V. 2. Planning Application 2018-05-AMD RZ SUB & PUD for Sanctuary at Oak Ridge
May 22, 2018 Planning Application 2018-05
Sanctuary at Oak Ridge Development
Proposed Action: Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the
following motion: Move to adopt Planning & Zoning Resolution 2018-04, recommending the
City Council approve the following applications, subject to conditions:
• Comprehensive plan amendment from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential
• Rezoning from R-5, High Density Residential to R-1D, Single Family Low Density with a
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
• Subdivision approval of both preliminary and final plats
• Execution of a Planned Unit Development Agreement
Overview
The applicant, Anderson Engineering, requests various applications to allow development of a 4
lot single family subdivision. The subject property is owned by Janet Griffing and located south
of Oak Ridge Golf Course, north of Highway 7, west of the Oak Ridge condominium building
and east of the Eisenhower Community Center. The site is currently guided and zoned for high
density residential development similar to the adjacent Oak Ridge Place building and received
approval for a 4-story 27 unit building in 2007. According to the applicant, development of the
site under the 2007 approvals is complicated by its relatively small size, rectangular shape,
topography, limited access and location abutting a wetland. In March of this year, the Planning
& Zoning Commission and City Council reviewed and generally supported a concept plan for
this development subject to approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the
applicant’s participation in a planned unit development agreement, and reaching an agreement
with the neighboring Oak Ridge Place HOA on maintenance of shared amenities. Based on the
findings detailed below, staff recommends approval of this request.
Primary Issues to Consider
● Development Proposal
● Concept Plan Review Comments
● Neighborhood Meeting Comments
● Subdivision Design
● Land Use and Zoning Standards
● Planned Unit Development
● Engineering Comments
Supporting Documents
● Planning & Zoning Resolution 2018-04
● Letter from Oak Ridge Place HOA
● Letter from Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District
● Applicant’s Narrative
● Plans
● Engineering Comments
_____________________
Jason Lindahl, City Planner
Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N ____ Source: _____________
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _________________________________________
Notes:
Planning Application 2018-05
Page 2
Primary Issues to Consider
Development Proposal. The subject property is currently vacant land. Development of the site
is complicated by its relatively small size, rectangular shape, topography, limited access and
location abutting a wetland. In 2005, the property received development approvals to allow
construction of a 16 unit multiple family condominium building. In 2007, those approvals were
revised to allow a 4-story 27 unit multiple family condominium building. In each case, the
approvals included a variance to allow a lot without frontage on a public right-of-way and was
subject to approval from the Watershed District. According to the applicant, the complications
noted above make development of the site under its current approvals too costly.
The proposed development would subdivide the existing 1.19 acre property into four single
family lots. According to the applicant, the lots would likely contain single level homes with
walkout basements marketed to empty nesters. The proposed use and many of the dimensional
standards would not comply with the current High Density Residential future land use
designation or R-5, High Density Multiple Family zoning classification and require both a
comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning. Access to the site would come through a shared
access easement across Oak Ridge Place, which is a private road. Individual access from the
three northern lots would come from a shared driveway while the site furthest south would have
its own driveway. The proposed design would also require reclassification of the adjacent
wetland to allow a reduced wetland buffer. The applicant has approached the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District on this issue and has received initial support pending a full wetland review
and delineation (see wetland section below). The site design is further complicated by an
existing water line, which is not located in the adjacent easement. This water line must be
relocated within the easement in such a way as to minimize the loss of adjacent trees.
Authorization of this application requires the following approvals:
• Approvals from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District related to wetland reclassification,
grading and storm water management
• Comprehensive plan amendment from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential
• Rezoning from R-5, High Density Residential to R-1D, Single Family Low Density with a
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
• Subdivision approval of both preliminary and final plats
• Execution of a Planned Unit Development Agreement
Concept Plan Review Comments. The Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing
to review the concept plan for this development (Planning Application 2018-04) during their
regular meeting on March 27, 2018. During the meeting, the Commission heard a summary
presentation from staff as well as comments from the applicant and neighbors. Comments from
the neighbors came from Evelyn Emerson and Betty Clark with the Oak Ridge Condominium
Associations related to density, access, traffic construction noise and guest parking. The
applicant stated they need a minimum of four units to make the project economically viable, but
would work on their design to address the other concerns. The Commission generally
supported the design but agreed with the neighbors’ concerns. The Commission directed the
applicant to revise the concept plan to address the neighbors’ concerns and the issues raised by
staff. The City Council reviewed the concept plan during their April 3, 2018 Meeting and agreed
with the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Planning Application 2018-05
Page 3
Neighborhood Meeting. The City’s public engagement process for this development goes
above and beyond the typical statutory requirements for a public hearing and review by the
Planning & Zoning Commission and approval by the City Council. It also requires the applicant
to host a neighborhood meeting before the public hearing to explain the project, answer
questions and take any comments. The developer’s notes from this meeting along with a
comment letter from the Oak Ridge Place HOA are attached for your reference. In general, the
neighbors are concerned about the type of housing, construction process, access, parking,
wetland, homeowners’ association documents, storm water management and the proposed
pedestrian trail. The developer addressed many of these questions during the neighborhood
meeting and agreed to continue to work with the neighbors to address their concerns.
Subdivision Design. The applicant proposes to subdivide the existing 1.19 acre property into
four single family lots. Subdivision of this property would require approval of both a preliminary
and final plat. The characteristics of the single family lots are detailed in the table below.
Sanctuary at Oak Ridge Lot Details
Lot Size Buildable Area Width Depth
1 14,834 2,790 116’ 90’*
2 9,693 3,670 60’ 161’*
3 12,926 4,240 60’ 215’*
4 19,194 5,950 61’* 233’*
*indicates average lot width or depth
The lots range in size from 9,693 to 19,194 square feet. The dimension of the proposed lots range
from 60’ to 116’ in width and from 90’ to 233’ in depth. This design would reduce the project’s
density from 22.7 units per acre approved in 2007 to 3.1 units per acre as proposed. However,
this density is still higher than the 2 units per acre allowed under the R-1-D zoning.
Land Use and Zoning Standards. The proposed use and many of the dimensional standards
would not comply with the current High Density Residential future land use designation or R-5,
High Density Multiple Family zoning classification and require comprehensive plan amendment,
rezoning and planned unit development approvals. Comprehensive Plan policies that would
support with the proposal include:
• Protect residential neighborhoods
• Maintain appropriate transitions between land uses
• Retain and enhance detached single-family homes
• Encourage the development of owner-occupied housing
• Continue to strive for a mix of housing that accommodates a balance of all housing needs
The proposed single family residential use is inconsistent with the property’s present future land
use and zoning classifications. However, the comprehensive plan goals listed above would
support re-guiding and rezoning the subject property to allow the proposed development. In this
case, staff recommends amending the future land use designation to Low Density Residential and
rezoning to R-1-D. These changes would still necessitate a Planned Unit Development approval
but the zoning would be consistent with the zoning for the adjacent golf course and other single
family properties to the north and east.
Planning Application 2018-05
Page 4
Lot & Building Standards Comparison for the R-1-D and R-5 Districts
Standard R-1-D District Proposed PUD
Design
Status
Front Setback 35’ 30’ House
25’ Garage
Non-Conforming
Side Setback 10’ – 14’ 6’ Non-Conforming
Rear Setback 40’ 20’ Non-Conforming
Manage 2
Wetland Buffer
30’ Average 40’ Average Exceeds Requirement
Maximum Height 35’ 35’ Conforming
Minimum Lot Width 100’ 60’ Non-Conforming
Density 2 Units/Acre 3.1 Units/Acre Non-Conforming
Building Coverage 35% 35% Conforming
The table above illustrates the proposed development will only comply with the maximum height
and building coverage standards for the proposed R-1-D district but will exceed the Manage 2
wetland buffer requirement. Staff recommends using a planned unit development to addresses
the differences between the R-1-D zoning standards and the proposed design (see PUD section
below). Each of the more specific zoning standards for this development are detailed below.
Exterior Building Materials. The Zoning Ordinance requires exterior materials to be compatible
with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses. In this case, the exterior materials of the
adjacent multifamily residential and institutional building are primarily brick while the single family
dwellings in the R-1-D district are an even mix of brick and siding. The applicant intends to meet
this standard with a mix of siding, brick, stone or stone veneer exterior materials. According to
the applicant, all homes will be subject to an architectural review committee as required by the
homeowners’ association.
Access and Parking. As designed, access to the site would come from Oak Ridge Place through
an existing shared access easement across this private road. Individual access to the three northern
lots would come from a shared 20’ driveway while the site furthest south would have its own
driveway. This design would require the residents of the new single family dwellings to enter into
a shared maintenance agreement with Oak Ridge Condominium association.
Off-street parking for each unit will be provided through an attached garage and driveway. Each
unit must have a minimum two stall garage with a minimum 20’ setback to provided adequate
access and maneuvering area. While there is no requirement for single family homes to provide
guest parking, the neighbors have concerns that future guests will park in their parking lot. The
applicant’s plans illustrate parallel guest parking within the 20’ private driveway; however, staff
finds there is not sufficient space for maneuvering and parallel guest parking within the 20’ private
driveway. The shared amenities and maintenance agreement between the applicant and the Oak
Ridge Place HOA should address the issue of guest parking.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access. The City has the authority to require pedestrian and bicycle
facilities/trails as part of the subdivision process. In this case, the applicant is proposing a 6’
asphalt trail extending through the “panhandle” of Lot 1. The Oak Ridge Place HOA is opposed
to the trail and the developer is considering removing it. Given the proposed trail does not fill a
Planning Application 2018-05
Page 5
gap in the City’s trail system staff is agreeable to removing it. However, should it remain part of
the project, staff recommends a condition of approval require the trail to extend from the southern
end of the proposed private driveway and across the access to Eisenhower so it connects directly
with the existing trail along the frontage road.
Landscaping. The standards for landscaping are detailed in Section 555.19 and require residential
development provide the greater of 1 tree for every 1,0000 square feet of gross building area or 1
tree for every 50 linear feet of perimeter. In this case, the landscaping requirement would be based
on the site perimeter which is 1,670 feet requiring 38 trees. The applicant requests that the
“panhandle” portion of the development be excluded from the perimeter used to calculate the
tree requirement and staff is agreeable to this request. As a result, the perimeter is reduced to
1,132 linear feet requiring 23 trees. Deciduous trees shall have a diameter of at least 2.5 inches,
coniferous trees shall be at least 6 feet in height and shrubs shall be at least 24 inches in height.
Staff recommends a condition of approval require the applicant to revise their landscape plan to
provide at least 23 trees and provide a landscaping letter of credit equal to 1.5 times the value of
the all proposed landscaping.
Park Dedication. With any subdivision, the City has the ability to collect park dedication in the
form of land or a fee. The standard park dedication fee for single family residential subdivisions
is $1,000 per unit. As part of the developer’s contribution to the PUD, they have agreed to pay a
park dedication fee based on the original 27 unit apartment building or $27,000 (see PUD section
below).
Wetland Review. The subject property includes a wetland. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD) is the Local Government Unit (LGU) and administers all wetland regulations.
The existing wetland is currently identified as a Preserve Management Class and would require a
75’ buffer setback. The applicant has submitted an updated Minnesota Routine Assessment
(MnRAM) to the Watershed which identifies the wetland as Manage 2 that would require a 30’
buffer setback. The MCWD is currently reviewing the MnRAM submittal which is contingent on
full wetland review and delineation that cannot occur until spring. Staff recommends a condition
of approval require approval by and conformance with all requirements of the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District.
Planned Unit Development. The purpose of a planned unit development is to allow flexibility
from traditional development standards in return for a higher quality development. Typically, the
City looks for a developer to exceed other zoning standards, building code requirements or meet
other goals of the Comprehensive Plan. A list of items to consider when evaluating the use of a
planned unit development for this site could include, but is not limited to, the items listed below.
● Architectural design and building materials
● Natural resource protection and storm water management
● Pedestrian and bicycle facilities
● Energy conservation and renewable energy
● Open space and public art
● Buffering and landscaping
Based on the proposed development, the applicant will need flexibility from nearly all of the lot
and building standards of the R-1-D district. In exchange for the flexibility offered by the
Planning Application 2018-05
Page 6
planned unit development, the applicant offers to provide enhanced natural resource protection
for the abutting wetland and additional open space in the form of increased park dedication. As
a result, the applicant will increase the average buffer around the wetland from the required 30
feet to 40 feet. In addition, the applicant will increase their park dedication from $4,000 required
for the proposed 4 lot single family development to $27,000 based on the unit count of the 27-
unit multifamily building originally approve for this site.
Engineering Comments. The Engineering Department has completed review of the concept
plan dated February 23, 2018 and sketch plan dated January 23, 2018, both by Anderson
Engineering and have the following comments:
• The existing water raw line extending westward out of the City Well House shall be relocated
utilizing trenchless methods to minimize tree loss.
• The 1” water line for well priming shall be protected or relocated.
• Outlot B should be eliminated or dedicated to the City.
• Storm water treatment and wetland protection shall be required per the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed district.
• Access drive and walkway shall be private.
• All water and sewer utilities shall be private.
• Private driveway shall not encroach side yard drainage and utility easements.
It should be noted that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed district has sent the applicant a letter
indicating their erosion control and storm water management application is incomplete and they
need more information to review their application. This indicates the applicant has yet to meet
the Watershed District’s requirements and their approval could be delayed.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018-04
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE 4 SINGLE
FAMILY LOT SANCTUARY AT OAK RIDGE PLACE DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the applicant, Anderson Engineering, initiated the following applications for
approval of the 4 single family lot Sanctuary at Oak Ridge Place development:
• Comprehensive plan amendment from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential
• Rezoning from R-5, High Density Residential to R-1-D, Single Family Low Density with a
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
• Subdivision approval of both preliminary and final plats
WHEREAS, these properties are legally described as Lot 2 and Outlots A & B, Oak Ridge Place
2nd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota;
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
1. That the above stated application were initiated by the applicant on April 27, 2018;
2. That the applicant, pursuant to mailed notice, held the required neighborhood meeting in
Room 209 of Eisenhower Community Center and reviewed such applications on May 14,
2018;and
3. That the Hopkins Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to published and mailed
notice, held a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on May 22,
2018: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and,
4. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and,
WHEREAS, staff recommended approval of the above stated application based on the findings
outlined in the staff report dated May 22, 2018.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the
City of Hopkins hereby recommends the City Council approve the above stated application allowing a 4
lot single family subdivision to be known as Sanctuary at Oak Ridge Place, subject to the conditions
listed below.
1. Approval of all three applications.
2. Execution of a Planned Unit Development Agreement.
3. Conformance with all conditions of the City Engineer listed in the May 22, 2018 staff report.
4. Conformance with all requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
5. Approval of the comprehensive plan amendment by the Metropolitan Council.
6. Formation of an HOA to management and maintain shared amenities with the Oak Ridge
Place HOA in a form satisfactory to both City staff and the City Attorney.
Adopted this 22nd day of May 2017.
________________________
Brian Hunke, Chair
1
April 18, 2018
Oak Ridge Place Condominium Association
555 Oak Ridge Place Ste. 130
Hopkins, Minnesota 55305
Mr. Roger Anderson
Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC
13605 1st avenue North
Suite 100
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
Dear Mr. Anderson,
The Oak Ridge Place (ORP) Condominium Association is sending you this letter to thank you for
proactively seeking us out to inform us of your project for The Sanctuary at Oak Ridge. We encourage
you to continue your proactive communication with us as this project progresses.
As you can imagine, we at ORP have many questions and concerns related to this project. Few of us
have had experiences that would allow us to foresee all that happens during a construction project as
you have planned. Those questions and concerns are the reason for this letter, although it is certain we
will have more questions as time passes and your plans become final. Please allow us to present some
of the potential issues we see with this impending project; with your experience, they may or may not
be seen as issues to you, but may be talking points as we work together to create a successful outcome.
1. Traffic, vehicles and Oak Ridge Place
• The intersection at 12th Avenue and Highway 7 is often congested, but becomes very congested
when the school day is beginning or ending, causing a person to sit through two or three
changes of the stop lights just to get out onto highway 7. Additional traffic created by trucks
hauling debris out or materials in would compound this already irritating problem.
• There is no exit heading east on the frontage road which has caused large trucks to back up and
then try to turn around by driving through the church parking lot or our drive-up, causing
bushes, trees, and landscaping to be run over and destroyed.
• Oak Ridge Place is a very narrow road. Today, it is not easy for two cars to pass when meeting
on the road. Large trucks will cause more issues with this as well as exiting from our garage.
Trucks should not plan to park along the road. There is in-ground irrigation which could also be
damaged.
• There is no parking allowed along Oak Ridge Place because of the narrowness. When The
Sanctuary homes are completed, residents or guests will not be allowed to park along the road.
It would be important to include this in your documents and to require they ask in advance for
permission to park either at the church or in any of ORP parking areas.
2
• ORP would find it unsightly if recreational vehicles, work trucks, boats, motors homes, or similar
vehicles were permitted to be parked in the driveways of The Sanctuary homes. Neither would
they be allowed to park in the church parking lot nor any ORP parking area.
• The position of The Sanctuary driveway exit for three of the homes is in close proximity to our
garage door. We currently find that cars heading toward our garage are required to back up to
allow cars to exit our garage or enter/exit our parking area. We feel there may be more
congestion with three homes also utilizing that same small area at the entrance to our parking
area and garage to exit their homes. It may be necessary to position a stop sign for vehicles
exiting the driveway from The Sanctuary as it intersects with Oak Ridge Place.
• Will there be adequate room for large emergency vehicles and garbage trucks to access all of
the new homes?
• Where will accumulated snow be plowed and piled over the winter?
• The city trucks currently have a loop drive to access the city well. It is important for this to
continue, as the end near the ORP garage on the east side is often clogged with snow during the
winter.
• A cement slab has been poured next to the well house. ORP was told this slab was for
placement of an emergency generator during electrical outages. There would need to be
sufficient room to allow trucks to bring this equipment into this space during an emergency,
have space to position the generator, and be able to make the necessary connections to get the
well working properly. Although there is access to the well house at the drive way of Lot 4, there
may not be adequate allowance for this scenario.
• Building on a golf course, you are well aware of the opportunity for numerous golf balls to hit
the homes being built. Over the course of the summer ORP has dozens of balls land on our
property and hit our building, especially at the west end. The location of The Sanctuary property
in relation to the golf course makes it even more likely to be the recipient of errant golf balls.
2. Landscape, water, noise, timeliness
• It is understood that construction will require that some of the current landscaping will change
and a number of ornamental flowers, trees and bushes will need to be removed and new
landscaping done to complete the housing project. As neighbors who will also live with the
changes, we would ask that you include the ORP Board by providing us an opportunity to review
those plans as they are developed.
• There is, of course, concern about loss of the many mature trees surrounding the pond and the
fenced area by the golf course. These beautiful, large trees currently help to hide the school, its
parking lots, and air-conditioner from ORP condominiums with a western view.
• These large trees also help to absorb and reduce the loud, high pitched, and often oscillating
noise from the school’s air-conditioning units. It is important to emphasize the high-pitched,
loud, irritating and disruptive noise emanating from the large air conditioning units situated
directly across the pond from The Sanctuary. Although ORP has sought help from both the
3
Hopkins School and the City of Hopkins, neither has been willing to mitigate nor provide relief
from this sensory bane.
• We love our boulder wall next to our garage and hope it remains in your plans. There is concern
about the loss of grass and trees above the boulder wall area which now collect and absorb rain
water. The Minnehaha Watershed prohibits any additional run-off onto adjoining property as a
result of new construction. However, new pavement for driveways and foundations along with
the loss of grass and trees may create a water run-off problem that does not exist today,
especially during heavy rain or storms. Large amounts of storm or rain water could cause
flooding into the ORP garage which is considerably below grade.
• The area where the new homes are to be built will need to be lighted for the new homeowners.
This could be very disconcerting for the homeowners at ORP if there are bright lights from
parking areas shining into ORP homes.
• Considering there are only four homes being built, ORP would prefer your building them in a
timely manner, hopefully, at the same time, as to minimize the amount of disruption for ORP,
our guests, and the church.
3. Co-existing
• The city requires new projects to show how they will maintain roads and property, but does not
detail how this will happen or be controlled. We realize these four homes will need to have an
association governing their properties, but there will also need to be a third or merged
association that bridges both ORP and The Sanctuary to maintain and pay for communal
property and services, e.g.; landscape, plowing, lighting, road maintenance, etc. ORP is asking
that you allow us to help create an organization that would be beneficial to both associations
and groups of homeowners.
In summary, Oak Ridge Place Condominium Association would like to partner in this forthcoming
project, not to interfere, but to create the best outcome for all involved.
Sincerely,
The Oak Ridge Place Board of Directors
Marles Frankman 763.360.7877 marlesf@comcast.net
Paul Silverstein 612.220.5228 parkidoc777@aol.com
Evelyn Emerson 651.283.1025 evemerson@gmail.com
CC: Jason Lindahl, AICP, Hopkins City Planner
Molly Cummings, Mayor, City of Hopkins
May 15, 2018
Airborne Construction One, LLC
c/o Roger Anderson
13605 1st Avenue North, Suite 100
Plymouth, MN 55441
RE: MCWD Permit Application #18-248: Sanctuary at Oak Ridge
Dear Mr. Anderson,
Thank you for submitting an application for a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit for erosion control
and stormwater management located at the property with PID 24-117-22-12-0096 and 24-117-22-12-0097
Avenue in the City of Hopkins. The application was received on May 5, 2018.
After review of the application materials submitted, the proposed project triggers the erosion control and
stormwater management rules. Additional information is required to complete the application and is outlined
below. Based on additional information needed, the application is incomplete.
Permit applications that do not require a variance or exception to District Rules require a public notice to all
properties within 600 feet of the subject property, which includes a 14 day comment period allowing members
of the public to receive further information and/or request a public hearing. If a public hearing is requested, it
will be scheduled on the first available Board meeting after the application is determined by staff to be
complete.
Applications that require a variance or exception to District Rules require approval of the District Board of
Managers which also includes the public notification process. Following the completion of the public process
and the District’s determination that the permit application is complete you will receive written notice of
conditional approval. This notice will list the conditions of the approval that will need to be complete prior to
the permit being issued.
Please submit the following information:
Erosion Control:
The District’s Erosion Control rule is triggered for any project proposing disturbance in excess of 5,000 square
feet or 50 cubic yards of cut or fill. Because the project as proposed will disturb 0.71 acres and 450 cubic yards,
the District’s Erosion Control rule is triggered. Please submit the following information to fulfill the criteria of
the rule:
1. Signed copy of the Erosion Control Supplemental Form (attached);
2. The location(s) of concrete washout sites;
3. Perimeter control down gradient of all disturbance;
a. Current plan does not provide perimeter control for installation of rock trenches
4. Perimeter control that conforms to the standards of the Minnesota Stormwater Manual and MnDOT
standard specs, including:
a. Perimeter control designed for slopes on site, including redundant controls and j-hooks as
needed.
Stormwater Management:
The District’s Stormwater Management rule is triggered for any project creating new or replace existing
impervious surface or change the contours of a parcel of land in a way that affects the direction, peak rate,
volume, or water quality of runoff flows from the parcel. The project is proposing the replacement of 5,397
square feet of impervious area with 19,700 square feet of impervious area. The stormwater management rule is
triggered and phosphorus, rate, and volume control must be provided for the entire site’s impervious area.
Please submit the following information to fulfill the criteria of the rule:
1. Plans and modeling demonstrating no increase in the runoff rates for the 1, 10, and 100 year storm
events
a. Current stormwater report and hydroCAD report are inconsistent for the 1 year event
b. Consider enlarging the proposed BMPs or reducing the diameter of outlets to reduce runoff
rates
c. If rates cannot be reduced for all storm events, a variance application is required. The variance
application and variance rule are attached.
2. Revised plans in conformance with the MN Stormwater Manual, including:
a. Revised detail for infiltration trench, see attached detail from stormwater manual
Wetland Protection
The buffer provision of the District’s Wetland Protection Rule is triggered whenever the Stormwater
Management Rule is triggered and buffer must be provided down gradient of disturbance. Thirty foot buffers
must be provided. To fulfill the criteria of the rule, please provide:
1. Calculation of the total buffer area required by applying a uniform 30-foot buffer
2. Calculation of the total provide buffer
a. Please note that the rock trenches may not be located within the buffer
As we review your submittals, we may find the need to request additional information, and will so inform you.
Please be advised that MCWD will retain the application and supporting materials submitted for one year from
the date of this letter. After that, the application will be closed and a new application and supporting materials
will need to be submitted to initiate the MCWD permit-review process. If you have any questions please contact
me at eshowalter@minnehahacreek.org or 952-641-4518.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Showalter
Permitting Technician
CC:
Nate Stanley, City of Hopkins
Jason,
Based on our discussion yesterday, we propose the following in support of our development
proposal for the Sanctuary at Oak Ridge:
1. The governing documents will be an HOA including each of the four Lots.
The HOA documents will include and expand on the high-quality design standards we proposed
for the development, and provide a vehicle for overall management of the primary issues raised
at the neighborhood meeting.
We previously provided a sample HOA document for a similar four-unit condominium, which
will be used as a draft for the new HOA. The new document will deal more extensively with the
construction phase, design standards, quality requirements, maintenance, and other appropriate
issues we discussed or became aware of during the meetings.
This document would be subject to City review and approval, and memorialize the development
standards.
2. The construction of the pathway to the frontage road will remain an optional item, subject to
discussions/input from the ORP board.
3. We have included increased buffer width on the adjacent wetland as an enhancement for water
quality and PUD amenities.
4. We still feel the combination of three car garages, driveway parking, and private access drive
parking provide the need for occasional temporary parking. We will continue to pursue other
available options.
5. With an unusual site like this, is clear that our on-site options for PUD amenities are limited. We
are proposing enhanced landscape, and building materials that are well in excess of the adjoiners.
Since the City is considering the downgrading of the density and other changes in the review of
this development, it may be more effective to contribute the wellbeing of the City by increasing
the park dedication, allowing the City to construct improvements where there is the greatest
need, rather than force them on a constrained site. Our current contribution to the park fund of
$4,000 ($1000/lot for residential) be increased to the amount of $27,000 to help with the overall
City need for park amenities/improvements.
6. The MCWD is currently reviewing the wetland classification and the Stormwater management
plan.
Please contact me if you have questions regarding this email.
Roger
POND OVERLOOK
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
2 BENCHES
LANDSCAPING
PRESERVE EXISITING
VEGETATION ALONG
OAK RIDGE PLACE
6’ WIDE ASPHALT PATH
OAK RIDGE PLACEHIGHWAY 7 SERVICE ROAD
STORMWATER DETENTION
WETLAND BUFFER
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
RETAINING WALL WITH
LANDSCAPING
STRIPED LANE FOR PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS TO CITY TRAIL
EXISTING CITY TRAIL
EXISTING POND
IND. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 270 EISENHOWER
COMMUNITY CENTER PARKING LOT
OAK RIDGE PLACE
CONDOMINIUMS
OAK RIDGE GOLF COURSE
N
0
20Scale
40
MAY 14, 2018
CITY OF
HOPKINS
WELLHOUSE
Sanctuary at Oak Ridge
Sanctuary at Oak Ridge
OAK RIDGE PLACEVIEW ANGLE
20'R15'R8'20'6'
6'
24'
R30'
R40'R60'
R50'R15'
R3'
R15'
R35'10'
20'
6'6' 162' 242' 188' 135' 40' 85' 247' 107' 79' 79' 167' 20' 371'
60'
60'
41'
20'
10'
10'
20'
20'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING
Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC
13605 1st Avenue North
Suite 100
Plymouth, MN 55441
763-412-4000 (o) 763-412-4090 (f)
www.ae-mn.com
ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE LAND SURVEYING
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
ANDERSON SANCTUARY AT OAK RIDGE
HOPKINS, MN C5
FINAL P.U.D. PLANN020'40'
LEGEND
PROPERTY LIMITS
CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
ADJACENT PROPERTY
BUILDING SETBACK
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT
PROPOSED CONCRETE C&G
PROPOSED CONCRETE
PAVEMENT
PROPOSED BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT
6' WIDE
ASPHALT TRAIL
CONCRETE
OVERLOOK
4" WIDE WHITE
STRIPING
BOULDER ROCK
RETAINING WALL
(TO MATCH EXISTING)
EXISTING:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 2 and Outlots A & B, Block 1, OAK RIDGE PLACE 2ND ADDITION, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
ZONING: R-5, HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
GUIDED LAND-USE (COMP. PLAN): HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR)
EXISTING PARCEL AREAS:
LOT 2 51,896 SF (1.19 AC)
OUTLOT A 4,750 SF (0.11 AC)
OUTLOT B 9 SF (0.002 AC)
TOTAL 56,655 SF (1.30 AC)
WETLAND AREA WITHIN PARCEL:6,551 SF (0.15 AC)
PROPOSED:
ZONING: R-1D
PROPOSED P.U.D. SETBACKS:
FRONT*: 30' (HOUSE), 25' (GARAGE)
SIDE: 6'
REAR: 20'
*FRONT IS ASSUMED ALONG THE PRIVATE / SHARED DRIVE.
PROPOSED LOTS:
TOTAL LOT AREA BUILDABLE AREA
LOT 1*:14,834 SF 2,770SF
LOT 2: 9,692 SF 3,530 SF
LOT 3:12,926 SF 3,420 SF
LOT 4:19,194 SF 5,060 SF
OUTLOT B**: 9 SF N/A
TOTAL 56,655 SF
*OUTLOT A TO BE INCLUDED INTO LOT 1
**OUTLOT B TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY
GROSS DENSITY: 4 UNITS / 1.30 AC = 3.1 UNITS PER ACRE
NET DENSITY (LESS WETLANDS):4 UNITS / 1.15 AC = 3.5 UNITS PER ACRE
WETLAND BUFFER:
WETLAND SETBACKS: 24' TO 30' AVG., 15' MIN. (MEDIUM QUALITY) PER MCWD
AVERAGE WETLAND SETBACK = 10,183 SF / 412 LF = 24.72' WIDTH
SITE DATA
6' WIDE
ASPHALT TRAIL
CURB
TRANSITION
RETAINING
WALL
RAINGARDEN
WETLAND BUFFER
MONUMENT (TYP.)
WETLAND BUFFER
DELINEATED
WETLAND
SHARED
DRIVEWAY
KEY NOTES
FRONT YARD SETBACK 30' HOUSE AND 25'
GARAGE TYP.
SIDE YARD SETBACK 6' TYP.
REAR YARD SETBACK 20' TYP. UNLESS
WETLAND BUFFER DICTATES
OAK RIDGE PLACE IS THE FIRE LANE FOR
PROPOSED LOTS 1-4
1
1
2
4
2
3
DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY EASEMENT
OAK RIDGE PLACE (PRIVATE ROA
D
)HIGHWAY 7 SERVICE DRIVEEXISTING ACCESS AND UTILITY
EASEMENT (SEE SURVEY)
3
4
PROPOSED P.U.D. VARIATIONS FROM STANDARDS
ITEM R-1-D PROPOSED PUD BASIS OF PROPOSED VARIATION
LOT AREA 20,000 SF 9,500 MIN., 13,000 AVG.R1-B=8,000 SF, R1-C=12,000 SF
LOT WIDTH 100 60 R1-B STANDARD
FRONT YARD 35 30 (HOUSE), 25 (GARAGE)R1-B AND R1-C=30', R1-A=25'
SIDE YARD, 1-STY 10, 5*6 STANDARD SIDEYARD D/U EASEMENT WIDTH
SIDE YARD, 2-STY 12, 5*6 STANDARD SIDEYARD D/U EASEMENT WIDTH
REAR YARD 40 20 N/A - WETLAND BUFFER GOVERNS REAR SETBACKS
MAX. PERCENT BLDG
COVERAGE 35 35 N/A - NO VARIATIONS PROPOSED
MIN. DWELLING FLOOR AREA 1,200 1,200 N/A - NO VARIATIONS PROPOSED
* ATTACHED GARAGE SIDE YARD SHALL BE MINIMUM OF 5-FT, AND CANNOT BE CONVERTED TO LIVING SPACE.
NOTE: PROPOSED SETBACKS ASSUME FRONTAGE ALONG OAK RIDGE PLACE (PRIVATE ROAD).
INFILTRATION
TRENCH (TYP.)
EX. GARAGE
ACCESS
OUTLOT B
25'30'
1
1
1
1
1
96596696596
4
964965
954
961
962
960
958
957 956 955
959
958
957
965 964JHL
13
2
GTH
3
PGD
1
AFJ
1
PNI
3
QRU
3
PGD
6
PLDNWL
11
CKF
12
NWL
5
CKF
3
PLD
34
JSE
1
AFJ
PGD
7
PGD
3
1
AFJ
1
COC
AFJ
1
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING
Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC
13605 1st Avenue North
Suite 100
Plymouth, MN 55441
763-412-4000 (o) 763-412-4090 (f)
www.ae-mn.com
ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE LAND SURVEYING
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
ANDERSON SANCTUARY AT OAK RIDGE
HOPKINS, MN
NEW SOD
WITH IRRIGATION
NATIVE SEED MIX
MN 33-262
3" DP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH
WITHOUT FABRIC
COMMERCIAL GRADE POLY EDGER
L1
LANDSCAPE PLANN020'40'
LEGEND
1
2
CREDITS
NOTES
1.ALL PLANTING WITHIN PROPERTY LIMITS SHALL
RECEIVE IRRIGATION
(SEE L2 FOR IRRIGATION NOTES)
ZONING REQUIREMENTS:
ZONING:R-5, HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
GUIDED LAND-USE (COMP. PLAN): HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
(HDR)
MCWD NEW TREE CREDIT: 40
2
1
2
1
1
1
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
PLANTING SCHEDULE
TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE REMARKS
4 AUTUMN BLAZE MAPLE B&B 2 - 1/2" CAL.
ACER X FREEMANII `JEFFSRED`
1 COMMON HACKBERRY B&B 2 - 1/2" CAL.
CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS
2 NORTHERN ACCLAIM THORNLESS HONEY LOCUST B&B 2 - 1/2" CAL.
GLEDITSIA TRIACANTHOS INERMIS 'HARVE' TM
16 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE B&B 6` HT.
PICEA GLAUCA `DENSATA`
1 AUSTRIAN BLACK PINE B&B 6` HT.
PINUS NIGRA
3 RED OAK B&B 2 - 1/2" CAL.
QUERCUS RUBRA
SHRUBS QTY COMMON NAME CONT REMARKS
15 FEATHER REED GRASS 3 GAL.
CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA `KARL FOERSTER`
13 LIMEGLOW JUNIPER 5 GAL.
JUNIPERUS HORIZONTALIS `LIMEGLOW`
4 SEA GREEN JUNIPER 5 GAL.
JUNIPERUS X MEDIA `SEA GREEN`
16 WALKERS LOW CATMINT 3 GAL.
NEPETA X FAASSENII `WALKERS LOW`
9 DWARF NINEBARK 5 GAL.
PHYSOCARPUS OPULIFOLIUS `LITTLE DEVIL` TM
PROTECT
EXISTING
VEGETATION
& TREES
(TYP.)
CITY REQUIREMENTS
ONE (1) 2-1/2" CALIPER DECIDUOUS TREE OR 6' IN HEIGHT
CONIFEROUS TREE FOR EVERY 50' OF PERIMETER.
REQUIRED: 1,130.62' / 50 = 22.61 (23 TREES)
PROVIDED: DECIDUOUS TREES = 10
CONIFEROUS TREES = 17
TOTAL = 27
ADD CITY REQUIREMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS AND ADJUST PLANT MATERIAL5/15/2018
1
1
1
1
May 16, 2018
Oak Ridge Plce
Engineering Review
The Engineering Department has completed a review of documents related to zoning application
for the Oaks Ridge property.
Documents Reviewed
Preliminary & Final Plat & P.U.D. Plan
Associated narrative
Comments
The existing water raw line extending westward out of the City Well House shall be
relocated utilizing trenchless methods to minimize tree loss.
The 1” water line for well priming shall be protected or relocated.
Outlot B should be eliminated or dedicated to the City.
Stormwater treatment and wetland protection shall be required per the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed district.
Access drive and walkway shall be private.
All water and sewer utilities shall be private.
Eric Klingbeil, P.E.
Assistant City Engineer