12-06-99 PCJAN -11-2000 11:51 NAC
612 595 9837 P 31/04
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULT..NTS
NSPTINCNA1111111111111111111�COMMUNITY PLANNING - pESIGN - MARKET RESLARC H
MEMORANDUM- via fax transmission
TO.- Lary Koshak
FROM: Daniel Licht
DATE: 11 January 2000
RE: Otsego - AJE Tower Site Mining Permit
FILE NO.; 176.02 - 99.26
PAGES: 4
AJE Companies has submitted an application for a mining permit for a parcel located south
of CSAH 37 and west of T.H. 101. The subject site is zoned A-1, Agricultural Rural
Service District. The Comprehensive Plan Update includes the subject parcel within the
sanitary sewer service district and guides future medium to high density residential use.
The proposed mining operation is intended to prepare the subject site for eventual
development and is considered temporary. Mining operations within the A-1 District
require consideration of a conditional use permit, as well as a mining permit.
In reviewing our files regarding similar applications, past practice has been for your office
to prepare to formal report for such requests. The purpose of this memorandum, therefore,
is to offer the following comments for your consideration. Please note that these
comments relate only to the planning aspects of the proposed use an$ you should feel free
to incorporate them into your review as you believe appropriate. If you would like to
discuss this application or my comments further, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
CUP Criteria. Section 20-4-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission
and City Council to consider the possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use.
Their judgement is to be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 55416
PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAII, NAC@DWINTERNET.COM
JAN -11-2000 11:52 NAC 612 595 9837 P.02iO4
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Reclamation. Our office's main issue with the mining permit is the reclamation of the site
to allow for planned urban uses. A concept pian illustrating a 196 -unit townhome
development (5.9 du/ac) has been submitted. At this stage the concept plan is only being
reviewed as part of a mining permit and no implicit approvals should be construed. in
review of the reclamation concept plan, we offer the following comments:
The subject site is presently elevated above CSAH 27 and T. H. 101 and may be
characterized as "roiling". The proposed excavation of the site would result in a
level development area at an elevation approximately equal to that of CSAH 37,
which facilitates extension of the north -south frontage road and access to the
subject site. However, we would suggest that some variation in topography to the
site would benefit the development.
The excavation results in significant slopes on the west and south edges of the site.
The elevation on the south property line may be constrained by an existing gas line
that must be relocated. However, these steep slopes prevent any connection
between the subject 'property and adjacent parcels, creating an isolated
environment. Further, the development would open towards the impacts of T.H.
101, future commercial uses and the frontage road.
If no provision were made for inter -neighborhood connections, the need for open
space within the project is made more important. The present concept plan
provides for minimal open space, other than ponding areas within the development.
A centrally located open -space courtyard would be highly desirable in this situation
The site plan would be anticipated to be revised to provide additional open space
opportunities as part of the necessary PUD and zoning applications.
Access to the development is provided by connections to CSAH 37 and the future
north -south collector street. If possible, the intersection to CSAH 37, which is
designated as a minor arterial, should be eliminated to minimize congestion. A
second access onto the north -south collector street would be more appropriate,
subject to further comment by the City Engineer.
2 of 4
JAN -11-2000 11:52 NAC 612 595 9837 P 03/04
• The development includes an internal street that is less than City standards, wl- ich
is assumed to be private. A private street may be appropriate provided thz:t it
allows for maintaining the desired density and open space along with adequate
access. We do have some concern regarding the numerous dead-end terminuses.
The future north -south collector street is designated as a collector street. The
Zoning Ordinance requires a 65 foot setback from streets of this classification. This
is noted for reference for future revisions of the preliminary concept plan, which
only provides 35 foot setbacks from this street.
There are existing tree stands in the north and west portions of the property that will
be lost by the proposed mining of the site. The City may be inclined to have further
information provided as to the significance of trees to be removed and possibly try
to protect them if necessary.
Temporary Use. As the Comprehensive Plan anticipates eventual urban development of
the subject parcel and surrounding area, the proposed mining of the subject site is
considered a temporary use. Under Section 20-25--9 of the Zoning Ordinance, mining
permits automatically expire 90 days from the date of issuance, but the City Council may
extend the expiration of the mining permit to a specified date. In that this facility is to be
an interim use, the applicant should provide a schedule for completion of the mining
operation.
Operational Characteristics. In review of the proposed use, specific attention must be
given to the operation of the mine. Specific areas of concern include:
• Hours of Operation (limited to 7:OOAM to 6:OOPM per Section 20-25-6)
• Traffic generation/Road capacity
• Noise
• Vibrations
• Dust control
• Top soil preservation
• Water pollution
Land Use Compatibility. To ensure compatibility with existing and planned land uses in
the area, the following conditions should be considered as part of the CUP:
Storage of materials or equipment other than incidental to the mining use,
inoperable machinery and/or rubbish is prohibited.
Screening should be provided as necessary to minimize the impacts of the mining
operation, using where practical, material stockpiles.
Security fencing should be provided at entrances and wherever deemed necessary.
3 0f4
JAN -11-2000 11:53 NAC 612 595 9837 P 04/04
Chapter 25. As you are aware, the Zoning Ordinance has spec performance stands, ds
for mining uses outlined in Chapter 25. As a condition of the CUP, the proposed operW Ion
must be required to meet all of these applicable standards.
Security. The City typically requires approved mining permit operations to post a sect:ity
for the reclamation of the site pursuant to Section 20-25-9.6 of the Zoning Ordinance_
Such a security should be required as part of the CUP based upon your office's estimation
of the costs for reclamation.
pc. Mike Robertson
Elaine Beatty
Andy MacArthur
4 of 4
TOTAL P.04
JAN.11.2000 2:20PM
TO:OTSEGO
Halonson ENGINEERING REVIEW
lAnderson Tower Site
Assoc,jnQ Mining Permit
for
City of Otsego
by
Hakalnson Anderson Associates, Inc.
NO. 994 P.1 6
Review No. 1
Submitted to: AJE Companies, John Jackels
cc: Mike Robertson, City Administrator
Elaine Beatty, Clerk
David L. Putnam, P.E,; Midwest Land Surv. & Civil Eng., Inc.
Dan Licht, NAC
Andy MacArthur, Attorney
Reviewed by: Lawrence G. Koshak, PE/Ronald J. Wagner, P.E.
Date: January 11, 2000
Proposed Development:
Street Location of Part of NE 1/4 Section 34, Township 121, Range 23 & part
Property: of NW 1/4 Section 35, Township 121, Range 23. Generally
the mine is 1/4 mile west of TH 101 on CSAH 37.
Applicant/Developer: AJE Companies, John Jackels
10738 Hanson Blvd. N.W.
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
Owners of Record: Ralph Lavedure
5743 Juneau Dane
Plymouth, MN 55446
Purpose: Mining approx. 1.3 million cubic yards of sand & gravel from
site in preparation for townhouse development.
Jurisdictional Agencies City of Otsego, Wright County Highway Department
(but not limited to):
Permits Required
(but not limited to): NPDES
PAGE 1 OF 1
1 {Ha0VShared D=lMunlcipaMO75EGO1903lor9o3#7RVWi. doc
JAN.11.2000 2:20PM N0.994 P.F 6
INFORMATION AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW:
• Mining Permit Application, 12/16/99
• Zoning Request Application, 12/2/99
• Narrative Report: Midwest Land Surveyors & Civil Engineers, Inc.; dated 12/1/99
Appendix A — Geotechnical Reports
1) Braun Intertec — 12/3/92 for ext. of Quayle Ave.
2) STS Consultants — 9/2/99
Appendix B -- HydroCAD Output — Stormwater Management
Midwest Land Surveyors & Civil Engineering, Inc.
• South Mississippi Watershed Study: Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
• Plan Sheets C1 through C6, 1 set 22" x 34", 1 set 11" x 1T'
C, — Existing Site
C2 —Stage 1
C.3 — Stage 2
04 — Stage 3
C6 — Stage 4
Cs-- Future Development
Cross Section -- Sheet 1 to 10
City of Otsego Ordinance No. 94-4
• National Wetlands Inventory, 1991
• Protected Waters & Wetlands Map, Anoka County, 1984
• Mark Hurd maps for Otsego
• Revisions to Mark Hurd for STH 101
• City of Otsego Comprehensive Plan
• City of Otsego Engineering Manual
COMMENTS
COVER SHEET
A cover sheet with the following items is missing:
1) Project Title
2) Sheet Index
3) Names, Addresses and Telephone Numbers of following:
a) Owner
b) Applicant
C) Surveyor
d) Geologist/Soils Engineer
e) Engineer
f) Preparer of Plans
PAGE 2 OF 2
MaOIIShared Ao"lMunicipalLg07'SEGOl9O3lot90.3#7RVWi.doc
JAN.11.2000 2:21PN N0.994 P.'-:".6
4) Location Map — 1" = 2000'
5) Signature by Registered Professional Engineer
SHEET C1 -- EXISTING CONDITIONS
1) The current zoning for the land and the abutting lands must be shown.
2) All structures within 350' must be shown. The residential structures are shown
but not highlighted and identified. The water tower site must be added. Find
accompanying a copy of that site plan.
a) Water Tower
b) House near NW comer of site
C) House near SW comer of;site
3) All underground utilities within 100' of site must be shown. Missing utilities of
note are;
a) Watermain crossing CSAH 37 to water tower site
b) Gas, electric power and telephone should be shown if within 100 ft. of the
site.
4) All significant surface features. Some of note are;
a) Wooded areas
b) Telephone poles or power lines
c) Wetland in SE comer of site
5) Soil borings shown on revised drawing 1/07/00.
6) Floodway elevation for wetland in SE comer of site (901.6). All wetlands within
100' of the site must be shown. The low area in the SE comer of the site is
considered a wetland according to the 1991 NWI.
7) All names, addresses and PID numbers & property lines within 500' of site must
be shown.
8) Certificate of Survey signed 13y a Registered Land Surveyor must be provided.
9) The contours on the water tower site must be shown (see attached site grading
plan G-8 of 8 and refer to item 2 above.
10) Contours requirement of 1 foot is waived to allow 2 foot contours due to the
steep terrain.
SHEETS C2 to C5
1) The location of proposed temporary structures to be utilized In the operation
must be shown. Examples — Sanitary facilities, offices, trash receptacles, and
processing plant, if any,
2) The parking areas for employees and visitors must be shown.
3) The vehicular circulation for the site must be shown.
4) Perimeter fencing and lockable gate must be installed due to unsafe conditions
within the site. Alternates such as earth berms will be acceptable in lieu of
perimeter fencing.
5) Culverts under entrance to site and water tower entrance must be shown.
6) Temporary topsoil storage areas must be shown.
7) Each pond must show high water elevation.
PAGE 3 OF 3
IIH8011Shared AocsIMuniclpai AOTSED019031of903#7AyW1.doc
JAN.11.2000 2:21PN
N0.994 P.J S
SHEET C6 — CLOSURE/Rr:HABILITATION PLAN
1) The areas of revegetation shall be noted. The areas to be landscaped and typl-,
of landscaping shall be noted.
2) The final slopes cannot exceed 5 to 1 slopes according to ordinance.
3) The current zoning for the land and the abutting lands must be shown.
4) All structures within 350' must be shown. Some of the structures noted that aro
missing are:
a) Water Tower
5) All underground utilities within 100' of site must be shown. Missing utilities of
note are:
a) Watermain on water tower site.
b) Culverts under entrance to water tower and entrance to site
6) All significant surface features. Some of note are:
a) Telephone poles or power lines
b) Wetland in SE comer of site
7) Floodway elevation for wetland in SE comer of site (901.6).
8) All wetlands within 100' of the site must be shown. The low area in the SE
comer of the site is considered a wetland and property lines according to the
1991 NWI,
9) The new contours on the water tower site must be shown.
TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
1) A Traffic Control Plan sheet needs to be included in the submittal package. It
must contain the following:
a) North Arrow
b) Scale
c) Title Block
d) Name, Address, Telephone Number and Registration Number of the
person responsible for preparing the plan, with signature
e) Location Map
f) Roadway Right -of -Way Widths
g) Roadway Widths
h) Location and Type of Traffic Control Signing Devices
i) Notes referencing the Mn/MUTCD
j) Traffic Control Signs and Device Details
NARRATIVE REPORT
1) Drainage Control Plan
a) Each temporary pond during each stage must be sized to contain at least
100 -year storm runoff events.
b) The final site ponds must be sized without using infiltration from the
bottom of the pond, and if no positive outlet is provided, the pond capacity
must be two back-to-back 104 -year event storms.
PAGE4 OF4
11Ha011Shared DocelMunk1pagAOTSCGOWo31of9o3#7RVW1.doo
JAN.11.2000 2:22PM N0.994 P. C5 b
2) Prevention plan must be discussed with methods to minimize wind erosion to
topsoil piles. Alternative dust control on the site during windy conditions when
use of pond water is not available must be provided. Possible use of municipal
water for this purpose.
3) A schematic showing haul routes must be included in the narrative report.
BORING LOGS
1) The quantity and quality of borings for this mining permit are acceptable.
ABSTRACT LISTING
1) A certified abstract listing of the names of all landowners owning property within
500' of the site must be included.
RIGHT -OF -ENTRY
1) A written right -of -entry which cannot be terminated for one year after anticipated
closure date to the city for its officers or agents to enter the land must be
included with signatures by owner/applicants.
COMMENT LETTERS
1 } Comment letter from the following agencies or utilities must be submitted after
they have been allowed to review a plan set.
a) Wright County Highway Dept.
b) Mn/DNR
C) MPCA
d) Mn/DOT
e) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
f) Northern Natural Pipeline
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photographs of following:
1) Existing on-site conditions and significant features
2) Site perimeter with views of adjacent properties
3) Wetland in SE comer of property
4) Site access views of CSAH 37 and the immediate vicinity of the access point
CROSS SECTIONS
1) Cross sections submitted at 100' per inch horizontally are acceptable.
NORTHERN NATURAL GAS LINE
The easement must be shown along with the pipe line location. The approximate profile
location of the pipelines must be shown on the cross-sections. There must be a letter
PAGE 5 OF 5
IU AOASharsd DocslMunkipaMOTSEGOI903lot903#7RVW1.doc
JAN.11.2000 2:22PM N0.994 P.6.6
from Northern Natural Pipeline acknowledging the Mining operation and that the
relocation of the pipelines in the future is acceptable to them.
WETLAND
Site wetlands must be delineated by a qualified delineator. The applicant must file a
complete form stating whether the wetland will be impacted. The completed forms are
required by the City for landowners making application for permits of any kind.
SECURITY ON SITE
The site must have lockable gates at the entrances. Any conditions such as ponds or
slopes that impose a potential hazard or liability must be secured by fencing and
minimal slopes.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
Certificate of Survey is required along with a map that includes properly owner names
and PID #'s of surrounding properties within 500 feet as required by the ordinances.
SITE PLAN APPROVAL
This plan, according to the ordinance can only be approved if it meets the City's
ordinances and Comprehensive Plan.
Please note that the west part of this proposal in Section 34 does not conform with the
present Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
The data provided appears to be adequate for preliminary review and appearance
before the Planning Commission at a public hearing. However, some information is
required to be available for public hearings, such as name, address, location and PID
#'s of surrounding property owners. As long as the appropriate notices have been
published, a hearing is legal.
We would not recommend approval by the City Council until the submittals are
completed in a form that substantially meets the Mining Ordinance No. 94.4. As of this
review, the submittal is not acceptable to recommend for approval.
PAGE 6 OF 6
IINaOiISharedAocsIMunic1paMO7SEGO19031of9O3#7PVWi.doc
JAN -12-2000 14:24 NAC
612 595 9837 F 02/09
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULT \NTS
NING COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RES _ARCH
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
DATE: 11 January 2000
RE: Otsego - Pearson Building Relocation CUP
FILE NO.: 176.02 - 00.01
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Applicant Dwain Pearson, on behalf of owner Charles Klein, is proposing to relocate an
existing manufactured single family dwelling to 8132 Packard Avenue (Lot 13, Block 1,
Vasseur's Oak Grove Estates, 1st Addition). The one acre subject site is zoned R-3,
Residential - Long mange Urban Service District (General). Single family uses are a
permitted use in this District. The relocation of existing buildings to lots within the City
requires consideration of a conditional use permit (CUP) as per Section 19 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
� _w
Exhibit A: Site Location
Exhibit B: Site Plan (Proposed)
Exhibit C: Safety Disclosure Statement
Recommendation
The proposed relocation of an existing manufactured single family dwelling to Lot 13, Block
1, Vasseur's Oak Grove Estates, 1 st Addition is generally consistent with the requirements
for building relocations, as well as Comprehensive Plan policies supporting neighborhood
improvements. As such, our office recommends approval of the requested CUP, subject
to the following conditions:
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 P -AX 612-595-9937 E-MAIL NACO WINTERNET.COM
JAN -12-2000 14:24 NAC 612 s95 9e37 F 03/09-
9. A building permit is applied for and approved by the Building Official pri..r to
relocation of the structure.
2. The relocated structure shall be ready for occupancy within six (6) months from, the
date of location on site, subject to approval of the Building Official.
3. The existing septic system and well are evaluated and subject to review and
approval of the Building Official.
4. A security as required by Section 20-19-3 of the zoning Ordinance as determined
by the building official is posted.
5. Comments of other City Staff.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Building Relocation. The relocation of existing structures to lots within the City of Otsego
requires compliance with the performance standards outlined in Section 20-19-2, below.
A. Upon relocation, the building shall comply with applicable requirements of the State
Uniform Building Code.
Comment. A building permit is required prior to relocation of any structure..
Conformance with the Uniform Building Code should be made a condition of any
approval, subject to review and approval of the Building Oficial.
B. The proposed relocated building shall comply with the character of the
neighborhood in which it is being relocated as determined by the City Council.
Comment. The neighborhood is fully developed with single family dwellings
consisting of a mix of manufactured housing and stick built structures. The existing
structure to be relocated to the subject site is consistent with this character.
C. The relocated use will not result in a depreciation of the neighborhood or adjacent
property values.
Comment: Provided the structure has a similar assessed value as adjacent
dwellings and is in conformance with applicable performance standards, no
depreciation is anticipated.
D. The relocated structure shall be similar to the market valuation of adjacent principal
structures as determined by the City or County Assessor.
Planning Report - Pearson CUP
Page 2
JAN -12-2000 14:25 NAC 612 595 9837 P 04/09
Comment: The structure was purchased by the applicant for $28,500 from a ales
lot, which is not always equal to an appraised value. The structures present., the
neighboring properties have an assessed market value of $20,900 and $3:.600
($27,250 average). Based upon the available information, the value o the
proposed structure is comparable with those of adjacent properties.
E. The relocated structure shall be ready for occupancy within six (6) months from the
date of location on site.
Comment_ This requirement should be made a condition of any approval.
Lot Standards, The following table illustrates required performance standards for single
family lots and dwellings in the R-3 District. As indicated, the subject property and
proposed location of the relocated single family house will conform with applicable
performance standards.
Single Family Dwelling Standards. Section 20-17-11 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines
minimum design standards for single family uses, which apply to this application. The
basic requirements are for a perimeter foundation, minimum dimensions of 30 feet by 24
feet, a shingled roof, and minimum overhangs of 1 foot. Based upon the information
provided by the applicant, the. existing structure is in conformance with these requirements.
Additionally, the structure has vinyl lap siding consistent with the requirements of Section
20-17-4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
CUP Criteria. In considering CUP applications, the Planning Commission and City
Council must also take into consideration the possible adverse impacts of the building
relocation based upon (but not limited to) the following factors outlined in Section 20-4-2.F
of the Zoning Ordinance:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment_ The following policies may be cited in support the applicant's request.
The character of individual neighborhoods shall be reinforced, maintained
and upgraded. (Policy Plan, pg. 40)
Planning Report - Pearson CUP
Page 3
Lot
Lot
Lot
Lot
Building Setbacks
Area
Width
Depth
Cover
Height
Front Side Rear
Required
1.0 ac.
150 ft.
100 ft.
30-A
2.5 stories 35 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft.
Proposed
1.0 ac.
150 ft.
291 ft.
5%
1 story 69 fit. 35/55 ft. 196 ft.
Single Family Dwelling Standards. Section 20-17-11 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines
minimum design standards for single family uses, which apply to this application. The
basic requirements are for a perimeter foundation, minimum dimensions of 30 feet by 24
feet, a shingled roof, and minimum overhangs of 1 foot. Based upon the information
provided by the applicant, the. existing structure is in conformance with these requirements.
Additionally, the structure has vinyl lap siding consistent with the requirements of Section
20-17-4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
CUP Criteria. In considering CUP applications, the Planning Commission and City
Council must also take into consideration the possible adverse impacts of the building
relocation based upon (but not limited to) the following factors outlined in Section 20-4-2.F
of the Zoning Ordinance:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment_ The following policies may be cited in support the applicant's request.
The character of individual neighborhoods shall be reinforced, maintained
and upgraded. (Policy Plan, pg. 40)
Planning Report - Pearson CUP
Page 3
JAN -12-2000 14:25 NAC 612 595 9837 F 05/09
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the ar, ,-a.
Comment. The area is developed with low density single family residential c ses,
which are planned to continue by the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the proposed
use will be compatible with present and future land uses.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in. the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment. • As noted above, the subject site and relocated structure conform with all
applicable performance standards.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The relocated dwelling and single family use of the property will not have
a negative impact to the area.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed.
Comment. Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment. The relocated structure will not generate any additional traffic.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity_
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity.
Septic System. The applicant is proposing all-new septic and well facilities to serve the
proposed dwelling. These systems are subject to review and approval of the City Building
Official.
Security. Section 2019-3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that a security escrow be
posted for the relocation of existing structures. This security is required primarily to cover
any costs that may be incurred due to damage of public facilities or infrastructure during
the relocation. Such a security as determined by the building official must be required as
a condition of approval.
Planning Report - Pearson CUP
Page 4
JAN -12-2000 14:26 NAC 612 595 9837 P.06/09
CONCLUSION
The applicant's request to relocate an existing mobile home unit is generally consi:ent
with all applicable performance standards and the Comprehensive Plan. Our spy --ific
recommendation is outlined in the executive summary of this report.
PC. Mike Robertson
Elaine Beatty
,ferry Olson
Andy MacArthur
Larry Koshak
Dwain Pearson
Charles Klein
Norman Carlson
Planning Report -Pearson CUP
Page 5
JAN -12-2000 14:26 NAC 612 595 9837 P 07/09
U
191,z
EXHIBIT A-1
JAN -12-2000 14:27 NAC
612 595 9837 P.08i09
1
ttooHe r� peon
,2,20ten-sl
12 t'o '
j
7 8 5 PO4o
pv„
aiao- o
83rd STREET
9
w 1 11 2 3 4 5
1214=
/2at2ol
B
r+wo
alas
4 �-W Q
bees �
9� 2
,1100 �
1 netr.7o C
,alto 4
11 �
nwr.ae
12.
WKWIo
#4130
13
H 1�
h, p1t-ae
15
Hole
rmo g
28
,rote
1
rzM27 #C
.Me..te
322"*'
.ne->re
26
X71
s„
IMO 25
2 4 tx.
on"
.7rt-7o
rs7.o
24
pogo
5
am -M
23
f}0e, 4J
r Z2
ttooe-eo
t�
7 OfOt
-�
�}
21
tmf�o
8
�
aM-yv 20�
�V�yJ �
too
'T 10
Prim 19
1$ ,
ti 1►1t4,�ao
' Mts-7n "t
it1a7D/. _
17
%11ao
12
g7M1.7O
a� 16�p
i3
15
14
trots 1
2
^1670
J
vale.
4r��
0106
5
to7rye
t+�
6
r,o�o
7
10
7tYti-.1D
�
111106 -M06 -M 11
� rttn
e�12
rnx
tt 110
14
N.E. 81 st ST. Iliv
15
rt,w
s6s-: —IL -M 18
4 3 2 1 "7~'
tit"
s 17'72
polo r� poxo 1°°' dao
1 tswo 2 27
pos6
4
EXHIBIT A-2
JAN -12-2000 14:28
NAC
612 595 9837 P.09i09
5jTE
LAY
OUT
9132
PAGKARV
Avt
(PO f 0 sed)
7,- P
„ kDA9sed
25.9
r�
pry}r
were * I
gx l5v I/
Ir
CrAleaye
x sla b rQP
Q�'► yr
way
Or
`'' 4�
PSG K�RI Avg dr5EG0
---- - ,
�- � o P
No Nor -ro 5 c A L.r
1k
T
EXHIBIT B
TOTHL P.09
MANUFACTURED (MOBILE) HOME
SAFE' F•EATUP,E DISCLOSURE FORM
Minnaoto Statutes 327007
The Safery Future Disclosure Form relates to in-Vark gala on7•. The seller must pry idc the ditciasvr_ to the beaver prior to the signing of the purchase
agreement. The seller is Msponsibta for the mformation provided in the drschscure, the bailding official is not. nor is the buyer.
The buyer is responsible for the corrections and has up to three veers to complete
the repairs. See 'Compiiancc with S+fety Futures' on Disclosure
Form.
The Building Ofri ial is reiponsibie for issuing permits for and providing inspection
of all re -work pursuant to the disclosure.
The Safety Disdoeure is path of the Manufactured Home Park Lot Rental Law•, and the specific section 327.C7 u titled 'in Park Salts,'
MANUFACTURED (MOBILE) HOME
accordance with the manufactures s gvideiines. A buildinf.
SAFETY FEATURE DISCLOSURE FORM
permit for this stove was issued by the city
T -.is form is required by taw to be fltied out and given to the pratpective buyer
of and this stove installation has been
Of any used manulaelured home by All privatt parties, dealers, and brokers.
approved by the building official.
EXTiS AND EGRESS WINDOWS
YES N011(�
This home has at least one ep%=-in3o- in each bedroom, or a window in
This hone contains a solid fuel bumtng frrepiatee. The fireplare
each bedroom that metu the specifications of the American National Standard
was installed by the manufacturer of the home after June 15,
institute ?9'e2 Standard A119.1 ctrvermp manufactured homes trade ir.
1976, and was inspected for compliance with the U.S.
Minnesota. This standard requires that the window be al lead 22 irvchcz in leas~
Department of }lousing and Urban Development Ma ufactured
dimension, and at Is= f+ve square feet m tire&, and that the window he not
Home Standards YES NO=
more than four feet ori the floor. i:47= windows installed in compliance with
'Iles home contains a solid fuel burning frteplacc. This fueplate
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urhan Dewlepen"t Manufactured Horne'
unit is approved for installation in manufactured homes. It was
Standards or the State Building Code are deemed to meet the requirements of
installed try in accordance with the
this section
manufactuter's guidelines. A building permit for this ftreplsm
YES NO
was issued by the city q! and this
This home hwc;L(rtumber) of erica. Tlt,4y are located jr
_
firepbcciirlstatlation hp been approved try the building ofiteiaL
SMOKE DETECI'tORS ARID FIRE E)MN(1URSil
. . . r • 'YEi NO
This home is equipped with fare eztinpuishers as required by the Minnesot�a/
State Health Department, YES NO /�
. SUPRT SYSTEM
, • EO
This home is by a
They arc located
sbpfroned tupport'systcm. as required
state code since September 1, 1974,
This home is equipped with at feast one listed automatic smoke detector outside
YES NO
each sleeping area as required in homes built in accordancezanP the state
RECOMMENDATIONS TD PROSPEC I"VE BUYERS
building cede. YES %�- NO
flFATTAPE
ALUMINUM ELECTRICAL WIRING
It is siso recommended that the buyer check the home's hat
This home Its alumintmt'ekmirical wiring. YES NO
tape. Did and worm hear tape, and imprc+per installation of heat
A)urnmum eicetrieal wiring an present a fire hazard in domes. The special
tape, an cause a fire hazard.
harards presented by Muminem efettriea] wiring an be eiiminsted by certain
FURNACE AND WATER HEATER
repairs, as recommended by the L'S. Consumer Product Safery Commission.
It it recommended that the buyer have i Qualified utility
A. The wiring eosrtrectiarts to the outic a in this home have been crimped, ae}d
rcprrxntathm Meek the furnace and water hater to are that
the mstneerion point is nor copper. YES NO
they are both in good working orde-,. If this home.was
B. T1his home hart eteetrieai outlets and switches compatible with aluminum
convened from oil to natural gas heat_ there could be safety
electrical wiring. YF -1Z NO
probkms.if the conversion was not done correctly. A utility
G Other action has been taken to eliminate or reduce the danger caused by
representative or building official can inspect the condition and
aluminum electrical wiring in this
installation of this equipment. They may charge a rsisonable
har„e•(De:`�;be)
(cc to do w. it is also recommmded that the burr check the
floor area around the wsrer beater and furnace compartments:
('The buvtf may otter the effectiveness of these methods by contacting the US_
A weakened floor on create a firs hazard.
Comsumcr Product Safety Commission.)
ENERGY AUDiT
It is also recommended that the buyer have a utility approved
FURNACE AND WATER HFATER
enerV audit of the home_
The furnace Min rtment in this home is lined with gypsum board, as specified
COMPLIANCE WITH SAFETY FEATURES
in the 1976 US Depammenl and Urban Dvveioptnent ruing
if you purchase the horns, you will be required to install egress
manufactured housing construction. YES A NO
windows within one vcar and smoke detectors and firs
The water heater enclosure in this home is lined with r.vVfiu9n board, as specified
ertinguishers within JO day -L. You will be required to comply
in the 1976 U.S. Dcpartnient of Hotaing and Urban Devc ens cedes
with all of the fcty fcalu consisted its this form within
governing manufactured housing eort:truetiost, YES NO
three '�
�t'7��
SOLID FUEL BURNING STOVE AND Fi PLACE.�U
r�thc undcrsipned,
This home cmixins a solid fuel burning stove. This stovt we& inststted by
hertbv dcclarc t e above informs t a true and eorrat to
manufacturer of the home after June 15, I976, and was inspected for compliance
the best of env nowt ge.
with the U5. Department of Housing and Union Devclopmcni Manufa
Dome Standards. YES NO
Sebe Sig
This home contains a solid fuel burning stove. This stove: unit is appNfor
installation in manufactured homes. Jr was installed by in
Bttve:SipnalL.
BaverSignamtre
Props n''Addze.ss Date [ 4 —0-99
SGiallso. 5a