontage for R-1 District properties). The Owner/Applicant has indicated his desire to build a new home for his family on the re-established middle Lot 36, and has also provided a proposed site plan/survey map illustrating the location of a possible new dwelling pad on the lot. This plan is for information only, and is not intended to be the final or approved location of the future dwelling pad. It does however, provide an example of how any new dwelling will comply with the “string-line” rule (refer to graphic – below) for new homes matching the existing front- yard setbacks established by adjacent dwellings, which in this case is 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road. Proposed side-yard setbacks of 15-ft. +/- will meet setbacks for a typical two-story dwelling in the R-1 Zone. As Dodd Road is also State Hwy. No. 149, the new driveway coming off Dodd Road will have to be reviewed, approved and permitted by MnDOT. Driveways and parking pads must be setback at least 5-ft. from property lines. The survey/site plan indicates the existing asphalt driveway/parking apron located on the north side of 1885 Dodd will encroach slightly over the new lot line (see image below – left); and there appears to be a separate and existing driveway encroachment issue on the north side of 1865 Dodd with neighboring property of 1857 Dodd Rd. (see image below-right). page 104 With the re-establishment of the shared line between Lot 35 and Lot 36 under this request, and because the Applicant is the controlling owner of all affected properties, it is recommended the Applicant either saw- cuts and removes that part of the driveway/apron that encroaches over the line to attain the minimum 5-ft. setback from the this line; or prepare an written agreement between neighboring properties that acknowledges the driveway encroachment issue exists between both properties, and that any future owners of these properties fully understands or accepts the encroachment issue between both parcels. Any agreement must be recorded with Dakota County, As for the existing driveway on 1865 Dodd Road that encroaches into the 1857 Dodd Road property, this too appears to be a long-term encroachment situation, and should be viewed as a civil matter between both property owners. Since the adjustment does not affect this shared lot line, the city will not require the Owner/Applicant to adjust or partially remove this encroaching driveway. It is highly recommended however, the Applicant address this issue immediately and directly with the owners of 1857 Dodd Road in order to avoid any potential legal, civil or title claim actions in the future. The existing fence for 1883 Dodd Road must be removed and relocated to the newly established lot line boundary between Lots 35 and 36. The city attorney was consulted on the applicability of this lot line adjustment in this case, and it was opined that the Owner/Applicant could request and proceed with a lot line adjustment application to the planning commission and city council, based on his opinion noted below: The definition of “subdivision” in Section 11-1-4 is as follows: SUBDIVISION: A described tract of land which is to be or has been divided into two (2) or more lots or parcels for the purpose of transfer of ownership or building development or, if a new street is involved, any division of a parcel of land. The term includes resubdivision and, where it is appropriate to the context, relates either to the process of subdividing or to the land subdivided. But the land in question has already been divided into lots, in this case three lots. For whatever reason, the land was developed into two single-family housing lots, not three. Per Section 11-1-5C of City Code, a “subdivision” request will have to go through the Planning Commission and City Council, per the preliminary and final plat process, if two exceptions enumerated in that section are met. The exceptions essentially have to do with (i) dividing a platted lot such as to add a portion of land to an abutting lot, and (ii) dividing a platted lot to add two new lots. That process does cover most subdivisions. However, here there is no division of a platted lot; the platted lot already exists, so there is nothing to change. The boundary lines may simply go back to the original platted lines, as shown on the survey you attached. The only real change I can see is requiring the County to assign a new PID, have the new property lines shown on the GIS, etc. page 105 ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend approval of the lot line adjustment, based on the attached findings of fact, with conditions; or 2. Recommend denial of the lot line adjustment, based on the findings of fact that the proposed adjustment is not consistent with the City Code or Comprehensive Plan and may have a negative impact on surrounding properties; or 1. Table the request; request additional information if required, and extend the application review period if necessary. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission give careful consideration to Alternative No. 1, approval of the lot line adjustment based on the attached findings of fact supporting the request, with conditions noted as follows: 1) The Applicant shall be responsible for recording with Dakota County any city resolution of approval and any and all necessary transfer or deed documents which convey the portion of lands under the lot line adjustment requested herein. 2) Applicant shall either saw-cut and remove that part of the driveway/apron that encroaches over the shared lot lie between Lots 35 and 36 to meet the 5-ft. setback required for driveway; or must prepare a written agreement that acknowledges and accepts the driveway encroachment issue between both properties, and such agreement shall be recorded with Dakota County. 3) The Applicant shall remove the privacy fence for 1883 Dodd Road and relocated/re-install along the shared lot line boundary between Lots 35 and 36. 4) No development activities, including grading/filling work, landscaping, tree removals, retaining walls, fencing, stairway or walkways, or any structure requiring a zoning and/or building permit will be allowed unless authorized under a separate critical area permit application. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL Lot Line Adjustment for 1865 & 1883 Dodd Road The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed requests: 1. The proposed lot line adjustment request meets the general purpose and intent of the City Code and is considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Approval of the lot line adjustment will have no visible impact on the subject properties; and poses no threat or creates any negative impacts on the character of the neighborhood. 3. The proposed adjustment does not cause any non-conformities on either parcel, based on the applicable zoning district standards for lot size and frontage requirements, except for the driveway encroachment issues as identified and noted in this report, which issues should not preclude the approval of this lot line adjustment. page 106 1865 & 1883 DODD ROAD Property Information April 17, 2020 0 450 900225 ft 0 130 26065 m 1:4,800 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. page 107 1865 & 1883 DODD ROAD Property Information April 17, 2020 0 110 22055 ft 0 30 6015 m 1:1,200 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. page 108 page 109 page 110 page 111 page 112 B) PLANNING CASE 2020-07 MATT GUSTAFSON, 1865 AND 1883 DODD ROAD – LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Matt Gustafson is requesting consideration of a lot line adjustment between two properties located at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; no comments or objections to this request were received. Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s website). Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Field asked when the combination of the proposed third lot was completed. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that he was unable to determine that. He replied that a structure was never built and perhaps the middle lot was split between the two properties when the homes were constructed in the 1950’s. Matt Gustafson, applicant, stated that he was present to address any questions. Acting Chair Mazzitello opened the public hearing. Community Development Director Tim Benetti read aloud two emails received in opposition of the request from to residents living at 1887 Dodd Road. COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS PERFORMED: COMMISSIONER KATZ AYE COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL AYE COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD AYE COMMISSIONER TOTH AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT SUPPORTING THE REQUEST WITH THE CONDITIONS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. THE APPLICANT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RECORDING WITH DAKOTA COUNTY ANY CITY RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL AND ANY AND ALL NECESSARY TRANSFER OR DEED DOCUMENTS WHICH CONVEY THE page 113 PORTION OF LANDS UNDER THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT REQUESTED HEREIN. 2. APPLICANT SHALL EITHER SAW-CUT AND REMOVE THAT PART OF THE DRIVEWAY/APRON THAT ENCROACHES OVER THE SHARED LOT LINE BETWEEN LOTS 35 AND 36 TO MEET THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK REQUIRED FOR DRIVEWAY; OR MUST PREPARE A WRITTEN AGREEMENT THAT ACKNOWLEDGES AND ACCEPTS THE DRIVEWAY ENCROACHMENT ISSUE BETWEEN BOTH PROPERTIES, AND SUCH AGREEMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITH DAKOTA COUNTY. 3. THE APPLICANT SHALL REMOVE THE PRIVACY FENCE FOR 1883 DODD ROAD AND RELOCATE/REINSTALL ALONG THE SHARED LOT LINE BOUNDARY BETWEEN LOTS 35 AND 36. 4. NO DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING GRADING/FILLING WORK, LANDSCAPING, TREE REMOVALS, RETAINING WALLS, FENCING, STAIRWAY OR WALKWAYS, OR ANY STRUCTURE REQUIRING A ZONING AND/OR BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE ALLOWED UNLESS AUTHORIZED UNDER A SEPARATE CRITICAL AREA PERMIT APPLICATION. FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER FIELD STATED THAT HE FINDS THE ORIGINAL PLATTING OF THE LAND TO BE OF INTEREST. HE STATED THAT THIS ACTION WOULD CREATE THREE LEGAL CONFORMING LOTS AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE APPROVED. HE ACKNOWLEDGED THE CONCERN FROM THE RESIDENT ABOUT THE WATER/WETLAND BUT NOTED THAT WOULD BE THE PROBLEM OF THE APPLICANT TO SOLVE. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RYAN RUZEK STATED THAT THE WATER RETENTION AREA WAS DISCUSSED IN THE PAST. HE STATED THAT IT WAS HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT THE WATER STORAGE WAS CREATED BY A PREVIOUS HOMEOWNER AND MAY HAVE A LINER. HE NOTED THAT IF THE AREA IS DETERMINED TO NOT BE A WETLAND, IT COULD BE FILLED. COMMISSIONER FIELD NOTED THAT THE COMMISSION IS SIMPLY APPROVING THE LOT SPLIT AND NOT GUARANTEEING WHAT WOULD OCCUR ON THAT NEW LOT. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL ASKED IF IT IS KNOWN WHAT WILL OCCUR ON THE NEW LOT. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BENETTI REPLIED THAT MR. GUSTAFSON INTENDS TO BUILD A NEW HOME FOR HE AND HIS WIFE ON THE NEW LOT. HE PROVIDED ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON THE CONDITION RELATED TO THE DRIVEWAY. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS PERFORMED: COMMISSIONER TOTH AYE COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO AYE page 114 COMMISSIONER KATZ AYE COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD AYE Acting Chair Mazzitello advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 5, 2020 meeting. page 115 From:maxzweber To:Tim Benetti Subject:Dispute Tues April 28, 2020 public hearing Date:Monday, April 27, 2020 3:58:56 PM My name is Max Zweber and I own the residence at 1887 Dodd Road, Mendota Heights, MN 55118. I am disputing the plan to "re-establish" 3 "original" platter lots in the R-1 one family residential district, located at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road. That is already a narrow lot. I would like to keep the house's in one row, not having a house set back. Right there is a natural water collection, pond, that fills in at different depths every year. The water has already flooded up to where a wooden fence was installed which is the same area a house would be built. Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7 edge, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone page 116 From:Andrea Sonju To:Tim Benetti Subject:Tues April 28, 2020 public hearing dispute Date:Monday, April 27, 2020 3:54:24 PM My name is Andrea Sonju and I reside at 1887 Dodd Road, Mendota Heights, MN 55118. I am disputing the plan to "re-establish" 3 "original" platter lots in the R-1 one family residential district, located at 1865 and 1883 Dodd Road. That is already a narrow lot. I would like to keep the house's in one row, not having a house set back. Right there is a natural water collection, pond, that fills in at different depths every year. The water has already flooded up to where a wooden fence was installed which is the same area a house would be built. Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone page 117 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor Garlock and City Council, City Administrator McNeill FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2020-35 Approving Variances for a New Press-Box/Bleacher Structure and Light Towers for Saint Thomas Academy, 949 Mendota Heights Road – [Planning Case No. 2020-08] Introduction City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution approving Variances to Saint Thomas Academy for a new multi-purpose press-box/bleacher stand structure with a canopy, along with six new over-height light towers, all for the existing baseball field located on the campus property. Background The plans indicate two bleacher/seating options: larger Option #1 with 234 seats and smaller Option #2 with 118 seats. The press-box would sit on the back, top edge of the bleachers. The bleachers will have an angled, overhead canopy to protect spectators, measuring 24’-4” from grade. The structure would also sit 1.36-ft. from the adjacent lot line (next to Patterson Dental). The field improvement plans also call for the installation of six (6) new light tower standards, with four towers at 70-ft. and two at 80-ft. in height. City Code requires accessory structures are limited to a height of 15-feet in height, and must maintain a setback at least 5 or 10-ft. from property lines, and are limited to certain numbers and size(s), depending on the area of the property (e.g. 425-sf. of total structure area and no single structure exceeds 225-sf. in size). Since City Code does not specify or grant allowances for over-height light standards in residential zoned properties, and the city has generally applied the “25-ft. maximum structure height” standard to these types of structures. Since the proposed light towers are 70-ft. and 80 ft. in height, a variance is needed. On April 28, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public hearing by means of a remote Webex and web- streamed meeting, whereby a planning staff report was presented and received by the commission, and the Applicant was present to answer questions. The city received no comments or objections on this item. A copy of the 04/28/2020 planning report is appended to this memo, along with meeting minutes. Discussion The City can use its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on certain land use or zoning decisions, such as this variance, and has broad discretion. A determination regarding whether or not the request meets the applicable code standards is required. Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve the Variance to Saint Thomas Academy for the proposed Press-Box/Bleacher Structure and Over-height Light Towers, with certain conditions and specific findings of fact to support said approval (noted in the proposed resolution). page 118 Action Requested If the City Council wishes to affirm this recommendation, make a motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-35 APPROVING VARIANCES FOR A NEW PRESS-BOX/BLEACHER STRUCTURE AND LIGHT TOWERS FOR SAINT THOMAS ACADEMY CAMPUS, 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD. Action on the proposed resolution requires a simple majority vote. If the Council wishes to over-turn this recommendation, make a motion to table this matter; and direct city staff to prepare an alternative resolution of denial for final consideration at the May 19th 2020 regular meeting. The 60-day statutory review period expires June 2, 2020. page 119 Planning Staff Report DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: PROPERTY ADDRESS: ZONING/GUIDED: ACTION DEADLINE: April 28, 2020 Planning Commission Tim Benetti, Community Development Director Planning Case No. 2020-08 Variances for Baseball Field Press Box/Bleachers & Light Towers Anderson-Johnson Associates, Inc. (St. Thomas Academy) 949 Mendota Heights Road R-1 One-Family Residential/PS-Private School June 2, 2020 (60-Day Review Period) INTRODUCTION Anderson-Johnson Associates, Inc., acting on behalf of Saint Thomas Academy (STA) is requesting certain variance approvals in order to construct new baseball field improvements at STA’s campus, located at 949 Mendota Heights Road. The variances would allow a new multi-purpose press box/covered bleacher structure to exceed the maximum height standard and have reduced setbacks needed for accessory structures; and allow for new light towers to exceed maximum height standards for structures in the R-1 One Family Residential District. This item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing on this item was published in the Pioneer Press newspaper; and notice letters of this hearing were mailed to property owners within 1,200 - 2,250 feet from the school campus property. As of the completion of this report, the city has not received any comments or objections on this item. BACKGROUND The school campus property consists of eight separate parcels, totaling 88.5 +/- acres (according to Dakota County/GIS records). The campus is located in the R-1 One Family Residential District, and is considered a permitted use under said district. The Convent of the Visitation sits directly to the east across Lake Drive, and Rogers Lake to the north provides ample buffers to nearby residential areas. I-494 lies to the south, with Patterson Dental offices to the immediate west of the campus and baseball field. Major and indirect access and traffic to the campus comes from Dodd Road to the east and Highway 55 to the west; with direct access and local traffic from Mendota Heights Road and Lake Drive to the south and east sides of the campus, respectively. page 120 In 1994, the city adopted Res. No. 94-22, approving a conditional use permit (CUP) and variances for the press box and stadium bleacher structure improvements at the football field facility, which also included four (4) new light towers. The CUP/variance allowed the press box (atop the bleachers section) not to exceed 16-feet in height, and the four light towers not to exceed 70-feet in overall height. Later that same year STA received approval of another CUP (Res. No. 94-42) to construct a main entrance ticket booth and concessions building, a small ticket booth along MH Road, and a screening structure for outdoor facilities. There also appears to be two additional accessory structures located on the south side of the football field. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The existing baseball field sits near the southwest corner of the main campus site, and is sandwiched between Patterson Dental to the west, Mendota Heights Road to the south, and STA Cadets Football Field to the east (see image- below). The baseball facility is currently un-lit or without any overhead light standards, and contains temporary bleachers set-up along the north and west sides of the back-stop/fencing, with player dug-outs on each end, and a large batting cage area next to the field (see close-up image-below). The existing stands and concrete underneath will be removed, along with the batting cage, some fencing and landscaping materials (See Plan Sheet C1.1 in the attachments). STA is proposing to replace and build a new multi-purpose covered bleachers/grandstand structure, with an upper level press box next to the existing baseball field. The improvements also include adding new page 121 baseball field light towers, as well as relocation of the batting cages and bull pen, and upgrades to the existing dugouts (see new improvements image – below and Plan Sheet C1.2 in the attachments). The plans call for two bleacher/seating options: Option #1 with 234 seats in a larger “wrap-around” arrangement with access ramps and landings located directly behind the home-plate back-stop; and Option #2 with 118 seats in a smaller squared-shape arrangement with access ramps/landings (see seating option images – below). Both arrangements call for the placement of an 8’ x 18’ (144-sf.) press-box on the top, back-side of the bleacher stands, with an angled, overhead canopy to protect the spectators. The top of the press box measures 18’-1” (from grade) and the upper reach of the canopy measures 24’-4” from grade. page 122 The closest point of the press box structure to the property line is 9.44 ft., while the edge of the new bleacher structure is setback only 1.36-ft. from the adjacent property line (see plan image – below). New overhead (over-height) lighting is a key component of this baseball field improvement project. These improvements include six (6) new light tower standards (similar to the ones depicted in the image below), with four of these at 70-ft. and two at 80-ft. in height. Pursuant to City Code Section 12-1I-7: Glare and Heat: “Any use requiring an operation producing an intense heat or light transmission shall be performed with the necessary shielding to prevent such heat or light from being detectable at the lot line of the site on which the use is located. Lighting in all instances shall be diffused or directed away from R districts and public streets.” The Applicants submitted a detailed lighting and photometric plan for this project. All new fixtures will be energy-saving LED lights, with different wattage and lumen levels depending on their placement or specified direction of display. The plan shows that most of the lighting (intensity) will be focused on the infield, with lesser or reduced amounts in the outfields. The goal or widely acceptable standard is to have a zero (0) light level at the property line or street line, especially near residential zoned areas. The plan shows minimal light spillage out towards Mendota Heights Road; and the closest single family residence (at 2371 Swan Drive) - when measured on a straight line from the nearest light pole - is approx. 2,112-feet (0.4 miles) away. Due to the fact the school is surrounded by a large commercial business to the west, a large open lake to the north, another school campus to the east, and the school’s own ice arena/open field space to the south (and the I-494 and I35E interstate systems), all help reduce the potential negative impacts these lights will have on surrounding properties. This is especially true for the neighboring residential uses (off Swan Drive, Rogers Avenue and Kressin Avenue), most of which are situated a great distance away from this field and are physically buffered and shielded by the STA’s school building. page 123 ANALYSIS of VARIANCE City Code requires structures in the R-1 One Family District must not exceed 25-ft. in measured height. Accessory structures however, are limited to a height of 15-ft., and must be setback at least 5-ft. or -10-ft. from property lines, and are limited to certain numbers and size(s), depending on the area of the property. For parcels 4+ acres, a property can have up to three (3) accessory structures not to exceed 425-sq. ft. of total structure area, and no single structure an exceed 225-sf. in size. The press box is noted as an 8’ x 18’ (144-sf.) enclosed structure; however, the overall footprint of the larger “wrap-around” style bleacher structure measures out approximately 1,275 sq. ft. in area; the canopy extends over the bleachers with a 24’-4” in height; and the press box/bleacher structure is shown with a 1.36-ft. setback off the nearby property line. The overall size, height and setback of this structure requires a variance. Since City Code does not precisely define or give allowances for tall light standards such as the ones being proposed by STA, the city has generally applied the “25-ft. maximum structure height” standard to these types of structures in a residential zoned area. Since the proposed light towers are 70-ft. and 80 ft. in overall height, a variance is in order. City Code Section 12-1L-5 governs variance requests. The city must consider a number of variables when recommending or deciding on a variance, which generally fall into two categories: (i) practical difficulties; and (ii) impact to the community. The “practical difficulties” test contains three parts: (i) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance; (ii) the plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality or neighborhood. It is also noted that economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. In addition, variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Section 12-1L-5(E)(1) further provides other issues the city may consider when granting or denying a variance, noted as follows: • Effect of variance upon health, safety, and welfare of the community. • Existing and anticipated traffic conditions. • Effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety. • Effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan. • Granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant, but necessary to alleviate undue hardship or difficulty. When considering a variance request, the Planning Commission must determine if these standards have been met in granting a variance, and provide findings of facts to support such a recommendation to the City Council. If the Planning Commission determines the Applicant has failed to meet these standards, or has not fully demonstrated a reasonableness in the granting of such variance, then findings of fact supporting a recommendation of denial must be determined. As part of any variance request, Applicants are required to prepare and submit their own responses and findings, which for this case, are noted in the application letter-narrative from AJA, dated April 2, 2020 (included in the attachments and noted below in italic text). page 124 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance. Applicant’s Response: St. Thomas Academy proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City’s ordinances and the comprehensive plan. Staff’s Response: The use of the property as a private (parochial) school is a permitted use in the R-1 District, and its continued use as a school, even with the proposed field improvements can be viewed as being consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. As noted in other planning application requests made with other local school sites, the City of Mendota Heights has approved similar variances for bleacher/press box structures and very tall light towers, due to the general acceptance that a school site such as STA (and others) function more like an institutional/campus use, rather than a typical “single-family residential” use in this R-1 District. Many high school athletic fields are lit by tall structures and it would be common practice to install that type of lighting for St. Thomas Academy. Modern and advanced lighting (such as LED) of stadiums has grown more popular throughout the metro cities and nation, especially in order to provide for more available hours for athletic events and games on these fields. At the same time the technology has improved the ability to shield the lights and focus the light pattern directly on to the fields, thereby minimizing spillage beyond the immediate baseball field area. With the limited number of baseball games played each year, the negative effects of the lighting should have a minimal overall impact on the adjacent single-family neighborhood and community. The positive impacts would be the comraderie and school spirit that is generated in athletic events held at times when athletes, parents and the community can attend games in later, after-work or evening hours. With reasonable standards applied to the lights, the issue of height is comparable to other similar (taller) light structures approved throughout the community, and these same lights should not be detrimental to the surrounding uses. STA’s desire to reconstruct and make these field improvements for the overall use and enjoyment of its student athletes and spectators appears very reasonable. This new press box/bleacher seating improvements, along with the new lighting will be nice improvements to the existing high school baseball field facilities, and the fact these additions are still within or near the height limits already established by the school’s football field facility today, makes the requested variance for heights justifiable and even reasonable in this case. The variances requested in this case should therefore be considered a reasonable request and an appropriate means to allowing the continued and successful use of this property 2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner. Applicant’s Response: The field lighting and bleacher/ press box will provide the school the ability to continue to use the facility safely and consistent with other on-campus uses as well as other neighboring schools. These unique circumstances were not created by the [school]. Staff’s Response: The plight of the landowner (STA) and restrictions on certain structure heights is due to circumstances unique to the property, as this school use is not a typical single-family use in the underlying R-1 One Family Residential District. Due to the long-term location of the school at this site, its limited effect on the surrounding uses, and its overall function as an institutional use in a residential zoning district, gives added weight to creating or supporting this practical difficulty argument on the unique situation of the property. Site and development standards reserved for typical single–family uses do not compare or should necessarily apply to such larger, school [institutional] uses. Staff believes there are circumstances unique that lend support to granting this variance. page 125 3. The variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Applicant’s Response: The property, and more specifically the varsity baseball field, has supported St. Thomas Academy’s baseball needs for decades- the proposed improvements will maintain the general character and use of the facility. The field lighting and bleacher/ press box will provide the school the ability to continue to use the facility safely and consistent with other on-campus uses as well as other neighboring schools. Staff’s Response: The variances, if granted, should not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods, as this school has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community. There is a general expectation that any addition of this nature can be considered a reasonable improvement to the overall functionality, benefit and enjoyment of the school, including its students, faculty, and the community. Staff believes the essential character of the neighborhood would not be altered by the granting of this variance. 4. Restrictions on Granting Variances. The following restrictions should be considered when reviewing a variance: a) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The applicants have indicated “the proposed improvements are not based on economic consideration.” When weighing the economic factor(s) of a variance application, taking economic considerations into account alone should not be the sole reason for either denying – or approving a variance. In this particular case, STA is simply providing an added benefit for the use and enjoyment of its student athletes, parents, spectators, and visitors to the field; and these improvements are likely to be an expensive project. These improvements are not meant serve as a means of generating added revenue (i.e. ticket sales), but a desire to expand playing time/hours on the field, and increase its standing and reputation with other local/metro schools. The Applicant has demonstrated other practical difficulties in this case, and reasonable justifications for requesting this variance. b) Variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff finds that the requested improvement plans for the subject property as requested by the Applicant, are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of school [or institutional] uses in the R-1 One Family Residential District. The subject property is designated PS-Private School in the current 2030 Comp Plan and scheduled for P/S Public/Semi-Public Use in the proposed 2040 Comp Plan. Certain land use goals and policies are noted below (note: LUG= Land Use Goal; LUP = Land Use Policy): • 2030 LUG #1: Maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and character of the community • 2030 LUP #4 Encourage appropriate transitions and buffering between potentially incompatible land uses. • 2030 LUP #5 Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level in community development and building. • 2040 LUP #2.2.2: Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level in community development and building. • 2040 LUP #2.2.5: Public buildings and properties will be designed, constructed and maintained to be a source of civic pride and to set a standard for private property owners to follow. page 126 The guiding principles in both comprehensive plans provide for supporting school improvements and development in the community. The requested variance appears to meet these goals and policy statements established under the comprehensive plans for the community; and will provide an opportunity for substantial investment to the existing school use, and will enhance the overall use and enjoyment by the school and its student athletes. The proposed improvements should pose no threat or any adverse effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety. These new field improvements and requested variance can be viewed or considered in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the current and proposed land use plans for the community. ALTERNATIVES for ACTION 1. Recommend approval of the variances to allow an additional and over-sized multi-purpose accessory structure consisting of a press box and bleacher stand approximately 1,275 sq. ft. in footprint area, 24’-4” in overall height, and located 1.36-ft. from the adjacent property line; along with variances for four (4) light towers at 70-ft. and two (2) light towers at 80-ft. in height, based on the following findings of fact that support the granting of said variances, noted as follows: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of the Variance to City Code Section 12-1D-1, as it relates to allowing an additional over-sized accessory structure with reduced setbacks, plus the over-sized (tall) light towers in the R-1 One Family Residential District, located on the St. Thomas Academy baseball facility and campus at 949 Mendota Heights Road, by the following supporting findings-of-facts: i.) The City Code’s accessory structure standards for residential districts causes a practical difficulty for a school use in this district, due to the overall size, scale and historical nature of the school at the subject location. ii.) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, as this school use functions more like an institutional use rather than a typical single-family use in the underlying R-1 One Family Residential District, and therefore warrants the approval or granting of these variances. iii.) The variances, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods; since the school is and has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community, and there is a general accepted expectation that similar athletic field improvements and related accessory structures can be considered a reasonable improvement for the overall benefit and enjoyment of the school, its students, faculty, and the community. iv.) The scale and scope of the variances needed to approve the number, sizes and heights of the proposed accessory structures, including the new press-box and bleacher stands, and over- height light poles on this large high school campus, are considered consistent with the spirit and intent of the City Code and Comprehensive Plan for the community, and may be approved as presented herein. page 127 v.) The Applicant has proven a reasonable justification and demonstrated a practical difficulty in this case for granting of these variances presented herein. C.The City has considered the factors required by Title 12-1L-5E1 of the City Code, including but not limited to the effect of the Variances upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of the Variances on the danger of fire and the risk to public safety, and upon the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan, and has determined this Variances will not affect or pose any negative impacts upon the neighborhood or the community in general. D.Approval of the Variances noted herein are for Saint Thomas Academy (949 Mendota heights Road) only, and does not apply or give precedential value to any other properties throughout the City. All variance applicants must apply for and provide a project narrative to the City to justify a variance. All variance requests must be reviewed independently by City staff and legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code. E.The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2020- 08, dated and presented April 28, 2020, on file with the City of Mendota Heights, is hereby fully incorporated into Resolution No. 2020-____. (final number to be assigned later) F.The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject to his Variance request. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact created by the variance. Conditions related to this transaction are as follows: i.) The Applicant shall obtain a building permit for all new structures identified herein, including any fence or electrical permits for the new light towers as necessary. ii.) Should the new tower lights, after installation, create any complaints or poses any issue of excessive light spillage, brightness or glare on the nearby Mendota Heights Road system or any other properties, the Applicant and/or lighting consultant shall immediately remediate and realign any light standards or fixtures (if needed) upon official notice from the City of Mendota Heights. iii.) Any public addressing/speaker system used on this baseball field must be centered or focused directly on to the baseball field or the bleacher/spectator stands. No speakers or noise shall be directed towards the neighboring businesses or residential uses to the north and east of the school. iv.) The Applicant shall not deviate from the site plan under this application review; nor increase any accessory structure numbers, area (footprint), light towers or height without first seeking and receiving city approvals, unless City Code provides for certain or allowable improvements to be made without any special application review process. v.) Any and all grading and construction activity 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. vi.) Approval of the variance is contingent upon City Council approval of the application and corresponding site plan. If the variances are approved by the City Council, the Applicant shall obtain all necessary building permits for construction of the proposed improvements within one-year from said approval date. If after one year no work has commenced, the Applicant may request an additional extension (to be determined by the City Council) if needed. page 128 2. Recommend denial of the variance request, based on the findings of fact that confirm the Applicant failed to meet the burden(s) of proof or standards in granting of the variance requested herein, noted as follows: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The Applicant has not met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of the variance to allow an additional and over-sized accessory structure or over-sized light towers in the R-1 District. These proposed improvements do not appear to be essential or critical to the overall enjoyment and continued use of the property; and the fact remains these improvements can only be allowed by means of a variance, which is contrary to the general spirit and intent of the Zoning Code. C. Because the City finds that the first prong of the three-part test (reasonable use of the property) is not met by the Applicant, the City need not consider the remaining two prongs of the test (unique circumstances of the property and essential character of the neighborhood). 3. Table the request and direct staff to extend the application review period an additional 60 days, in compliance with MN STAT. 15.99. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission give careful consideration to Alternative No. 1, approval of the variances, with findings-of-facts to support this recommendation, along with the conditions as noted herein. The commission has the authority to revise or modify these findings, and provide additional but reasonable conditions if necessary. Attachments 1. Aerial/Site Location Map 2. Applicant/Consultant Narrative Letter of Request 3. Site Plans – AJA Assoc. 4. Lighting Plan – Musco Lighting page 129 April 2, 2020 Mr. Tim Benetti Community Development Director City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 (651) 255-1142 email:timb@mendota-heights.com Re:Planning Application - Variance St. Thomas Academy Baseball Field 949 Mendota Heights Road Mendota Heights, MN 55120 Dear Mr. Benetti, We are please to provide the enclosed information related to the Baseball Field Improvements (Phase 2) proposed at St. Thomas Academy. We are submitting the Planning Application today in hopes of appearing in front of the April Planning Commission. The work proposed at St. Thomas Academy, specifically related to the requested VARIANCE(S) includes adding field lighting as well as the replacement of the existing bleachers with a new covered grandstand with press box at the existing athletic facilities. Proposed work also includes relocation of the batting cages and north bull pen, and upgrades to the existing dugouts (e.g. painting, new cubbies). The use and general character of the property will not change. We have included plans with this cover letter and application to iilsutarte and detail the height and character of the field lighting and bleacher/ press box structure. We provide the following findings related to the variances required for the field lighting and bleacher/ press box structure. • The property, and more specifically the varsity baseball field, has supported St. Thomas Academy’s baseball needs for decades- the proposed improvements will maintain the general character and use of the facility. • The field lighting and bleacher/ press box will provide the school the ability to continue to use the facility safely and consistent with other on-campus uses as well as other neighboring schools. • These unique circumstances were not created by the School District. • The proposed improvements are not based on economic considerations. • St. Thomas Academy proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City’s ordinances and the comprehensive plan. page 130 • The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality or be injurious to the use or enjoyment of other property in the vicinity. • If granted, the proposed variances will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or of those utilizing the property or nearby properties. St. Thomas Academy intends to construct the improvements later this Summer, 2020. Construction would begin in midJuly and be complete by late-October. Tim, we trust the above and enclosed information is clear and comprehensive and satisfies your needs. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact our office. Sincerely, Anderson-Johnson Associates, Inc. Jay R. Pomeroy, Landscape Architect attachments cc: Pam Kunkel - Thomas Academy Andy Faulkner - ICS page 131 St. Thomas Academy - Campus Property Information April 22, 2020 0 450 900225 ft 0 130 26065 m 1:4,800 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. page 132 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129%$6(%$//),(/',03529(0(1763+$6(677+20$6$&$'(0<0(1'27$+(,*+76010HQGRWD+HLJKWV5RDG0HQGRWD+HLJKWV017,7/(6+((71912503/31/2020JRPJRP&&,7<9$5,$1&(68%0,77$/35(/,0,1$5<'5$)79,&,1,7<0$3'5$:,1*,1'(;*(1(5$/127(6%$6(%$//),(/',03529(0(1763+$6(6W7KRPDV$FDGHP\0HQGRWD+HLJKWV5RDG0HQGRWD+HLJKWV016W7KRPDV$FDGHP\ $//&216758&7,210867&203/<:,7+$33/,&$%/(67$7($1'/2&$/25',1$1&(6 7+(&2175$&725:,//%(5(63216,%/()25$1'6+$//3$<)25$//&216758&7,2167$.,1*/$<287 7+(&2175$&7256+$//2%7$,1$1'3$<)25$//5(/$7('&216758&7,213(50,7668%0,7$&23<2)$//3(50,76727+(6&+22/',675,&7(1*,1((5$1'&,7< &2175$&7256+$//%(5(63216,%/()25$//75$)),&&21752/6,*1$*( &216758&7,21=21(6 1(&(66$5<72&216758&7352326(',03529(0(176$//6,*1$*(/$<28760867%('(6,*1('%<7+(&2175$&725$1'$33529('%</2&$/$87+25,7,(6 ,167$//&21752/)(1&,1*$1'%$55,&$',1*$61(&(66$5<723527(&77+(38%/,& 9,6,7$1',163(&76,7(72'(7(50,1((;7(172):25.$1'1$785(2)0$7(5,$/672%(+$1'/(' 5()(57263(&,),&$7,216)25'(:$7(5,1*5(48,5(0(176 &+(&.$//3/$1$1''(7$,/',0(16,216$1'9(5,)<6$0(%()25(),(/'/$<287 0$,17$,1$'-$&(173523(57<$1'38%/,&675((76&/($1)520&216758&7,21&$86('',57$1''(%5,621$'$,/<%$6,63527(&7'5$,1$*(6<67(06)5206(',0(17$7,21$6$5(68/72)&216758&7,215(/$7('',57$1''(%5,6 0$,17$,1'867&21752/'85,1**5$',1*23(5$7,216 $//(526,21&21752/0(7+2'66+$//&203/<:,7+03&$$1'/2&$/5(*8/$7,216 &2175$&7256+$//0,1,0,=(',6785%$1&(726,7($1'3527(&7(;,67,1*6,7()($785(6 ,1&/8',1*785)$1'9(*(7$7,21 :+,&+$5(725(0$,1 352326('&2172856$1'6327(/(9$7,216$5(6+2:172),1,6+*5$'(81/(6627+(5:,6(127(' 352326('(/(9$7,2166+2:17<3,&$//<$6256+$//%(81'(56722'720($125 6327(/(9$7,2166+2:1,1',&$7(685)$&(),1,6+*5$'(681/(66127('27+(5:,6( 7+(&2175$&7256+$//%(62/(/<5(63216,%/()25'(7(50,1,1*48$17,7,(62)&87),//$1':$67(0$7(5,$/672%(+$1'/('$1')25$028172)*5$',1*72%('21(,125'(572&203/(7(/<3(5)250$//:25.,1',&$7('217+(•••• •••••••••• • • • •• • •• • • • • •• • • • • •• • •••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • •••• • • • • •• • • • • •• • •• • •• • • • •• • • •••• • • •• • • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••$662&,$7(':,7+,03257,1*$1'(;3257,1*0$7(5,$/66+$//%(,1&,'(17$/727+(&2175$&7 12),1,6+('6/23(66+$//(;&((' +25,=217$/72 9(57,&$/  81/(6627+(5:,6(127(' $//',6785%('$5($6:+,&+$5(127'(6,*1$7('72%(3$9('25725(&(,9(6<17+(7,&785)6+$//5(&(,9($7/($672)72362,/$1'6+$//%(62''(' )$,/85(2)785)'(9(/230(17,17+((9(177+(&2175$&725)$,/6723529,'($1$&&(37$%/(785)7+(&2175$&7256+$//5(62'$//$33/,&$%/($5($6$712$'',7,21$/&267727+(2:1(5727+(6$7,6)$&7,212)7+((1*,1((5 /2&$7($//(;,67,1*87,/,7,(69(5,)</2&$7,216,=($1',19(57(/(9$7,212)$//(;,67,1*87,/,7,(69(5,)</2&$7,2166,=(6$1'(/(9$7,2162)6$0(%()25(%(*,11,1*&216758&7,21& 7,7/(6+((7& (;,67,1*&21',7,216$1'6,7(5(029$/63/$1& 6,7(/$<287$1'),1,6+,1*3/$1& *5$',1*$1''5$,1$*(DQG5(7$,1,1*:$//3/$16& 6,7('(7$,/6% %/($&+(53/$1$1'6(&7,21% 35(66%2;3/$16(&7,21$1''(7$,/6(;+ /2&$7,217232*5$3+,&DQG87,/,7<6859(<(Sunde Land Surveying, 5/28/2019)((/(&75,&$/6,7(3/$1(Not Included)((/(&75,&$/'(7$,/6(Not Included)6((086&23/$16page 133 ;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(;)/$77,/(5(029(:22':$//5(029()(1&(,1&/8',1*)227,1*65(029()(1&(,1/&8',1*&21&5(7(0$,17(1$1&(675,33527(&7$'-$&(176<17+(7,&785)5(029()(1&(,1&/8',1*)227,1*65(029(&21&5(7(5(029(%$77,1*&$*(,1&/8',1*)(1&($1')227,1*6$1'685)$&(5(029($5%259,7$(6,1&8',1*6780363527(&7%$&.6723$1'$'-$&(17&21&5(7(:$/.5(029(5(3/$&(&21&5(7($61(('('72$//2:)25%/($&+(5)227,1*63527(&76<17(+7,&785),1),(/'12&216758&7,2175$)),&81'(5$1<&,5&8067$1&(6(;326((;,67,1*785)),(/''5$,17,/(72$//2:)251(:'5$,17,/(&211(&7,215()(5726+((7&LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129%$6(%$//),(/',03529(0(1763+$6(677+20$6$&$'(0<0(1'27$+(,*+76010HQGRWD+HLJKWV5RDG0HQGRWD+HLJKWV01(;,671*&21',7,216$1'6,7(5(029$/63/$11912503/31/2020JRPJRP&&,7<9$5,$1&(68%0,77$/35(/,0,1$5<'5$)7015 30127(6/(*(1'*5$9(/685)$&(5(029$/6&21&5(7(3$9(0(175(029$/6&21&5(7(&85%675,35(029$/6)(1&,1*5(029$/675((5(029$/63523(57</,1( 5()(5726+((7&7,7/(6+((7)25*(1(5$/127(6 0,1,0,=(',6785%$1&(726,7($1'3527(&7(;,67,1*9(*(7$7,21$1'6,7()($785(6 &85%6:$/.63$9(0(17629(5+($'$1'81'(5*5281'87,/,7,(66,*1$*()(1&,1*52$':$<6(7& :+,&+$5(725(0$,1 5(3$,5255(3/$&((;,67,1*3523(57<$1'6,7()($785(6,1&/8',1**5$66$1'9(*(7$7,21:+,&+,6725(0$,17+$7,6'$0$*('%<7+(:25.722:1(5 66$7,6)$&7,21$1'$712$'',7,21$/&267727+(2:1(5 9,6,77+(6,7(35,2572%,'',1*%()$0,/,$5:,7+$&78$/&21',7,216,17+(),(/'(;75$&203(16$7,21:,//127%($//2:(')25&21',7,216:+,&+&28/'+$9(%((1'(7(50,1('25$17,&,3$7('%<(;$0,1$7,212)7+(6,7(7+(&2175$&7'5$:,1*6$1'7+(,1)250$7,21$9$,/$%/(3(57$,1,1*72(;,67,1*62,/687,/,7,(6$1'27+(56,7(&+$5$&7(5,67,&6 7+(&2175$&7256+$//+,5(7+(6(59,&(62)$87,/,7</2&$725&203$1<72/2&$7($//35,9$7(/<2:1('87,/,7,(67+$70$<%(',6785%('%<&216758&7,2123(5$7,216$1'6+$//3529,'($//1(&(66$5<3527(&7,215(029$/$1'5(/2&$7,212)35,9$7(87,/,7</,1(6,1&/8',1*,55,*$7,216<67(012$'',7,21$/&203(16$7,21:,//%(3$,'727+(&2175$&725)2587,/,7,(66+2:1217+('5$:,1*625:+,&+27+(5:,6(0$<+$9(%((1$17,&,3$7('35,25727+(&216758&7,21 75((3527(&7,21,167$// +,*+25$1*(612:)(1&($77+('5,3/,1(2)$//75((672%(3527(&7('0$,17$,17+528*+287'85$7,212)&216758&7,21 $//,7(06'(6,*1$7('72%(5(029('25,17+(3$7+2)&216758&7,216+$//%(&20(3523(57<2)7+(&2175$&725$1'5(029(')5207+(6,7(81/(6627+(5:,6(127('page 134 1(:%/($&+(5$1'35(66%2;0,''/(6(&7,2172%(&29(5(':,7+522)5()(5726+((76%$1'%352326('%8//3(1 6<17+(7,&785) 352326('%$77,1*&$*(6  :6<17+(7,&785)352326('5(7$,1,1*:$// 5()(5726+((7& (;,67,1* 1(:3+$6( 1(77('%$&.6723$1'6<17+(7,&785),1),(/'352326('),(/'/,*+7,1* 32/(67<3,&$/ 352326('),(/'/,*+7,1* 32/(67<3,&$/ 352326(''8*287,03529(0(176 %<27+(56 352326(''8*287,03529(0(176 %<27+(56 0$7&+(;,67,1*6<17+(7,&785)785)%<27+(56352326('62)772661(77,1* a/); 5C1.49C1.45C1.44C1.410C1.47C1.46C1.45C1.4 +,*+&+$,1/,1.6,'(/,1()(1&(8C1.410C1.4C1.410C1.48352326('&21&5(7(:$/.3/$=$ a6) 7C1.41.36'9.44'7.64' TOPROP. LINE3.53' TOPROP LINE152.70' TO PROPERTY LINE40.90' TO PROP. LINE75.00'75.00'17.20'15.00'7.00'60.50'LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129%$6(%$//),(/',03529(0(1763+$6(677+20$6$&$'(0<0(1'27$+(,*+76010HQGRWD+HLJKWV5RDG0HQGRWD+HLJKWV016,7(/$<287$1'),1,6+,1*3/$11912503/31/2020JRPJRP&&,7<9$5,$1&(68%0,77$/35(/,0,1$5<'5$)7015 30127(6 5()(5726+((7&7,7/(6+((7)25*(1(5$/127(6 $//$33/,&$%/(',0(16,216$5(72&(17(5/,1(2))(1&(25('*(2)&85%81/(6627+(5:,6(127(' &+(&.$//3/$1$1''(7$,/',0(16,216$1'9(5,)<6$0(%()25(),(/'/$<287 $//',6785%('$5($6:+,&+$5(127'(6,*1$7('72%(3$9('6+$//5(&(,9($7/($672)72362,/$1'6+$//%(62''(' )$,/85(2)785)'(9(/230(17,17+((9(177+(&2175$&725)$,/6723529,'($1$&&(37$%/(785)7+(&2175$&7256+$//5(62'$//$33/,&$%/($5($6$712$'',7,21$/&267727+(2:1(5727+(6$7,6)$&7,212)7+((1*,1((5/(*(1'5()(5(1&(.(<726,7('(7$,/6'(7$,/,'180%(5 723 '(7$,/6+((7180%(5 %27720 352326('&21&5(7(:$/.3/$=$352326('&+$,1/,1.)(1&,1*0$,17(1$1&(675,3352326('6<17+(7,&785)352326('/,*+732/(352326('5(7$,1,1*:$//:,7+ +,*+)(1&(3523(57</,1(1C1.44C1.410C1.45C1.44C1.410C1.4page 135 83.583.082.883.883.883.883.883.483.683.483.283.183.183.583.683.4&2//(&725'5$,1,19 &2//(&725'5$,1,19  &2//(&725'5$,1# &2//(&725'5$,1# &2//(&725'5$,1#TC= 81.783.383.683.1TC= 82.183.4.883352326('5(7$,1*:$// a +,*+ :,7+)(1&,1*83.483.383.383.282.482.3TW=82.5BW=82.4TW=90.5BW=82.7TW=89.0BW=83.0TW=83.5BW=83.3TW=89.5BW=82.683.182.982.682.483.3TW=87.0BW=83.3TW=90.5BW=83.1TW=91.5BW=83.0TW=87.5BW=82.5M.E.83.583.082.883.483.483.283.183.183.5&2//(&725'5$,1,19 352326('5(7$,1*:$// a +,*+ :,7+)(1&,1*83.483.383.383.282.482.3TW=82.5BW=82.4TW=90.5BW=82.7TW=89.0BW=83.0TW=83.5BW=83.3TW=89.5BW=82.683.182.982.682.483.3TW=87.0BW=83.3TW=90.5BW=83.1TW=91.5BW=83.0TW=87.5BW=82.5LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129%$6(%$//),(/',03529(0(1763+$6(677+20$6$&$'(0<0(1'27$+(,*+76010HQGRWD+HLJKWV5RDG0HQGRWD+HLJKWV01*5$',1*$1''5$,1$*(3/$11912503/31/2020JRPJRP&&,7<9$5,$1&(68%0,77$/35(/,0,,1$5<'5$)7010 20/(*(1'5()(5(1&(.(<726,7('(7$,/6'(7$,/,'180%(5 723 '(7$,/6+((7180%(5 %27720 (;,67,1*&217285(;,67,1*6327(/(9$7,21352326('&217285352326('6327(/(9$7,210( 0$7&+(;,67,1*7: 7232):$//%: %277202):$// (;326(' 6,/7)(1&(52&.&216758&7,21(175$1&(352326('6<17+(7,&785)352326('/,*+732/(352326(''5$,17,/(352326('5(7$,1,1*:$//:,7+ +,*+)(1&(3523(57</,1(86666.61C1.4 5()(5726+((7&7,7/(6+((7)25*(1(5$/127(6 0$,17$,1$'-$&(173523(57<$1'38%/,&675((76&/($1)520&216758&7,21&$86('',57$1''(%5,621$'$,/<%$6,63527(&7'5$,1$*(6<67(06)5206(',0(17$7,21$6$5(68/72)&216758&7,215(/$7('',57$1''(%5,6 0$,17$,1'867&21752/'85,1**5$',1*23(5$7,216 $//(526,21&21752/0(7+2'66+$//&203/<:,7+03&$$1'27+(5/2&$/5(*8/$7,216 ,)(526,21$1'6(',0(17&21752/0($685(67$.(1$5(127$'(48$7($1'5(68/7,1'2:1675($06(',0(177+(&2175$&7256+$//%(5(63216,%/()25&/($1,1*287'2:1675($0672506(:(56$61(&(66$5<,1&/8',1*$662&,$7('5(6725$7,21 6(',0(17&21752/'(9,&($7672506(:(5,1/(76$77+(,1/(7672$//672506(:(56758&785(63529,'($352'8&7)5207+()2//2:,1*/,67$&&(37$%/(352'8&76$:,0&27236/$%Œ02'(/5'%,1)5$6$)(Š6(',0(17&21752/%$55,(5',675,%87('%<52<$/(19,5210(17$/6<67(06,1&6&% 66+$//%(6,=('63(&,),&$//<)257+(6758&785($1'&$67,1*63(&,),('6&% 66+$//%((48,33(':,7+)5$0($1'3(5)25$7('6+528'$1'6+$//%(:5$33('217+(2876,'(&29(5,1*7+(3(5)25$7(':$//21/<:,7+$*(27(;7,/(62&.& '$1'<%$*Š25'$1'<%$*,,Š',675,%87('%<%52&.:+,7(&203$1<673$8/01  '$1'<%$*6+$//%(86('21/<)25&85%,1/(76$)7(53$9(0(17 %,1'(5&2856(25:($5&2856( ,6,167$//('25$7(;,67,1*3$9('$5($6' ,1)5$6$)(Š'(%5,6&2//(&7,21'(9,&(%<52<$/(19,5210(17$/6<67(06,1&',675,%87('%<(66%527+(56&2817<52$'&25&25$101'&' 66+$//%(6,=('63(&,),&$//<)257+(6758&785($1'&$67,1*63(&,),('3529,'(),/7(5%$*6$1'7,(6)25&203/(7(,167$//$7,21( 25$33529('(48$/ 3(5,0(7(5(526,21&21752/'(9,&(6 6,/7)(1&(52&.(175$1&(,1/(73527(&7,21(7& ,167$//('%<7+(&2175$&7256+$//%(,163(&7('%<7+(&,7<35,2572$1</$1'',6785%,1*$&7,9,7,(6&2175$&72508673529,'(+285127,&(727+(&,7<)25,163(&7,21127(63C1.4&*5$',1*$1''5$,1$*(3/$16&$/(  &5(7$,1,1*:$//3/$16&$/(  2C1.45C1.44C1.410C1.45C1.45(7$,1,1*:$//$1')(1&(127(6 %,*%/2&. 5(7$,1,1*:$//66+$//%(&216758&7(',1$&&25'$1&(:,7+0$18)$&785(5 6,16758&7,216$1':$//'(6,*1(1*,1((5 65(48,5(0(176 86(5(7$,1,1*:$//%/2&.6)257+(%$6(2)7+(:$//$1':+(5(21(6,'(2)7+(:$//,6(;326('86()5((67$1',1*%/2&.6$1'&$381,76)257233257,212):$//$1':+(5(%/2&.7(;785('685)$&(,6(;326('21%27+6,'(62)7+(:$// 3529,'( 7<3,&$/ µ67(36¶2):$//+(,*+7,125'(5720$7&+*5$'(2)&21&5(7(:$/.$1''(&25$7,9()(1&(86(³67(3'2:1´%/2&. 6,'('$1'6,'(' $65(48,5(' 6(&85(67(3'2:1$1'&$3%/2&.672)5((67$1',1*%/2&.:,7+32/<85(7+$1(6($/$17 &25('5,//&$3$1'81'(5/<,1*%/2&.725(&(,9()(1&(3267*52873267,13/$&(3(5'(7$,/page 136 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129%$6(%$//),(/',03529(0(1763+$6(677+20$6$&$'(0<0(1'27$+(,*+76010HQGRWD+HLJKWV5RDG0HQGRWD+HLJKWV016,7('(7$,/61912503/31/2020JRPJRP&&,7<9$5,$1&(68%0,77$/35(/,0,1$5<'5$)752&.&216758&7,21(175$1&((;,67,1*3$9(0(17725(0$,172:$6+('52&.*(27(;7,/()$%5,& 0Q'27&/$669 127(3529,'(:+(5(&216758&7,2175$)),&(17(5625(;,767+(&216758&7,216,7(0,1,0807+,&.1(663523(57<52:/,1( 0,1,080$65(48,5('&62)77266 32676 1(77,1*  +(,*+72'7235$,/&+$,1/,1.)(1&(&21&5(7(0$,17(1$1&(675,3&21&5(7()227,1*[)25(1'&251(5*$7($1'38//32676127(6 $//326766+$//%(2' 326763$&,1*6+$//127(;&((' 2& %277205$,/6+$//%(3/$&('12025(7+$1$%29(),1,6+*5$'(1(77,1* /21*(;7(16,21:(/'('7232673529,'(1(77,1*38//(<6<67(0(<(%2/76$1'0,6&+$5':$5()25&203/(7(6<67(0*$/9$1,=('7+5($'('(<(%2/77+528*+3267&8C1.46(',0(17&21752//2*)/2:0,1 2&0$;)/2:)/2:67$.('(7$,/,167$//$7,21'(7$,/6(',0(17&21752//2*67$.(72%(3/$&('$772(2)6/23(%27+6,'(6:22'67$.(%277202)6:$/(:22'67$.(723(1(75$7(1(77,1*0$7(5,$/21/<6(',0(17&21752//2*&%8//3(13,7&+(560281'  (/(9$7,216/23(#3(5)22781,)2506/23(          72+20(3/$7(7+,&.&21&5(7(6/$%29(5325286$**5(*$7( 81,)2506/23(81,)2506/23( 0281'7$%/(/(9(/:,7+3,7&+(5 658%%(5  0281'7$%/(/,0,76',5(&7,212)7+52:3,7&+(5 658%%(5&/$< 29(5325286$**5(*$7( 7+,&.&21&5(7(%$6(6/$%72%(&29(5(':,7+6<17+(7,&785) %<27+(56 81,)2506/23(/(9(/$5($/(9(/$5($  &'28%/(6:,1**$7(/$7&+127(3529,'($'(48$7(63$&(%(7:((1*$7(3267$1'*$7(68&+7+$7*$7(,6,1/,1(:,7+)(1&,1*:+(1)8//<&/26('$1'/$7&+('/21*+$1'/( 21(21($&+6,'(2)/$7&+ /$7&+5(&(,9(5 21(($&+6,'(2)/$7&+ /$7&+$50 21(21($&+6,'(2)*$7( /$7&++,1*(6(&85(/$7&+72*$7(3529,'(0(&+$1,6072$//2:*$7(72%(6(&85(':,7+3$'/2&.6(&85(/$7&+5(&(,9(572*$7(&6,1*/(6:,1**$7(/$7&+127(3529,'($'(48$7(63$&(%(7:((1*$7(3267$1'*$7(68&+7+$7*$7(,6,1/,1(:,7+)(1&,1*:+(1)8//<&/26('$1'/$7&+('*$7(/$7&+&/$036(&85('72*$7(3267/,)7+$1'/(/$7&+/,)7+$1'/(5(&(,9(53529,'(+2/(7+528*+/,)7+$1'/($1'5(&(,9(572$&&2002'$7(3$'/2&. 3$'/2&.%<2:1(5 /,)7+$1'/(5(&(,9(5&/$036(&85('72*$7(3267&&21&5(7(:$/.0,1 0,1 &21&5(7(:$/.6$1'68%%$6(7<3,&$/$7*5$66/$1'6&$3,1*$1'62'$5($6&203$&7('68%*5$'(&5(7$,1,1*:$// %,*%/2&. &586+('6721(/(9(/,1*3$' $663(&,),(' '5$,17,/('$</,*+77+528*+:$//%27720%/2&.$$6+72126721(72(;7(1'$7/($67%(+,1':$//029(%/2&.6)25:$5''85,1*,167$//$7,2172(1*$*(6+($5.12%6 7<3,&$/ (;326(':$//+(,*+79$5,(6 +,*+)(1&(:+(5($33/,&$%/(*5$'(72'5$,1685)$&(:$7(5$:$<)520:$//5()(572*5$',1*3/$16/23(9$5,(6%85<'(37+),(/'&25(,172QG&2856(%/2&.*5287)(1&(3267,13/$&((;326(':$//+(,*+79$5,(6&'5$,1$*()$%5,& 0,5$),1 %$77,1*&$*($1'%8//3(16(&7,2135(3$5('68%*5$'( 0,1 *5$1,7( 325286$**5(*$7( 75$352&. 325286$**5(*$7( 785)&$53(7:,7+,1),// %<27+(56 ;377,0%(5)$67(1('72:$//%/2&.625&21&5(7(0$,17(1$1&(675,36$1'68%%$6(6/23(72'5$,16/23(72'5$,11(:&2//(&725'5$,17,/(5()(5723/$1)25/2&$7,21$1',19(57(/(9$7,216785) %<27+(56 )$67(1('727232)&85%',$%$77,1*&$*(3267  +,*+ ,1*5281'6/((9(&&21&5(7(0$,17(1$1&(675,3 3/$16(&7,215$',86 7<3,&$/ ),1,6+*5$'(2)0$,17(1$1&(675,36+$//%($%29(62'$1')/86+:,7+3$9(0(17  5(%$5'(37+&216758&7,21-2,17*5$66&203$&7('68%*5$'(&216758&7,21-2,176+$//%(&8772'(37+$1'6+$//2&&85$7($&+3267$1'$70,'32,17%(7:((1326763267  5(%$5&6,/7)(1&(1250$/86(32676 ,)86(':,7+2876833257)(1&( :22'64 0,1 #  0$; 63$&,1*0(7$/OEVOI 0,1 # 0$; 63$&,1*',5(&7,212)5812)))/2:127('(3(1',1*8321&21),*85$7,21$77$&+72:,5(0(6+:,7++2*5,1*667((/32676:,7+7,(:,5(625:22'32676:,7+67$3/(6 0,1/(1*7+3267 0(7$/  0,1/(1*7+3267 :22' 6,/7)(1&()$%5,&29(5/$3)$%5,&$1')$67(1# ,17(59$/6(;7(1':,5(0(6+,17275(1&+)$%5,&$1&+25$*(75(1&+%$&.),//:,7+7$03('1$785$/62,/0,10,11$785$/62,/0,1%85<'(37+ 0(7$/ 0,1%85<'(37+ :22' 0,10(7$/67$.(25:22'3267237,21$/6833257)(1&( :,5(0(6+ &&+$,1/,1.)(1&(+(,*+79$5,(65()(5723/$1127(6 (1'&251(5$1'38//326766+$//%(/,1(326766+$//%( $//)(1&,1*6+$//5(&(,9([*$8*()$%5,&81/(66127('27+(5:,6( /,1(326760$<%($,5'5,9(1 326763$&,1*6+$//127(;&((' 2& %277205$,/6+$//%(3/$&('12025(7+$1$%29(),1,6+*5$'(7235$,/&+$,1/,1.)(1&(%277205$,/),1,6+*5$'(&21&5(7(0$,17(1$1&(675,3&21&5(7()227,1*[)25(1'&251(5*$7($1'38//32676&8C1.4page 137 1234567SEATING LAYOUT - BASEBALL OPT #11234567SEATING LAYOUT - BASEBALL OPT #2SECTION VIEW - BASEBALLLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERINGANDERSON - JOHNSONASSOCIATES,INC.7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129%$6(%$//),(/',03529(0(1763+$6(677+20$6$&$'(0<0(1'27$+(,*+76010HQGRWD+HLJKWV5RDG0HQGRWD+HLJKWV01%/($&+(53/$1$1'6(&7,211912503/31/2020JRPJRP%&,7<9$5,$1&(68%0,77$/35(/,0,1$5<'5$)7$//6+23$1'25)$%5,&$7,21'5$:,1*6)256758&785$/&20321(1762)7+(*5$1'67$1'6<67(06,1&/8',1*)227,1*6$1')281'$7,2166+$//%('(6,*1('$1'&(57,),('%<$5(*,67(5('6758&785$/(1*,1((5&855(17/</,&(16('7235$&7,&(,17+(67$7(2)0,11(627$&203/(7(&(57,),('6758&785$/&$/&8/$7,2166+$//$&&203$1<68%0,66,212)6+23'5$:,1*6'5$:,1*6$1'&$/&8/$7,2166+$//&/($5/<127($//'(6,*1/2$'6,1$&&25'$1&(:,7+7+(0,11(627$67$7(%8,/',1*&2'(7KLVGUDZLQJLVIRUUHIHUHQFHRQO\DQGIRUFRPSHWLWLYHELGGLQJSXUSRVHV%OHDFKHUPDQXIDFWXUHUVKDOOSURYLGHHQJLQHHUHGGUDZLQJVDVQRWHGRQWKLV3ODQDQGLQWKHVSHFLILFDWLRQpage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page 139 PROJECT SUMMARYNot to be reproduced in whole or part without the written consent of MuscoSports Lighting, LLC. ©1981, 2020 Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.ENGINEERED DESIGNBy: Joe Seda • File #199895B • 27-Feb-20St. Thomas Academy BaseballMendota Heights, MNLighƟng System Pole / Fixture SummaryPole IDPole HeightMtg HeightFixture QtyLuminaire TypeLoadCircuitA170'70'4TLC-LED-12004.68 kWA16'1TLC-BT-5750.58 kWAA270'70'5TLC-LED-12005.85 kWA16'1TLC-BT-5750.58 kWAB1-B280'80'7TLC-LED-150010.01 kWA16'2TLC-BT-5751.15 kWAC1, C370'70'5TLC-LED-15007.15 kWA16'2TLC-BT-5751.15 kWA64350.60 kW Circuit SummaryCircuitDescriptionLoadFixture QtyABaseball50.6 kW43 Fixture Type SummaryTypeSourceWattageLumensL90L80L70QuantityTLC-LED-1200LED 5700K - 75 CRI1170W136,000>81,000>81,000>81,0009TLC-LED-1500LED 5700K - 75 CRI1430W160,000>81,000>81,000>81,00024TLC-BT-575LED 5700K - 75 CRI575W52,000>81,000>81,000>81,00010Light Level Summary Calculation Grid SummaryIlluminationGrid NameCalculation MetricAveMinMaxMax/MinAve/MinCircuitsFixture QtyBaseball (Infield)Horizontal Illuminance50.436691.891.40A43Baseball (Outfield)Horizontal Illuminance30.320472.331.51A43BullpenHorizontal35.820472.331.79A43Road SpillHorizontal0.0800.410.00A43Road SpillMax Candela (by Fixture)28320.881046911924.863218.64A43Road SpillMax Vertical Illuminance Metric0.1500.650.00A43page 140 ILLUMINATION SUMMARYNot to be reproduced in whole or part without the written consent of MuscoSports Lighting, LLC. ©1981, 2020 Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.ENGINEERED DESIGNBy: Joe Seda • File #199895B • 27-Feb-20C1A1A2B1B2C33952534242373426293345676954454641333036314764645647423732303333425361534335313133343329464348453629252629323228464745383026242528293120404643352825252629323128383532272526262832322732303027262726262826303534312827292725222534352927273029232327272628242121232145'61'335'131'45'50'200'46'132'360'42'207'SCALE IN FEET 1 : 800'80'160'EQUIPMENT LIST FOR AREAS SHOWNPoleLuminairesQTYLOCATIONSIZEGRADEELEVATIONMOUNTINGHEIGHTLUMINAIRETYPEQTY /POLETHISGRIDOTHERGRIDS1A170'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001414001A270'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001515002B1-B280'-15.5'80'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002727002C1, C370'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002525006TOTALS43430Pole locaƟon(s)dimensions are relaƟveto 0,0 reference point(s)St. Thomas Academy BaseballMendota Heights, MNGRID SUMMARYName: BaseballSize: Irregular 288' / 375' / 330'Spacing: 30.0' x 30.0'Height: 3.0' above gradeILLUMINATION SUMMARYMAINTAINED HORIZONTAL FOOTCANDLESInĮeld OuƞieldGuaranteed Average:50 30Scan Average: 50.35 30.26Maximum: 69 47Minimum: 36 20Avg / Min: 1.38 1.49Guaranteed Max / Min:22.5Max / Min: 1.89 2.33UG (adjacent pts): 1.50 1.52CU: 0.75No. of Points: 25 105LUMINAIRE INFORMATIONColor / CRI: 5700K - 75 CRILuminaire Output: 136,000 / 160,000 / 52,000 lumensNo. of Luminaires: 43Total Load: 50.6 kWLumen MaintenanceLuminaire Type L90 hrsL80 hrsL70 hrsTLC-LED-1200 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-LED-1500 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-BT-575 >81,000>81,000>81,000Reported per TM-21-11. See luminaire datasheet for details.Guaranteed Performance:The ILLUMINATION describedabove is guaranteed per your MuscoWarranty document and includes a 0.95dirt depreciaƟon factor.Field Measurements:Individual Įeld measurements may vary fromcomputer-calculated predicƟons and should be takenin accordance with IESNA RP-6-15.Electrical System Requirements:Refer to AmperageDraw Chart and/or the"Musco Control System Summary"for electrical sizing.InstallaƟon Requirements:Results assume ± 3%nominal voltage at line side of the driver and structureslocated within 3 feet (1m) of design locaƟons.page 141 ILLUMINATION SUMMARYNot to be reproduced in whole or part without the written consent of MuscoSports Lighting, LLC. ©1981, 2020 Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.ENGINEERED DESIGNBy: Joe Seda • File #199895B • 27-Feb-20B24247424738443541333829352531202642'207'SCALE IN FEET 1 : 200'20'40'EQUIPMENT LIST FOR AREAS SHOWNPoleLuminairesQTYLOCATIONSIZEGRADEELEVATIONMOUNTINGHEIGHTLUMINAIRETYPEQTY /POLETHISGRIDOTHERGRIDS1A170'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001414001A270'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001515002B1-B280'-15.5'80'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002727002C1, C370'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002525006TOTALS43430Pole locaƟon(s)dimensions are relaƟveto 0,0 reference point(s)St. Thomas Academy BaseballMendota Heights, MNGRID SUMMARYName: BullpenSize: Irregular 288' / 375' / 330'Spacing: 10.0' x 10.0'Height: 3.0' above gradeILLUMINATION SUMMARYMAINTAINED HORIZONTAL FOOTCANDLESEnƟre GridScan Average:35.79Maximum: 47Minimum: 20Avg / Min: 1.77Max / Min:2.33UG (adjacent pts): 1.29CU: 0.01No. of Points: 16LUMINAIRE INFORMATIONColor / CRI: 5700K - 75 CRILuminaire Output: 136,000 / 160,000 / 52,000 lumensNo. of Luminaires: 43Total Load: 50.6 kWLumen MaintenanceLuminaire Type L90 hrsL80 hrsL70 hrsTLC-LED-1200 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-LED-1500 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-BT-575 >81,000>81,000>81,000Reported per TM-21-11. See luminaire datasheet for details.Guaranteed Performance:The ILLUMINATION describedabove is guaranteed per your MuscoWarranty document and includes a 0.95dirt depreciaƟon factor.Field Measurements:Individual Įeld measurements may vary fromcomputer-calculated predicƟons and should be takenin accordance with IESNA RP-6-15.Electrical System Requirements:Refer to AmperageDraw Chart and/or the"Musco Control System Summary"for electrical sizing.InstallaƟon Requirements:Results assume ± 3%nominal voltage at line side of the driver and structureslocated within 3 feet (1m) of design locaƟons.page 142 ILLUMINATION SUMMARYNot to be reproduced in whole or part without the written consent of MuscoSports Lighting, LLC. ©1981, 2020 Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.ENGINEERED DESIGNBy: Joe Seda • File #199895B • 27-Feb-20C1A1A2B1B2C30.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.12 0.23 0.350.410.28 0.03 0.01 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.000.000.00SCALE IN FEET 1 : 800'80'160'EQUIPMENT LIST FOR AREAS SHOWNPoleLuminairesQTYLOCATIONSIZEGRADEELEVATIONMOUNTINGHEIGHTLUMINAIRETYPEQTY /POLETHISGRIDOTHERGRIDS1A170'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001414001A270'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001515002B1-B280'-15.5'80'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002727002C1, C370'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002525006TOTALS43430Pole locaƟon(s)dimensions are relaƟveto 0,0 reference point(s)St. Thomas Academy BaseballMendota Heights, MNGRID SUMMARYName: Road SpillSpacing: 30.0'Height: 3.0' above gradeILLUMINATION SUMMARYHORIZONTAL FOOTCANDLESEnƟre GridScan Average:0.0773Maximum:0.41Minimum: 0.00No. of Points: 28LUMINAIRE INFORMATIONColor / CRI: 5700K - 75 CRILuminaire Output: 136,000 / 160,000 / 52,000 lumensNo. of Luminaires: 43Total Load: 50.6 kWLumen MaintenanceLuminaire Type L90 hrsL80 hrsL70 hrsTLC-LED-1200 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-LED-1500 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-BT-575 >81,000>81,000>81,000Reported per TM-21-11. See luminaire datasheet for details.Guaranteed Performance:The ILLUMINATION describedabove is guaranteed per your Musco Warrantydocument.Field Measurements:Individual Įeld measurements may vary fromcomputer-calculated predicƟons and should be takenin accordance with IESNA RP-6-15.Electrical System Requirements:Refer to AmperageDraw Chart and/or the"Musco Control System Summary"for electrical sizing.InstallaƟon Requirements:Results assume ± 3%nominal voltage at line side of the driver and structureslocated within 3 feet (1m) of design locaƟons.page 143 ILLUMINATION SUMMARYNot to be reproduced in whole or part without the written consent of MuscoSports Lighting, LLC. ©1981, 2020 Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.ENGINEERED DESIGNBy: Joe Seda • File #199895B • 27-Feb-20C1A1A2B1B2C30.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.14 0.30 0.49 0.650.650.40 0.05 0.03 0.22 0.32 0.36 0.31 0.14 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.000.000.00SCALE IN FEET 1 : 800'80'160'EQUIPMENT LIST FOR AREAS SHOWNPoleLuminairesQTYLOCATIONSIZEGRADEELEVATIONMOUNTINGHEIGHTLUMINAIRETYPEQTY /POLETHISGRIDOTHERGRIDS1A170'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001414001A270'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001515002B1-B280'-15.5'80'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002727002C1, C370'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002525006TOTALS43430Pole locaƟon(s)dimensions are relaƟveto 0,0 reference point(s)St. Thomas Academy BaseballMendota Heights, MNGRID SUMMARYName: Road SpillSpacing: 30.0'Height: 3.0' above gradeILLUMINATION SUMMARYMAX VERTICAL FOOTCANDLESEnƟre GridScan Average:0.1505Maximum:0.65Minimum: 0.00No. of Points: 28LUMINAIRE INFORMATIONColor / CRI: 5700K - 75 CRILuminaire Output: 136,000 / 160,000 / 52,000 lumensNo. of Luminaires: 43Total Load: 50.6 kWLumen MaintenanceLuminaire Type L90 hrsL80 hrsL70 hrsTLC-LED-1200 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-LED-1500 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-BT-575 >81,000>81,000>81,000Reported per TM-21-11. See luminaire datasheet for details.Guaranteed Performance:The ILLUMINATION describedabove is guaranteed per your Musco Warrantydocument.Field Measurements:Individual Įeld measurements may vary fromcomputer-calculated predicƟons and should be takenin accordance with IESNA RP-6-15.Electrical System Requirements:Refer to AmperageDraw Chart and/or the"Musco Control System Summary"for electrical sizing.InstallaƟon Requirements:Results assume ± 3%nominal voltage at line side of the driver and structureslocated within 3 feet (1m) of design locaƟons.page 144 ILLUMINATION SUMMARYNot to be reproduced in whole or part without the written consent of MuscoSports Lighting, LLC. ©1981, 2020 Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.ENGINEERED DESIGNBy: Joe Seda • File #199895B • 27-Feb-20C1A1A2B1B2C36127953122335191847310469997671933321145814442216431365417754438820849603246912721243SCALE IN FEET 1 : 800'80'160'EQUIPMENT LIST FOR AREAS SHOWNPoleLuminairesQTYLOCATIONSIZEGRADEELEVATIONMOUNTINGHEIGHTLUMINAIRETYPEQTY /POLETHISGRIDOTHERGRIDS1A170'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001414001A270'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-12001515002B1-B280'-15.5'80'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002727002C1, C370'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-15002525006TOTALS43430Pole locaƟon(s)dimensions are relaƟveto 0,0 reference point(s)St. Thomas Academy BaseballMendota Heights, MNGRID SUMMARYName: Road SpillSpacing: 30.0'Height: 3.0' above gradeILLUMINATION SUMMARYCANDELA (PER FIXTURE)EnƟre GridScan Average:2832.4041Maximum:10468.79Minimum: 0.88No. of Points: 28LUMINAIRE INFORMATIONColor / CRI: 5700K - 75 CRILuminaire Output: 136,000 / 160,000 / 52,000 lumensNo. of Luminaires: 43Total Load: 50.6 kWLumen MaintenanceLuminaire Type L90 hrsL80 hrsL70 hrsTLC-LED-1200 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-LED-1500 >81,000>81,000>81,000TLC-BT-575 >81,000>81,000>81,000Reported per TM-21-11. See luminaire datasheet for details.Guaranteed Performance:The ILLUMINATION describedabove is guaranteed per your Musco Warrantydocument.Field Measurements:Individual Įeld measurements may vary fromcomputer-calculated predicƟons and should be takenin accordance with IESNA RP-6-15.Electrical System Requirements:Refer to AmperageDraw Chart and/or the"Musco Control System Summary"for electrical sizing.InstallaƟon Requirements:Results assume ± 3%nominal voltage at line side of the driver and structureslocated within 3 feet (1m) of design locaƟons.page 145 EQUIPMENT LAYOUTNot to be reproduced in whole or part without the written consent of MuscoSports Lighting, LLC. ©1981, 2020 Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.ENGINEERED DESIGNBy: Joe Seda • File #199895B • 27-Feb-20BaseballIrregularC1A1A2B1B2C3SCALE IN FEET 1 : 800'80'160'Pole locaƟon(s)dimensions are relaƟveto 0,0 reference point(s)St. Thomas Academy BaseballMendota Heights, MNEQUIPMENT LAYOUTINCLUDES:· BaseballElectrical System Requirements:Refer to AmperageDraw Chart and/or the"Musco Control System Summary"for electrical sizing.InstallaƟon Requirements:Results assume ± 3%nominal voltage at line side of the driver and structureslocated within 3 feet (1m) of design locaƟons.EQUIPMENT LIST FOR AREAS SHOWNPoleLuminairesQTYLOCATIONSIZEGRADEELEVATIONMOUNTINGHEIGHTLUMINAIRETYPEQTY /POLE1A170'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-1200141A270'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-1200152B1-B280'-15.5'80'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-1500272C1, C370'-15.5'70'TLC-BT-575TLC-LED-1500256TOTALS43SINGLE LUMINAIRE AMPERAGE DRAW CHARTBallast SpeciĮcaƟons(.90 min power factor)Line Amperage Per Luminaire(max draw)Single Phase Voltage208(60)220(60)240(60)277(60)347(60)380(60)480(60)TLC-LED-12007.0 6.6 6.1 5.2 4.2 4.0 3.0TLC-LED-15008.5 8.1 7.4 6.4 5.1 4.7 3.7TLC-BT-5753.4 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.0 1.8 1.5page 146 C) PLANNING CASE 2020-08 ANDERSON-JOHNSON ASSOC. (ON BEHALF OF ST. THOMAS ACADEMY), 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD – VARIANCE Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Anderson-Johnson Associates, Inc., acting on behalf of Saint Thomas Academy (STA) is requesting certain variance approvals in order to construct new baseball field improvements at STA’s campus, located at 949 Mendota Heights Road. The variances would allow a new multi-purpose press box/covered bleacher structure to exceed the maximum height standard and have reduced setbacks needed for accessory structures; and allow for new light towers to exceed maximum height standards for structures in the R-1 One Family Residential District. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 1,200 to 2,250-ft. of the site; and no comments or objections to this request were received. Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s website). Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Petschel asked if there was an issue with malplacement of the field originally. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that a lot line adjustment was completed between the applicant and neighboring property owner to eliminate encroachments that came about with the installation of the field and fencing. He stated that the lot line adjustment corrected the issue. Acting Chair Mazzitello stated that the Commission is being asked to consider option one. He noted that the applicant has stated that if fundraising is not successful, they will proceed with option two, which would fall within the footprint of option one. He asked if some of the existing variances would no longer be necessary if the City were to develop institutional standards in the future. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that to be true. He agreed that it would be beneficial to have an institutional zone for schools, churches and similar uses. Jay Pomeroy with AJA, Inc., representing the applicant, stated that he is present to address any questions the Commission may have. Commissioner Katz asked if there is an indication of the amount of light that would be used and how that could impact the park or residents along the lake. Mr. Pomeroy replied that the intent of the high light poles is to focus the light directly down, so that there is very little spill outside of the perimeter. page 147 Chair Magnuson opened the public hearing. Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that staff did not receive any written comments related to this item. COMMISSIONER TOTH MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS PERFORMED: COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD AYE COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL AYE COMMISSIONER KATZ AYE COMMISSIONER TOTH AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCES, WITH FINDING OF FACT TO SUPPORT THIS RECOMMENDATION, ALONG WITH THE CONDITIONS AS NOTED HEREIN. FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER FIELD COMMENTED THAT IT COULD BE WISE TO STATE THAT THE CITY IS ANTICIPATING OPTION ONE, BUT THE SMALLER OPTION WOULD ALSO BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL IF THE APPLICANT CANNOT MOVE FORWARD WITH OPTION ONE. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TIM BENETTI NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH OPTION ONE, BUT IF OPTION TWO MOVES FORWARD, THAT WOULD FIT UNDER THE VARIANCES APPROVED. HE CONFIRMED THAT LANGUAGE COULD BE ADDED THAT THE APPROVAL OF OPTIO N ONE WOULD INCLUDE THE APPROVAL OF OPTION TWO. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS PERFORMED: COMMISSIONER TOTH AYE COMMISSIONER KATZ AYE COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO AYE COMMISSIONER FIELD AYE COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL AYE Acting Chair Mazzitello advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 5, 2020 meeting. page 148 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-35 RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES TO SAINT THOMAS ACADEMY’S BASEBALL FIELD IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED AT 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD [PLANNING CASE NO. 2020-08] WHEREAS, Saint Thomas Academy (the “Applicant”) applied for a Variance application on the school campus property, located at 949 Mendota Heights Road, and which is legally described in attached Exhibit A (the “Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is guided under the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as Institutional – “S-School” and zoned R-1 One Family Residential, according to the city’s official Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, the Applicant is seeking approval of a number of Variance to allow a new multi-purpose press box/covered bleacher structure to exceed the maximum height standard of accessory structures from 15-ft. to 24-ft.-4-inches, and size to approximately 1,275 sq. ft. in area, and a reduced setback of 1.36-ft. from the adjacent lot line, and further allow six (6) new over- height light towers of 70-ft. and 80-ft. in height, which would exceed the 25-ft. maximum height standards for structures in the R-1 One Family Residential District, all proposed and presented under Planning Case No. 2020-08; and WHEREAS, Title 12-1L-5 of the City Code (Variances) allows for the Council to grant variances or certain modifications from the strict application of the provisions of the City Code, and impose conditions and safeguards with variances if so needed or granted: and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2020, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter, and whereupon closing the hearing and follow-up discussion on this item with staff and the Applicant, the Planning Commission recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve the application for Variances, with certain findings of fact to support such approval. page 149 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the recommendation from the Planning Commission is hereby affirmed, and approval of these Variances, which relate to Option No. 1 and inclusive of Option No. 2, as presented in the “Baseball Field Improvements–Phase 2” plans prepared by Anderson Johnson Assoc., Inc., dated 03/31/2020, submitted under Planning Case No. 2020-08 (and on file with the City of Mendota Heights), which would allow an additional and over-sized multi-purpose accessory structure consisting of a press box and bleacher stand approximately 1,275 sq. ft. in footprint area, 24’-4” in overall height, and located 1.36-ft. from the adjacent property line; along with variances for four (4) light towers at 70-ft. and two (2) light towers at 80-ft. in height, are based on the following findings of fact that support the granting of said variances, and noted as follows: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of the Variance to City Code Section 12-1D-1, as it relates to allowing an additional over-sized accessory structure with reduced setbacks, plus the over- sized (tall) light towers in the R-1 One Family Residential District, located on the St. Thomas Academy baseball facility and campus at 949 Mendota Heights Road, by the following supporting findings-of-facts: i.) The City Code’s accessory structure standards for residential districts causes a practical difficulty for a school use in this district, due to the overall size, scale and historical nature of the school at the subject location. ii.) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, as this school use functions more like an institutional use rather than a typical single-family use in the underlying R-1 One Family Residential District, and therefore warrants the approval or granting of these variances. iii.) The variances, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods; since the school is and has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community, and there is a general accepted expectation that similar athletic field improvements and related accessory structures can be considered a reasonable improvement for the overall benefit and enjoyment of the school, its students, faculty, and the community. iv.) The scale and scope of the variances needed to approve the number, sizes and heights of the proposed accessory structures, including the new press-box and bleacher stands, and over-height light poles on this large high school campus, are considered page 150 consistent with the spirit and intent of the City Code and Comprehensive Plan for the community, and may be approved as presented herein. v.) The Applicant has proven a reasonable justification and demonstrated a practical difficulty in this case for granting of these variances presented herein. C. The City has considered the factors required by Title 12-1L-5E1 of the City Code, including but not limited to the effect of the Variances upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of the Variances on the danger of fire and the risk to public safety, and upon the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan, and has determined this Variances will not affect or pose any negative impacts upon the neighborhood or the community in general. D. Approval of the Variances noted herein are for Saint Thomas Academy (949 Mendota Heights Road) only, and does not apply or give precedential value to any other properties throughout the City. All variance applicants must apply for and provide a project narrative to the City to justify a variance. All variance requests must be reviewed independently by City staff and legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code. E. The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2020-08, dated and presented April 28, 2020, on file with the City of Mendota Heights, is hereby fully incorporated into this Resolution No. 2020-35. F. The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject to his Variance request. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact created by the variance. Conditions related to this transaction are as follows: 1. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit for all new structures identified herein, including any fence or electrical permits for the new light towers as necessary. 2. Should the new tower lights, after installation, create any complaints or poses any issue of excessive light spillage, brightness or glare on the nearby Mendota Heights Road system or any other properties, the Applicant and/or lighting consultant shall immediately remediate and realign any light standards or fixtures (if needed) upon official notice from the City of Mendota Heights. 3. Any public addressing/speaker system used on this baseball field must be centered or focused directly on to the baseball field or the bleacher/spectator stands. No speakers or noise shall be directed towards the neighboring businesses or residential uses to the north and east of the school. 4. The Applicant shall not deviate from the site plan under this application review; nor increase any accessory structure numbers, area (footprint), light towers or height without first seeking and receiving city approvals, unless City Code provides for certain or allowable improvements to be made without any special application review process. page 151 5. Any and all grading and construction activity 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. 6. Approval of the variance is contingent upon City Council approval of the application and corresponding site plan. If the variances are approved by the City Council, the Applicant shall obtain all necessary building permits for construction of the proposed improvements within one-year from said approval date. If after one year no work has commenced, the Applicant may request an additional extension (to be determined by the City Council) if needed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Variances requested by Saint Thomas Academy under Planning Application Case No. 2020-08, and specifically for the Saint Thomas Academy baseball field improvements, located at 949 Mendota Heights Road, are hereby approved. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of May, 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 152 EXHIBIT A Saint Thomas Academy Property Address: 949 Mendota Heights Road Mendota Heights MN 55120 PID: 27-03500-51- 010 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NE 1/ 4 OF SW 1/ 4 EX N 198 FT OF E 636 FT, SECTION 35 TWN 28 RANGE 23; DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA [Abstract Property] Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 page 153 DATE: May 5, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Setting of Date for City Council Work Session Comment: Introduction: The City Council is asked to set a work session date, and time, to discuss three issues—payment and timing of licenses for on-sale alcoholic beverages, the RFP’s for the Natural Resources Plan update, and an update on impacts of COVID 19 on City operations. Background: There are three issues needing discussion and direction from the City Council: 1. Payment of On-Sale Alcoholic Beverage Licenses—City Code currently requires the full payment of on-sale liquor, wine, and beer licenses by May 1st, for the new license year which begins July 1st. Because of the disruption to the restaurant industry caused by the COVID 19 closures, the City Clerk has received requests for the city to allow partial or prorated payments of the licenses. Because this would require an amendment to the City Code, Council direction on whether to consider this is requested, so that the notification of any possible change is able to be posted in accordance with State law, prior to formal adoption. 2. The City’s budget for 2020 contained $75,000 for the hiring of a consultant to update the City’s Natural Resources Plan. With the assistance of a Natural Resources Master Plan Committee (which was comprised of four knowledgeable residents and two members of staff), an RFP was drafted and sent out. Six responses were received. The Committee has reviewed the responses, and has recommended one of the proposals which is in excess of the budgeted amount. Staff requests a work session setting to review in more detail the Natural Resources plan proposals, and the reasons for the recommendation. 3. With the Governor’s update on the Stay at Home orders made on April 30, staff will update the Council on its impacts on the City. If the Council is willing to hold a work session, it will need to be done remotely. Recommendation: If a work session is agreeable to Council, it should choose a date and time, based on the attached calendar for May. page 154 Because of the need to post notice for a minimum of 72 hours, the earliest that a work session could be held would be the week of May 11th. Action Required: If the Council concurs, it should establish a date and time to hold a remote work session for these three topics. Mark McNeill, City Administrator page 155 page 156