Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-08-2026 PC PacketAPPROVAL OF THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES Draft 06 -03 -26 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes DRAFT 06 -03 -26 PC MINUTES.PDF PLANNING CASES Planning Case 26 -013 –EFH Co. –1300 Grey Fox Road –Site Plan Review And Conditional Use Permit MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF ATTACHMENT G.PDF Planning Case 26 -009 –Roers Companies LLC –3499 Lexington Avenue – Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master And Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review, And Variance PC 26 -009 PC MEMO -REVISED.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF ATTACHMENT G.PDF ATTACHMENT H.PDF ATTACHMENT I.PDF ATTACHMENT J.PDF ATTACHMENT K.PDF ATTACHMENT L.PDF Planning Case 26 -017 –Ryan Companies –Ordinance Amendments To Chapter 13 -Zoning Code Section 1380 TCAAP Redevelopment Code For Clear Height And Loading Dock Requirements MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF Planning Case 26 -018 –City Of Arden Hills –Ordinance Amendment To Chapter 13 –Zoning Code Section 1320.16 Requirements For Affordable Housing MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 26 -011 -City Of Arden Hills –Ordinance Amendments To Chapter 13 –Zoning Code Section 1325 Adding Language For Accessory Dwelling Units MEMO.PDF COMMENTS AND REPORTS Report From The City Council Planning Commission Comments Staff Comments ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting. Chair: Joshua Collins (2027) Commissioners: Brad Bjorklund (2025) Steve Erler (2026) Ben Lindau, Vice Chair (2026) Patrick Burlingame (2027) Nancy Jacobson (2027) Jessica Birken (2027) Katie Stromberg - Alternate (2026) SJ Julius -Alternate (2027) Council Liaison: Kurt Weber Planning Commission July 8, 2026 6:30 p.m. City Hall Address: 1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone: 651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City Vision Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play. Members of the public may attend a meeting in -person at City Hall or they may view the meeting remotely on the City ’s website using the below link. Meetings are also broadcast on Cable Channel 16 for those that live in Arden Hills. https://cityofardenhills.org/320/Watch -City -Meetings Some Commissioners may be participating in this meeting by interactive technology/remotely. Agenda CALL TO ORDER 1. 2. 2.A. Documents: 3. 3.A. Documents: 3.B. Documents: 3.C. Documents: 3.D. Documents: 4. 4.A. Documents: 5. 5.A. 5.B. 5.C. 6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDAAPPROVAL OF MINUTESDraft 06 -03 -26 Planning Commission Meeting MinutesDRAFT 06 -03 -26 PC MINUTES.PDF PLANNING CASES Planning Case 26 -013 –EFH Co. –1300 Grey Fox Road –Site Plan Review And Conditional Use Permit MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF ATTACHMENT G.PDF Planning Case 26 -009 –Roers Companies LLC –3499 Lexington Avenue – Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master And Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review, And Variance PC 26 -009 PC MEMO -REVISED.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF ATTACHMENT G.PDF ATTACHMENT H.PDF ATTACHMENT I.PDF ATTACHMENT J.PDF ATTACHMENT K.PDF ATTACHMENT L.PDF Planning Case 26 -017 –Ryan Companies –Ordinance Amendments To Chapter 13 -Zoning Code Section 1380 TCAAP Redevelopment Code For Clear Height And Loading Dock Requirements MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF Planning Case 26 -018 –City Of Arden Hills –Ordinance Amendment To Chapter 13 –Zoning Code Section 1320.16 Requirements For Affordable Housing MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 26 -011 -City Of Arden Hills –Ordinance Amendments To Chapter 13 –Zoning Code Section 1325 Adding Language For Accessory Dwelling Units MEMO.PDF COMMENTS AND REPORTS Report From The City Council Planning Commission Comments Staff Comments ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting. Chair:Joshua Collins (2027)Commissioners:Brad Bjorklund (2025)Steve Erler (2026)Ben Lindau, Vice Chair (2026)Patrick Burlingame (2027)Nancy Jacobson (2027)Jessica Birken (2027)Katie Stromberg -Alternate (2026)SJ Julius -Alternate (2027)Council Liaison:Kurt Weber Planning Commission July 8, 2026 6:30 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96Arden Hills MN 55112Phone:651 -792 -7800Website:www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting,strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirableCity in which to live, work, and play.Members of the public may attend a meeting in -person at City Hall or they may view the meeting remotely on the City ’s website using the below link. Meetings are also broadcast on Cable Channel 16 for those that live in Arden Hills.https://cityofardenhills.org/320/Watch -City -MeetingsSome Commissioners may be participating in this meeting by interactive technology/remotely.AgendaCALL TO ORDER1.2.2.A.Documents: 3. 3.A. Documents: 3.B. Documents: 3.C. Documents: 3.D. Documents: 4. 4.A. Documents: 5. 5.A. 5.B. 5.C. 6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDAAPPROVAL OF MINUTESDraft 06 -03 -26 Planning Commission Meeting MinutesDRAFT 06 -03 -26 PC MINUTES.PDFPLANNING CASESPlanning Case 26 -013 –EFH Co. –1300 Grey Fox Road –Site Plan Review And Conditional Use PermitMEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFATTACHMENT F.PDFATTACHMENT G.PDFPlanning Case 26 -009 –Roers Companies LLC –3499 Lexington Avenue –Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master And Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review, And Variance PC 26 -009 PC MEMO -REVISED.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFATTACHMENT F.PDFATTACHMENT G.PDFATTACHMENT H.PDFATTACHMENT I.PDFATTACHMENT J.PDFATTACHMENT K.PDFATTACHMENT L.PDFPlanning Case 26 -017 –Ryan Companies –Ordinance Amendments To Chapter 13 -Zoning Code Section 1380 TCAAP Redevelopment Code For Clear Height And Loading Dock Requirements MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFPlanning Case 26 -018 –City Of Arden Hills –Ordinance Amendment To Chapter 13 –Zoning Code Section 1320.16 Requirements For Affordable HousingMEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDF UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 26 -011 -City Of Arden Hills –Ordinance Amendments To Chapter 13 –Zoning Code Section 1325 Adding Language For Accessory Dwelling Units MEMO.PDF COMMENTS AND REPORTS Report From The City Council Planning Commission Comments Staff Comments ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting. Chair:Joshua Collins (2027)Commissioners:Brad Bjorklund (2025)Steve Erler (2026)Ben Lindau, Vice Chair (2026)Patrick Burlingame (2027)Nancy Jacobson (2027)Jessica Birken (2027)Katie Stromberg -Alternate (2026)SJ Julius -Alternate (2027)Council Liaison:Kurt Weber Planning Commission July 8, 2026 6:30 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96Arden Hills MN 55112Phone:651 -792 -7800Website:www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting,strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirableCity in which to live, work, and play.Members of the public may attend a meeting in -person at City Hall or they may view the meeting remotely on the City ’s website using the below link. Meetings are also broadcast on Cable Channel 16 for those that live in Arden Hills.https://cityofardenhills.org/320/Watch -City -MeetingsSome Commissioners may be participating in this meeting by interactive technology/remotely.AgendaCALL TO ORDER1.2.2.A.Documents:3.3.A.Documents:3.B.Documents:3.C.Documents:3.D.Documents: 4. 4.A. Documents: 5. 5.A. 5.B. 5.C. 6. Approved: July 8, 2026 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 2026 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Collins called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Joshua Collins, Commissioners Jessica Birken, Brad Bjorklund, Patrick Burlingame, Stephen Erler, Nancy Jacobson and Ben Lindau. Absent: None. Also present were: Community Development Director Jacob Reilly, Senior Planner Elena Fransen and Council Liaison Kurt Weber. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – JUNE 3, 2026 Commissioner Erler moved, seconded by Commissioner Birken, to approve the June 3, 2026, agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 8, 2026 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting Senior Planner Fransen reported there were updates made to the minutes on Page 4 and 5 to correct the spellings of names. Commissioner Erler moved, seconded by Commissioner Birken, to approve the April 8, 2026, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as amended. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 26-012 – 3336 Lake Johanna Boulevard – Variance – No Public Hearing Required Senior Planner Fransen explained that Mill City Design Build (“The Applicant”), on behalf of the property owners, has requested a variance from the floor area ratio (FAR) requirement in the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 2 R-2 Zoning District to build a 384 square foot porch addition to the existing principal dwelling at 3336 Lake Johanna Boulevard (“Subject Property”). To construct the proposed porch, the Applicant is requesting a FAR of 0.336. City code establishes a maximum FAR of 0.3. Senior Planner Fransen stated the Subject Property lot area is 9,215 square feet as measured from the front and side property lines to the ordinary high water level. Minnesota State Statute 6120.3300 requires only land above the ordinary high water level to be used to meet lot area standards. The maximum gross floor area of the principal dwelling on the lot is 2,765 square feet, for a maximum FAR of 0.3. The existing principal dwelling is 2,718 square feet in area. Senior Planner Fransen reported the Subject Property was originally developed in 1913 with an addition constructed in 1987. The detached garage on the property was reconstructed in 2004. The detached garage required a variance from the front yard setback, the side yard setback for accessory structures, and the requirement that no accessory structure shall be nearer the front lot line than what is the required front setback. The City Council approved the variance requests in Planning Case 03-22. The Subject Property is a riparian lot with frontage on Lake Johanna, which is defined by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as a General Development Lake. The property is subject to the Shoreland Regulations in the City’s Zoning Code Senior Planner Fransen reviewed the Site Data, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. Mike and Katie Shepard are the owners of the property at 3336 Lake Johanna Boulevard, Arden Hills, MN. 2. Mill City Design Build, on behalf of the property owners submitted a land use application for a variance to construct a porch addition at the Subject Property 3336 Lake Johanna Boulevard. 3. The proposal would vary from the maximum floor area ratio (0.3) permitted in the R-2 Zoning District in that the proposed new porch expands the footprint of the existing dwelling and increases the floor area ratio to 0.336. 4. The Subject Property is a riparian lot with frontage on Lake Johanna and is subject to Shoreland Regulations. 5. The proposed addition would be set back 52.7 feet from Ordinary High Water Level and would be located outside of the required structure setback of 50 feet and will not be nearer to OHWL than the nearest adjacent structure. 6. The Applicant submitted the required shoreland mitigation plan for the proposed addition. 7. The proposed addition to the Subject Property would conform to all other requirements and standards of the R-2 Zoning District and the Shoreland Regulations. Variance Findings: 8. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when consistent with the comprehensive plan. 9. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 10. The requested variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance because a porch is a common feature of a single-family dwelling use. 11. The requested variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan goal of maintaining a strong, vital diverse, and stable housing supply, uses site sensitive planning and design to ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 3 protect the significant natural feature – Lake Johanna – abutting the property, and remains a residential use as shown on the Future Land Use map. 12. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner because a porch addition is a common amenity within residential zoning districts. 13. There are unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner due to the unique grading and drainage issues posed by a shoreland property. 14. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood because the proposed porch will be incorporated into the profile of the existing dwelling and will have limited impacts to view from Lake Johanna and adjacent properties. Senior Planner Fransen reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission for Planning Case 26-012 for a variance to allow the property owner to construct a porch addition resulting in a floor area ratio of 0.336 and deviate from the 0.3 FAR standard at 3336 Lake Johanna Boulevard: 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions 1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to the commencement of construction. 2. The proposed building addition shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. 3. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the City’s PW/Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. 4. Final grading, drainage, and site plans shall be subject to approval by the Public Works Director/City Engineer and Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit or other development permits. 5. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, RCWD and DNR, prior to the start of any site activities. 6. The submitted shoreland mitigation plans shall be completed in accordance with City Code Section 1330.03 Subd. 7. E. within one year of the plan's approval unless otherwise approved by the City. 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted 3. Recommend Denial 4. Table Chair Collins opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Burlingame asked if the applicant was aware of the fact this addition would bring the structure coverage to the hard maximum of 25% and any future additions would require another variance. Senior Planner Fransen stated the applicant was aware of this requirement and this information would be included in the building permit approval. Chair Collins requested further information regarding the distinction between floor area ratio (FAR) and structure coverage. Senior Planner Fransen explained FAR was the sum of the horizontal area of all floors of the building measured from the exterior faces of the exterior walls and does not include garages, decks, covered front porches or spaces that do not meet minimum height requirements. She ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 4 reported the structure coverage for this property would be expanded through the deck addition and expansions to the dwelling footprint. Commissioner Bjorklund asked what the side yard setbacks were in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts. Senior Planner Fransen indicated the minimum side yard setback in the R-1 zoning district was 10 feet and the combined total can be no less than 25 feet. She reported the minimum side yard setback in the R-2 zoning district was 5 feet and the combined total can be no less than 15 feet. Commissioner Bjorklund commented on the number of variances this property already has, in his opinion, noting the lot size is too small, suggesting the FAR change adds even more variances. Chair Collins explained the only requested variance at this time was for the FAR. He reported the property itself does not conform to many items within the R-2 or shoreland ordinances. He indicated this meant the lot was non-conforming and not that the property has received additional variances. Commissioner Bjorklund stated the garage was not in conformance with City standards. He indicated the garage was not currently meeting the front yard or side yard setbacks. He was of the opinion this property required four variances. Chair Collins explained there were numerous properties in Arden Hills that were not in conformance with the City’s zoning code. He indicated the Commission was being asked to consider a variance for FAR at this time. Commissioner Bjorklund stated this may be the case, but noted this property had six or seven non-conformities already. He further discussed how this lot did not meet the lot area minimum or proper lot width at the building line for riparian lots in the Shoreland District. He discussed how this property probably had a cottage on it at one time and the property owner has continued to expand the building over time while the lot remains in non-conformance. He stated approval of the proposed variance would make this lot even more non-conforming. Senior Planner Fransen reported a variance was granted for the garage. Commissioner Jacobson thanked staff for the detailed presentation on this request. She commented on the City’s FAR and questioned how Arden Hills’ regulations compared to neighboring cities. Senior Planner Fransen indicated the City’s FAR has become more restrictive over time, but has generally been used to manage density and how structures are massed on a property. Commissioner Bjorklund discussed how this neighborhood had changed over time. He commented on how there was pressure to build bigger and bigger homes on lakeshore properties. He stated the building area for the lots on this lake was becoming quite congested. Commissioner Jacobson explained she lived on a non-conforming lot in a non-conforming house. She indicated she appreciated how the applicant was proposing to alter their property and believed the three season porch and deck were a good use of the space. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 5 Chair Collins reported the structure coverage for this property would remain at 25%. He understood the visual congestion that was occurring on the lake but noted this was just progress. Commissioner Lindau commented he believed the three season porch and deck expansion were reasonable requests. He stated some communities don’t count porch space against as floor area. Commissioner Lindau moved a motion to recommend approval as submitted of Planning Case 26-012 for a variance to allow the property owner to construct a porch addition resulting in a floor area ratio of 0.336 and deviate from the 0.3 FAR standard at 3336 Lake Johanna Boulevard, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans. The motion failed for lack of a second. Commissioner Erler moved and Commissioner Birken seconded a motion to recommend approval with conditions of Planning Case 26-012 for a variance to allow the property owner to construct a porch addition resulting in a floor area ratio of 0.336 and deviate from the 0.3 FAR standard at 3336 Lake Johanna Boulevard, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the June 3, 2026, report to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Bjorklund stated he believed seven non-conformities on a property were too many. He explained he would not be supporting the motion on the floor. Commissioner Erler reported he disagreed with Councilmember Bjorklund, noting this property was different from the previous request on Lake Johanna. He stated this property owner was requesting one small variance and not six. Commissioner Burlingame indicated the requested variance was very minor. He clarified for the record that non-conformities were not the same as variances. He stated the request before the Commission was to consider if the FAR variance meets the three-factor practical difficulty test. He indicated the Commission cannot use this case as a vehicle to revisit conditions that were already on the property. The motion carried unanimously 6-1 (Commissioner Bjorklund opposed). B. Planning Case 26-010 – Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 13 - Zoning Code Section 1380 TCAAP Redevelopment Code for multi-use trail width and streetlight spacing – Public Hearing Community Development Director Reilly stated in November 2012, the City Council approved a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with Ramsey County which establishes a partnership between the City of Arden Hills and Ramsey County with the goal of the remediation and redevelopment of the 427-acre Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) site. Under the JPA, the City and County created a Joint Development Authority (JDA) that is the joint governing entity of the TCAAP site as allowed by the Joint Powers Act and MN State Laws. The JDA is the authority responsible for, but not limited to, environmental remediation, elimination of blight, infrastructure construction and financing, comprehensive planning and zoning, and economic development and redevelopment. The JDA Board is comprised of two County Commissioners, two City Councilmembers, and an additional non-elected City appointee as the Chair. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 6 Community Development Director Reilly reported between 2013 – 2016, the city facilitated the process of developing the Master Plan for the TCAAP site, which as noted above was the responsibility of the city under the JPA. Planning elements of the Master Plan included defining the public engagement process, land use, circulation and movement, utilities, environmental remediation, parks and open space, implementation plan, and a regulatory plan. In 2016, the City adopted the TRC, Section 1380 of the zoning code which includes the regulating plan, land use table, design standards, and other regulations related to land development that are specific to the TCAAP site. Community Development Director Reilly stated through the JPA in the event the JDA believes the TCAAP Master Plan should be amended that shall be referred to the City and County for review. The city maintains the responsibility for processing TRC and Comprehensive Plan Amendments. As part of a TRC Amendment, the City will request confirmation of approval by Ramsey County. Community Development Director Reilly commented the Rice Creek Commons Public Infrastructure Improvements team is responsible for the overall scope, progress, and key design for Rice Creek Commons. With preparations for the construction of Rice Creek Boulevard (formerly known as the Spine Road) underway, the Public Infrastructure Improvements team identified lighting and trail design as topics that require further JDA discussion and direction to ensure alignment with project goals and the overall design intent. The team drafted the attached ordinance amendment language and prepared background information for the JDA to consider at the February 2nd Work Session. Community Development Director Reilly explained following the February 2 discussion, during which the JDA reached consensus around the amendment to the TRC-required multi-use trail design width, the item was brought back to the March 10 Special JDA Meeting with more information to support additional discussion on the topic of lighting. The JDA reached consensus around the proposed amendments for lighting, and a recommendation was made for City and County staff to bring the two TRC amendments requested by Ramsey County to the respective elected bodies for consideration. The Applicant presented the proposed amendments to the City Council at the April 27th Work Session Meeting. The City Council reached consensus that the amendments could be advanced to the Planning Commission for review. Community Development Director Reilly commented on the proposed ordinance amendments for Planning Commissions review. The draft language allows for greater intervals between streetlights along Rice Creek Boulevard and allows for a reduction in the minimum width for shared use paths and trails on Rice Creek Boulevard from 12 feet to 10 feet. These amendments are to Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code, y and only applicable to infrastructure associated with the Rice Creek Commons area of Arden Hills. Community Development Director Reilly reported the Applicant states that reducing the minimum required trail width along Rice Creek Boulevard would also qualify the trail for a Rice Creek Watershed District Rules exception for trails that are 10 feet or less and allow for a relative reduction in required stormwater treatment volume compared to the requirements for a 12-foot width trail. Reducing the required trail width from 10 feet to 12 feet would reduce project costs for stormwater treatment and trail materials. Community Development Director Reilly provided the Findings of Fact for review: ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 7 General Findings: 1. The Applicant is proposing to amend ordinance language in Chapter 13 – Zoning Code Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code. 2. The proposed ordinance amendment would allow for streetlight spacing along the length of the Rice Creek Boulevard Corridor that meets the Recommended Footcandle Levels as established in the MnDOT Roadway Lighting Design Manual. 3. The Applicant states that the proposed ordinance language will ensure adequate lighting while reducing infrastructure costs and long-term maintenance and operation costs. 4. The proposed ordinance amendment would allow for a minimum multi-use trail width of 10 feet along Rice Creek Boulevard. 5. The Applicant states that the proposed ordinance language would meet minimum width standards as set by MnDOT’s Bikeway Facility Design Guide, ADA and Public Right-of Way Accessibility Guidelines, and other local standards while minimizing costs for additional trail width and additional stormwater treatment under the Rice Creek Watershed District. 6. The proposed ordinance amendments are generally in the public interest and in keeping with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 7. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. Community Development Director Reilly reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission for Planning Case 26-010 Zoning Code Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 13 in Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language to allow for greater intervals between streetlights along Rice Creek Boulevard and allow for a reduction in the minimum width for shared use paths and trails on Rice Creek Boulevard from 12 feet to 10 feet. 1. Recommend Approval 3. Recommend Denial 4. Table Chair Collins opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Lindau requested further information from the County regarding why this request was being made. John Mazzitello, Ramsey County Deputy Director for Public Works, introduced himself to the Commission. He explained at the time the TRC was developed, the project was in a highly conceptual stage. He reported the project has since moved along and 12-foot trail widths were no longer being considered. For this reason, it made sense to change the 12-foot trail width to 10 feet. He commented further on County’s lighting standards for trails and roadway corridors. Michael Kirsch, Kimley Horn, commented further on the three trail corridors that would run through Rice Creek Commons. Commissioner Bjorklund inquired if the proposed changes were being made at the request of a developer or were the requests coming from the County. Mr. Mazzitello explained the requests were coming from Ramsey County. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 8 Commissioner Jacobson thanked the County for making these recommendations. She noted she supported the two proposed changes. Commissioner Erler asked why the multi-use trail in the neighborhood would be 12 feet wide when the trail along Rice Creek Boulevard would be 10 feet. Mr. Mazzitello indicated the regional trail along the east side of the development will belong to Ramsey County Parks and Recreation and they have different standards than Ramsey County Public Works. Commissioner Lindau questioned if this trail would be multi-modal. Mr. Mazzitello reported all three trails would be multi-modal. Commissioner Bjorklund encouraged the County to put additional conduit in the ground for future lighting along the trail corridors. Mr. Mazzitello stated this was being discussed by the County. Commissioner Burlingame asked if there was an approval process for the foot candle compliance before infrastructure was accepted by the City. Community Development Director Reilly explained the City did have a process in place. Chair Collins opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Chair Collins invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. There being no comments, Chair Collins closed the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Commissioner Birken moved and Commissioner Erler seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-010 as presented for Zoning Code Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 13 in Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language to allow for greater intervals between streetlights along Rice Creek Boulevard and allow for a reduction in the minimum width for shared use paths and trails on Rice Creek Boulevard from 12 feet to 10 feet as discussed in the June 3, 2026 Report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). C. Planning Case 26-008 – 3761 Lexington Avenue – Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit – Public Hearing Senior Planner Fransen presented Vector Styling, Inc. (“The Applicant”) is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to operate a vehicle window tinting and stereo installation facility in 3,900 square feet of the existing 10,108 square foot service station and retail sales facility at 3761 Lexington Avenue (“Subject Property”). As part of site plan review, the Applicant seeks a sign standard adjustment to install 110 square feet of new signage on the property. Senior Planner Fransen stated the Applicant submitted a land use application for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review at the Subject Property. The Applicant plans to lease 3,900 ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 9 square feet of an existing facility for a new business, TINT WORLD. The proposed space would combine two tenant spaces into one and share the building with TGK Tires, another service station use. A Conditional Use Permit is required for a service station use within the proposed 3,900 square foot tenant space. Senior Planner Fransen explained the Applicant proposes to combine the two unoccupied tenant spaces into one and use five existing bay areas for services and provide a retail area and waiting room for customers. Employee and customer parking needs will be met by 30 parking spaces to the south and west of the tenant space. An application for a Conditional Use Permit requires a Site Plan Review application. Through the site plan review process, an applicant can request flexibility from the strict application of the zoning code by applying for a Sign Standard Adjustment as part of site plan review. The applicant proposes two 55 square foot wall signs be installed above the main entrance. The property is located in Sign District 5. The maximum amount of signage allowed in Sign District 5 is 80 square feet. Senior Planner Fransen reviewed the Site Data, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. The applicant has a lease agreement for space in the subject property located at 3761 Lexington Avenue, Arden Hills, MN. 2. The Subject Property is located within the Service Business District designated for Commercial Uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 3. The Subject Property is zoned B-3 Service Business. 4. A service station use requires a conditional use permit in the B-3 District. 5. The Subject Property is located in Sign District 5, where the maximum wall signage permitted is 80 square feet. 6. The Subject Property has two existing wall signs for a total of 80 square feet. 7. Section 1260.01, adjustments to the requirements and standards for the height, number, type, lighting, area, and/or location of a sign or signs established by Chapter 12 Sign Code may be approved with a Site Plan Review. 8. The Applicant applied for a site plan review with a sign standard adjustment and conditional use permit to establish a vehicle window tinting and stereo installation service station at 3761 Lexington Avenue. 9. The applicant requested a sign standard adjustment to install an additional 110 square feet of wall signage, bringing the total building wall signage to 190 square feet. 10. The Applicant proposes to restripe the parking lot on the site, install a gate to the existing trash enclosure, and provide an additional accessible parking space. 11. The Applicant requests to waive the requirement for a traffic study. The Applicant offers sufficient data in the application to demonstrate the proposed use will not result in a large amount of additional traffic and that the current conditions of the site can support the anticipated traffic. 12. The proposed plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code or the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. 13. The proposed use is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole. 14. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 10 15. The proposed plan is not expected to have significant impact on traffic or parking conditions. 16. A public hearing is required for a conditional use permit. 17. Property owners within 1000 feet of the subject property were notified of the application as established in city code. Senior Planner Fransen reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission for Planning Case 26-008 for a site plan review with sign standards adjustment and a conditional use permit to establish a vehicle window tinting and stereo installation service station and install up to an additional 110 square feet in wall signage at 3751 Lexington Avenue: 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the Community Development Director, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The proposed parking area shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 3. A Building Permit shall be obtained for alterations to the existing principal structure. 4. A separate sign permit shall be required for each sign on the site. 5. Any future trash enclosure shall use gates and be constructed on three sides using the similar or complementary materials, colors, and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted 3. Recommend Denial 4. Table Chair Collins opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Burlingame inquired what the total signage allowed was for this building, noting TGK Tires already had signage on the building. He asked if a sign standard adjustment would remain with the property. Community Development Director Reilly stated the sign standard adjustment would remain with the user but the conditional use permit would remain with the property, if a similar use were to occupy the property within 90 days of the applicant vacating the site. He noted 80 square feet was allowed for signage. He commented further on the sign code amendments that would be coming forward for City Code. Commissioner Burlingame requested further information on why staff was recommending the traffic study be waived. Senior Planner Fransen stated this recommendation was made in the Findings of Fact because staff has sufficient information from the applicant. Commissioner Jacobson reported the total sign limit for the building was 80 square feet, which had to be split among the users of the building. Senior Planner Fransen stated this was the case. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 11 Commissioner Jacobson commented visibility was a concern given how this property was setback from Lexington Avenue. She appreciated the fact that visitors to this business would be coming by appointment. She questioned if this business would have a free-standing sign as well as signage on the building. Senior Planner Fransen indicated the applicant would have signage on the free-standing pylon sign in addition to the proposed wall signage on the building. Commissioner Erler supported this business having a visible sign given how this building was setback from Lexington Avenue. However, he questioned if it was necessary to have additional signage on the southern facing elevation of the building. Nick Jorczak, representative for the applicant, reported this request was being made for traffic flow purposes through the parking lot as this signage would point visitors to the entrance of the business. Commissioner Birken asked if Tint World worked with the other tenant to get signage on the east face of the building. Mr. Jorczak explained this was TGK’s space and he did not believe this would be an option. Senior Planner Fransen commented this would be an option for the applicant to discuss with the property owner. Commissioner Birken stated she did not object to the size of the sign, noting the signage was necessary in order to be seen from Lexington Avenue, but encouraged the applicant to speak with the property owner to see if the signage could be placed on the east face of the building. Kevin Murray, representative for the applicant, thanked Commissioner Birken for this suggestion and noted he and Mr. Jorczak could speak with the property owner regarding this matter. Chair Collins inquired if approval of the sign standard adjustment was size and location based. Senior Planner Fransen reported the motion language would allow the applicant to install up to 110 square feet of wall signage at 3751 Lexington Avenue and the location on the building was not specified. Chair Collins asked if the current motion language would allow the applicant to install one large 110 square foot sign. Senior Planner Fransen stated the applicant would have to follow the submitted plans per the current motion language. Commissioner Lindau commented he wanted this business to be successful along the Lexington Avenue corridor. Commissioner Jacobson explained she had concerns with signage being on both faces. She supported the signage only being located on the face adjacent to Lexington Avenue. She questioned if the signage on the southern face of the building was necessary. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 12 Mr. Jorczak reported the south-facing sign was proposed for impressions. He stated the more impressions passersby get from the building and pylon signs, the better. He commented on how users of the car wash would be viewing the sign on the southern face of the building, which would also leave an impression. Commissioner Jacobson inquired if the applicant would support scaling down the size of the sign in order to meet the 80 square foot requirement. She stated this would require the applicant to have 40 square foot signs on the two faces of the building. Mr. Jorczak indicated the proposed signage was very similar in size to the TGK sign. Senior Planner Fransen commented further on the amount of open space on the Tint World sign. Mr. Murray thanked City staff for all of their assistance with this request and for accommodating him via Zoom. Chair Collins opened the public hearing at 8:10 p.m. Chair Collins invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and comment. There being no comments from the public, Chair Collins closed the public hearing at 8:11 p.m. Chair Collins stated he was of the opinion the proposed signage would be similar in size and scale to the TGK signage. Commissioner Burlingame moved and Commissioner Lindau seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case for a site plan review with sign standards adjustment and a conditional use permit to establish a vehicle window tinting and stereo installation service station and install up to an additional 110 square feet in wall signage at 3761 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact, subject to the conditions in the June 3, 2026, report to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Jacobson reported approval of this motion would mean this building would have 190 square feet of wall signage. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). Chair Collins recessed the Planning Commission meeting at 8:15 p.m. Chair Collins reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 8:23 p.m. D. Planning Case 26-011 – City of Arden Hills – Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 13 – Zoning Code Section 1325 Adding Language for Accessory Dwelling Units – Public Hearing Community Development Director Reilly stated in 2025, the City Council requested a work session agenda item to allow for discussion of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). At the April 13, 2026, City Council work session, the Council considered information related to permitting ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 13 ADUs, including information from other metropolitan area municipalities related to permitting ADUs. That information is included in this memo. At the work session, the Council asked city staff to craft an ordinance that included the following provisions: A. Allow ADUs as an accessory use in residential districts. B. Prohibit units not attached to either the principal structure or an existing accessory garage. C. Allows not more than one ADU per residential lot. D. Maintains existing impervious surface coverage, setbacks, and other adopted provisions of the code related to dimensional standards. E. Requires that utilities be provided through the principal dwelling while also providing for a mechanism to ensure residents in either dwelling unit have independent understanding of their use of the utility. F. Prohibits the separate sale or subdivision of the secondary unit (ADU). G. Requires – to the extent possible - at least one of the dwelling units on the property to be occupied by a property owner. Community Development Director Reilly reviewed a definition for ADUs, described reasons municipalities allow ADUs, and commented on the draft ordinance. Staff requests the Planning Commission provide any comments, questions, concerns or ideas related to the above provisions. These will be considered and passed on to the City Attorney in order to ensure the ordinance language meets the intent, purpose, and direction of the Planning Commission and the City Council, as appropriate and subject to applicable laws and regulations. While ADUs alone will not solve the region's housing crisis, or Arden Hills’ share of the need, they offer a proven, neighborhood-scale contribution to housing choice, supply, affordability, aging in community, and multigenerational living as part of a broader housing strategy. The benefits align with the city’s housing goals in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan as well as the newly adopted strategic plan. Chair Collins opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Chair Collins discussed how there were two sections of the Ordinance that were still open at this time. Community Development Director Reilly explained the draft language for these two sections was being reviewed by the City Attorney. He indicated the goal of this language was to bring existing ADUs into conformance as much as possible through an administrative review. Chair Collins stated it appears this ordinance would be tabled until July or August to allow this language to be brought forward to the Planning Commission for consideration prior to moving forward to the City Council. Community Development Director Reilly indicated this item could be tabled to the July Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Erler thanked staff for the detailed presentation on this matter. Commissioner Lindau asked why a detached ADU would not be allowed. Councilmember Weber explained he was uncertain why the Council did not support detached ADUs. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 14 Commissioner Bjorklund commended staff for the well written staff report and presentation. Commissioner Jacobson inquired if tiny homes, which were mobile, would qualify as an ADU. Community Development Director Reilly stated tiny homes meeting the size requirement and installed on a permanent foundation would qualify as an ADU. Chair Collins opened the public hearing at 9:02 p.m. Chair Collins invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and comment. Steve Nelson, 3475 Seims Court, indicated he would like a limitation set on the number of occupants within an ADU. He recommended steps be allowed to go up to the ground floor. He recommended ADUs be allowed within a trust. He suggested new construction permits not allow residents to live within an ADU without finishing the principal structure. He recommended proper address signage be required for ADU units. He stated he was concerned with how the City would monitor the occupants in rental ADUs and noted he also had concerns regarding parking. He supported ADUs be permanent structure and not mobile. He asked if ADUs would be allowed if a property already had an accessory structure. There being no additional comment Chair Collins closed the public hearing at 9:09 p.m. Community Development Director Reilly responded to the public comment noting the parking language requires a property to have one parking space for the ADU. He commented further on how City Code defines a family and household. Commissioner Birken stated she believed the detached ADU option was missing from this ordinance. She questioned why the City Council objected to detached ADUs. She asked why the height was limited to 25 feet. She noted she supported a property having one or two internal ADUs. She explained she supported a smaller house on a large property in Arden Hills becoming an ADU, noting a larger home could be built on the same property. She questioned why one garage stall would have to remain open in a garage ADU. She requested staff take a look at the exterior step language within the ordinance. She recommended that ADUs not have to be owner occupied because some properties may be in a trust or residents may be living intergenerationally. Commissioner Burlingame stated his main concerns with the ordinance at this time were with owner occupancy verification, short term rental, utilities and how the City would be addressing non-conforming ADUs. He discussed how the City verifies homesteaded properties and recommended the short-term rental language for ADUs be further considered. He supported submetering be required for ADUs. He explained he supported the draft of this ordinance being forwarded along to the City Council with recommendations from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Erler commented on the ADU ordinance owner-occupied requirement. He explained no other city that allows ADUs requires separate utilities. He stated the City’s stance around the short-term rental of ADUs was also a concern for him. He reported this led him to further consider what the City was trying to accomplish with ADUs. He asked if the goal was to create more affordable housing units or create intergenerational housing. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 15 Commissioner Lindau stated he believed ADUs were an excellent option to allow residents to age in place. He supported the City having a low number of regulations in place when it came to ADUs. He commented on the number of ADUs in Minneapolis, noting only 120 units were added over the past 10 years. He reported there were a lot of barriers to adding an ADU to a property in Arden Hills and believed this probability should be further studied. He discussed how modular construction was becoming more applicable. Commissioner Bjorklund indicated that ADUs usually do not alter the fundamental character of the existing neighborhood. He discussed how ADUs were constructed without public subsidies. He supported the City adopting this Ordinance at this meeting, with the understanding that amendments could be made in the future. Commissioner Jacobson reiterated that the focus for ADUs should be to add housing units to Arden Hills. She indicated she did not support ADUs becoming short term rentals but did support the City having detached ADUs. Chair Collins commented he had concerns with moving this ordinance forward without all of the ordinance language in place. He stated the City is pursuing ADUs in order to increase housing stock and affordability. He was of the opinion the Commission had to further consider the ordinance language when it comes to ADUs as short-term rentals. He asked if the Commission supported allowing detached ADUs. Commissioner Lindau stated he supported detached ADUs as this would provide homeowners with another option for locating an ADU on their property. Commissioner Birken supported this option as well. Commissioner Burlingame indicated he would like to see detached ADUs allowed, however, he understood the City Council did not support this option. Commissioner Bjorklund and Commission Jacobson supported detached ADUs as well. Chair Collins requested further information regarding the height limit for ADUs. Senior Planner Fransen reported other communities have set height limits for ADUs. Community Development Director Reilly indicated the proposed requirement aligns with the height limits established in City Code. He discussed the differences between an accessory use and an accessory structure. He commented the language could be changed to allow for a height no more than 35 feet. Commissioner Birken supported this recommendation. Commissioner Jacobson stated she did not support allowing ADUs to be 35 feet tall because this would be out of scale with many homes in the community. Chair Collins recommended staff further investigate the height limit language within the ordinance. He asked if ordinance language would allow an existing small home to become an ADU if the lot size allowed for the construction of a new home. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 16 Community Development Director Reilly commented the existing language does not account for this scenario. Commissioner Lindau anticipated there were very few lots in Arden Hills that would allow for this scenario. Chair Collins inquired if the City was only interested in allowing one ADU on a property. Community Development Director Reilly stated the direction was to allow only one ADU at this time. The Commission supported this requirement. Chair Collins asked that staff review the front stoop/step language for clarification purposes. He asked how the Commission wants to address the owner-occupancy requirement. Commissioner Birken feared that this requirement would make it more difficult for an individual to get financing and was a barrier that the City should not have in place. She stated if the concern was that corporations would be buying up housing in Arden Hills and creating ADUs, language could be drafted to address this concern. Community Development Director Reilly stated the owner occupancy requirement was put in place due to the perception owners care more for their property and community than renters. He reported the corporate ownership of properties was a separate issue. Commissioner Birken was of the opinion the perception that owners took better care of their property was biased and classist. She supported children being able to live in a parent’s home if the parent wanted to go and travel the world, without requiring the parent to sell their home. Chair Collins questioned how the ordinance language should be worded. Commissioner Birken recommended the owner-occupied requirement be removed from the ordinance. She stated the data shows 90% of ADUs are going to be owner occupied. Chair Collins asked if the Commission supported the subdivision of utilities. Commissioner Burlingame recommended submetering be required along with a separate address. Commissioner Lindau reported the utility provider would bear the expense of running the line for the additional meter. Commissioner Bjorklund suggested the language read installation of a meter or submeter. Commissioner Erler stated he was of the opinion the separation of the meter should be determined by the owner of the house. He reported no other city requires meters to be split. Chair Collins asked if the Commission wanted to move this ordinance forward or should the ordinance be brought back to a future meeting for further consideration. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 3, 2026 17 Commissioner Erler stated he was not comfortable approving the ordinance at this time, noting there were currently two blank sections. Commissioner Birken indicated she would like to see a new draft of the ordinance prior to making a recommendation. Chair Collins suggested the ordinance be laid over until the August Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Lindau supported this recommendation. Commissioner Erler moved and Commissioner Burlingame seconded a motion to postpone action on the ADU ordinance to the August 5, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Bjorklund explained he would be forwarding his comments to staff in order for these items to be incorporated into the revised ordinance. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council Councilmember Weber provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. He reported the City Council approved the affordable housing ordinance with amendments. He explained the Council was working through the Zoning Code updates. He stated the 75th Anniversary of Arden Hills would be celebrated on Friday, July 17 at Cummings Park. Community Development Director Reilly discussed the planning cases that would be addressed by the Commission at the July 8, 2026, Planning Commission meeting. B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests Commissioner Bjorklund asked what the status was for the apartments being constructed on the North Heights Church property. Senior Planner Fransen reported Trident Development was still closing on this property with the church and it is anticipated that construction should begin later this summer. ADJOURN Commissioner Birken moved, seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund, to adjourn the June 3, 2026, Planning Commission Meeting at 10:22 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (7- 0). Page 1 of 9 PC Agenda Item – 3A MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2026 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Elena Fransen, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #26-013 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: EFH Co. on behalf of Powder Technology Property Location: 1300 Grey Fox Road Request: Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review Requested Action EFH Co. (“The Applicant”) is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to create an internal drive lane with the addition of 6,098 square feet of pavement on the existing 6.55-acre parcel at 1300 Grey Fox Road (“Subject Property”). The proposed constitutes a substantial modification to the existing Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan regulating the site, triggering amendments and City review. Background 1. Existing Conditions The Subject Property is the location of an existing 80,267 square foot office and warehousing facility owned and operated by Powder Technology (“The Property Owner”). The facility was originally constructed in 1969 as a warehousing use. The property is accessible from Grey Fox Road on the north and the site is served by rail on the south. On April 8, 1991, the City Council adopted the I-Flex zoning ordinance, which established that wholesaling, warehousing, and related uses in this district shall require special use permits to allow such uses to continue, provided that the ratio of special uses to the gross floor area on the site did not exceed those established in the special use permit. In 1991, Tyson Companies, the occupant of the subject property, submitted for a special use permit to establish the following ratios of uses: Page 2 of 9 Building Usage Area - Office 5,600 square feet (6.5%) - Warehouse, interior loading area, small office and lunchroom on mezzanine level 80,400 square feet (93.5%) Total floor area 86,000 square feet (100%) Special use permit 91-011 also established that 43,851 square feet of the subject property would be utilized for parking and loading area with a percentage of parking/loading area to area of principal uses of 50.9%. As approved by the City Council on April 27, 1992, future expansion or modification which complies with these percentages should be allowed. In 2014, Powder Technology took ownership of the property. The property remains under the conditions and approvals of the 1991 special use permit and use expansions and modifications are subject to City review. 2. Overview of Request The Applicant submitted a land use application for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review at the Subject Property. The proposal adds 6,098 square feet of pavement to create an internal drive lane. Landscaped area is proposed to be removed between the two existing parking areas and from a portion of the parking “peninsula” separating the east parking area from the east loading dock. The proposal will connect the two separate halves of the existing parking and loading area to accommodate truck maneuvering and circulation on the site. Proposed Site Plan of Work Area The Applicant’s narrative notes that site conditions require delivery trucks to back into the site directly from Grey Fox Road to access the loading docks. The proposal would allow trucks to enter the site in a forward direction, circulate internally, and back into loading docks entirely on-site. Page 3 of 9 The proposal increases the established parking and loading area of 43,851 square feet by 6,098 square feet, bringing the percentage of parking/loading area to area of principal uses to 58.1%. The drive lane requires the removal of three (3) parking spaces on the site, bringing the total parking spaces on the site to 82 parking spaces. The Applicant is not requesting any changes to the established warehouse or office use areas within the building. An interior office remodel is anticipated in 2026 to accommodate expanded operations at the site. Those changes would not alter the nature or intensity of the approved use. Approvals 1. Conditional Use Permit Arden Hills Zoning Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for warehousing in the I-FLEX Zoning District. Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 lists the general criteria for evaluating CUP applications. The Planning Commission and City Council should consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the owners and occupants of the surrounding land and the community, in general, including but not limited to the following factors: 1. Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; 2. Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics; 3. Drainage; 4. Population density; 5. Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; 6. Adjoining land values; 7. Park dedications where applicable; 8. Orderly development of the neighborhood and the city within the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. Under state law a “conditional use” is a use that is generally allowed in a designated district upon the applicant showing that the standards and criteria stated in the ordinance will be satisfied. Conversely, if the applicant is unable to show that the ordinance standards are met, the application can be denied. Conditions may be added to any approval to ensure that the use does not negatively impact surrounding properties or the public way. The Subject Property is currently regulated by the special use permit and site plan approved in 91- 011. The Applicant is requesting an amendment to the adopted site plan to change the site parking and loading area established in the 91-011 SUP approval. Chapter 13, Zoning Code Section 1355 Administration and Procedures, states an application for amendments to site plans and conditional use permits shall be administered in the same manner as required for a new application. Any structural alteration, enlargement, or intensification change in site plan, or similar change not specially permitted, shall require City Council action and all procedures shall apply as if a new application were being requested. Page 4 of 9 2. Site Plan Review A site plan review and evaluation of site conditions are required as part of the Applicant’s request for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment. The site plan review includes a review of requirements for landscaping and parking as they relate to the zoning district and approved uses. Plan Evaluation The proposal is subject to Zoning Code standards established in Section 1320, District Provisions, Section 1325.05, Design Standards and Section 1325.06, Requirements for Parking, Loading and Circulation. The following evaluation identifies how the Applicant’s proposal addresses where standards are met and/or nonconforming and/or where flexibility is required. Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review 1. District Provisions (I-FLEX District) – Section 1320 Under the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, this site is guided as Light Industrial and Office (IND) on the land use plan and is zoned I-FLEX under the Zoning Code. The Future Land Use designation is for a broad range of light industrial uses such as manufacturing, processing, and warehousing. Compatible uses such as office buildings are also intended for this area. Direction 2040 Comp. Plan Land Use Zoning Existing Land Uses North IND – Light Industrial and Office I-FLEX District Flex Industrial Center South COM – Commercial B-2 General Business District Railroad, Event Center, Parking Lot, Industrial Warehouse East IND – Light Industrial and Office I-FLEX District Industrial Warehouse Warehousing is allowed by a conditional use permit within this district. The table below provides the standards for the I-FLEX District and the preliminary analysis for the principal structure and the site: Ordinance Requirements I-FLEX District Standards Existing Development Proposed Development Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.8 0.31 No change, Complies Maximum Structure Coverage 40% 28.1% No change, Complies Minimum Landscape Lot Area 25% 53.9% 51.76%, Complies Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 feet 136.89 feet No change, Complies Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 feet 49.77 feet No change, Complies Minimum Side Yard Setback 20 feet (min)/ 40 feet (total) 264.17 and 37.39 feet/ 301.56 feet No change, Complies Minimum Lot Area 24,000 square feet 285,226 square feet No change, Complies Maximum Building Height 45 feet 29 feet No change, Complies The proposed will decrease the landscape lot area from 53.9 percent to 51.76 percent, which exceeds the minimum required landscape lot area of 25 percent. With the proposed drive lane, the Page 5 of 9 Subject Property will remain in compliance with the district provisions in the I-Flex Zoning District. 2. Design Standards – Section 1325.05 Landscaping – Meets Requirements A landscaping plan is required for this application because the proposed includes the expansion of an industrial parking lot by at least 5,000 square feet when an approved landscape plan is not on file with the city. The Applicant included a landscaping plan with the current and proposed landscaping conditions with their application materials. Plans show that there are trees along the property’s frontage on Grey Fox Road and there is a wooded area along the west side of the property which provides screening from Snelling Avenue. The proposed landscaped area is 51.76 percent of the total lot area, which exceeds the minimum requirements established for the zoning district. 3. Tree and Landscaping Preservation – Section 1325.055 Tree Removal and Preservation – Meets Requirements The Applicant proposes to remove three trees near the project area, for a total of 46 inches of significant caliper inches of trees, with a proposal to plant 13 trees on site for a total of 31 new caliper inches of new trees. The plan also shows that various dead and nuisance trees will be removed as part of the project landscaping. Section 1325.055 permits up to 10 percent of existing significant trees to be removed without requiring replacement. For significant trees removal above the permitted 10 percent, caliper inches shall be replaced at a ratio of one new caliper inch for every two caliper inches removed. Based on the provided landscaping plans, 4.6 caliper inches could be removed without replacement and the remaining 41.4 caliper inches to be removed would require at least 20.7 caliper inches in replacement trees. Considering the existing tree coverage on the subject property, the Applicant’s proposed plans exceed the minimum requirements for replacement. In a communication with staff, the Applicant shared that given how many trees are within the west wooded area and the difficulty of traversing this part of the lot, the project team determined that the base calculations for tree removal would be limited to the landscaped area adjacent to the building frontage. The property owner is also interested in improving the curb appeal and has proposed to install a more caliper inches of trees than required and to remove additional dead and nuisance trees, which do not require replacement. 4. Section 1325.06 - Requirements for Parking, Loading and Circulation Construction Standards – Meets Requirements The Applicant’s proposal creates a new parking area drive lane to improve circulation on the site. The zoning code requires all off-street parking areas and drives to be improved with a paved surface and the city and the Rice Creek Watershed District require surfacing to be graded and drained to dispose of all surface water accumulation within the area. A concrete curb and gutter are also required. The submitted civil plans show the proposed will meet the standards for surfacing and curbing. Permits from the City and Rice Creek Watershed District are required for the proposed. Page 6 of 9 Off Street Parking Spaces Required – Alternative Standard Proposed There are 85 parking spaces on the site. The Applicant proposes to remove three parking spaces adjacent to the east parking peninsula as part of the new drive lane project, bringing the total parking spaces to 82. The approved uses for the subject property are office and warehousing. The Zoning Code establishes the minimum required off-street parking spaces by use and the table below evaluates the requirements for the Subject Property: Land Use Parking Requirement Required Stalls by Use Total Required Stalls Existing Stalls Proposed Stalls Parking Deficiency Business & Professional Office @ 6.5% or 5,600 sq. ft. 1 for each 250 sq. ft. of floor area 22.4 stalls 102.4 stalls 85 stalls 87 stalls -15.4 stalls Other Business and Industry @ 93.5% warehouse or 80,600 sq. ft. 1 for each 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area 80.4 stalls The Applicant states that the parking required by the zoning code exceeds the parking needs on the subject property. The application includes a request to consider the existing uses as “Uses Not Specifically Noted Including Public Uses,” which allows a minimum parking requirement as determined by the City Council after recommendation by the Planning Commission. As part of their request, the Applicant provided a proof-of-parking plan which shows 87 parking spaces available on the site. The Applicant states that the property provides parking in excess of operational demand. It is noted that current and anticipated operations require 25 parking spaces and that there is minimal visitor traffic. The Applicant requests consideration to approve the subject property with 87 parking stalls. A finding of fact is drafted for the Planning Commission to consider recommending approval of the proposed parking. Traffic and Circulation – Meets Requirements The loading and unloading of delivery trucks is a main feature of the approved operations at the subject property and the Applicant has identified site issues such as safety challenges for drivers, obstructions of the roadway, and traffic congestion along the public road. The proposed is intended to improve circulation on the site and redirect operational traffic from Grey Fox Road onto the subject property, improving operational efficiency. The Zoning Code requires vehicular traffic generated by industrial uses to be channeled and controlled in a manner that will avoid congestion on the public streets and traffic hazards. The proposal is intended to improve traffic circulation conditions both on the subject property and the adjacent public street, Grey Fox Road. Page 7 of 9 Additional Review Building Official The Building Official reviewed the plans and provided no comments. A Building Permit is not required for the proposed. Public Works Director/City Engineer The Public Works Director/City Engineer reviewed the plans and provided no comments. A Grading and Erosion Control Permit is required for the proposed and the standard conditions for approval are included for review. Rice Creek Watershed District The Rice Creek Watershed has been sent the plans but has not provided comments at the time of report drafting. A condition of approval for applicable RCWD permits is included for review. Findings of Fact General Findings: 1. The Applicant is a representative for the owner and occupant of the subject property located at 1300 Grey Fox Road, Arden Hills, MN. 2. The Subject Property is designated as Light Industrial & Office (IND) in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 3. The Subject Property is zoned I-FLEX Zoning District. 4. A warehouse requires a conditional use permit in the I-FLEX District. 5. The Applicant applied for a site plan review and conditional use permit to create an internal drive lane with the addition of 6,098 square feet of pavement at 1300 Grey Fox Road. 6. The Applicant proposes to remove 46 caliper inches of significant trees, to be replaced in accordance with City requirements, and to remove three parking spaces. 7. The Applicant states that the site can support up to 87 parking spaces shown in the proof of parking and that this number exceeds the parking needs for the approved operations at the site, based on the average need of 25 parking spaces. 8. The proposed plan will not result in insufficient parking for the uses permitted under the amended conditional use permit. 9. The proposed plan will not result in the subject property exceeding the maximum impervious surface coverage permitted in the I-FLEX zoning district. 10. The proposed plan is not expected to have significant impact on traffic or parking conditions. The proposed plan is intended to improve traffic circulation conditions both on the subject property and the adjacent public street, Grey Fox Road. 11. The proposed use is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole. 12. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics. 13. The proposed plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code or the Comprehensive Plan for the City. 14. A public hearing is required for a conditional use permit. 15. Property owners within 1000 feet of the subject property were notified of the application as established in city code. Page 8 of 9 Options and Motion Language Staff offers the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission may consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval and should provide findings are part of a motion for denial. Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit • Recommend Approval with Conditions: Move to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-013 for a site plan review and a conditional use permit to create a new drive lane at 1300 Grey Fox Road, based on the findings of fact in the July 8, 2026, Planning Commission report, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the Community Development Director, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The proposed parking area shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 3. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, MnDOT and Ramsey County (i.e. ROW or access) prior to the start of any site activities. 4. The final plans shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer, Building Official, and Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit. 5. Final grading, drainage, utility, and site plans shall be subject to approval by the Public Works Director, City Engineer, and Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit or other development permits. 6. Upon completion of grading and utility work on the site, a grading as-built and utility as-built shall be provided to the City for review. 7. Heavy duty silt fence and adequate erosion control around the entire construction site shall be required and maintained by the Developer during construction to ensure that sediment and storm water does not leave the project site. • Recommend Approval as Submitted: Move to recommend approval of 26-013 for a site plan review and a conditional use permit to create a new drive lane at 1300 Grey Fox Road, based on the findings of fact in the July 8, 2026, Planning Commission report and the submitted plans. • Recommend Denial: Move to recommend denial of 26-013 for a site plan review and a conditional use permit to create a new drive lane at 1300 Grey Fox Road, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. • Table: Move to table Planning Case 26-013 for a site plan review and a conditional use permit to create a new drive lane at 1300 Grey Fox Road: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Public Comments Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on June 26, 2026. Notice was prepared by the City and mailed to property owners within 1000 feet of the subject property. At the time of report drafting, the city had not received public comments on this planning case. Page 9 of 9 Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on May 27, 2026. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the city must act on this request by July 25, 2026 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. Based on the city’s adopted meeting schedule for July, the City is unable to process the planning case within the sixty (60) day timeline and notice was provided to the applicant extending the time period until September 23, 2026 (120 days). With consent of the applicant, the City may extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A. Land Use Application B. Location Map C. Narrative D. Survey E. Civil Plans F. Landscaping Plans G. Proof of Parking Location Map 6/26/2026, 8:57:16 AM 0 0.1 0.20.05 mi 0 0.2 0.40.1 km 1:8,000 Ramsey County Ramsey County MN 6uEMect Property CO 2.5 " B&B 2 GI 2.5 " B&B 5 AN 2" B&B 3 AB 8' BB 3 (1) REINSTALL SALVAGED BOULDER TYP. BURY BOTTOM 1 3 OF BOULDER. (2)REINSTALL SALVAGED BOULDER TYP. BURY BOTTOM 1 3 OF BOULDER. DEAD TREE TYP. SEE CIVIL FOR REMOVALS. SEED ALL AREAS OF DISTURBED SOIL WITH TURF MIX. DEAD TREE TYP. SEE CIVIL FOR REMOVALS. SEED ALL AREAS OF DISTURBED SOIL WITH TURF MIX. EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN TYP. SEE CIVIL FOR TREE REMOVALS EXISTING BUILDING GREY FOX ROAD EXISTING BOULDER TO REMAIN TYP. (NOT SURVEYED) APPROXIMATE EXISTING WOODLAND TREE LINE SYMBOL CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT QTY TREES AB Abies balsamea / Balsam Fir 8' BB 3 AN Amelanchier x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance' / Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry 2" B&B 3 CO Celtis occidentalis / Common Hackberry 2.5 " B&B 2 GI Gleditsia triacanthos inermis 'Skycole' / Skyline® Honey Locust 2.5 " B&B 5 GROUND COVERS TT Tuff Turf Seed Mix hydroseed 3,289 sf PLANT SCHEDULE PT 16" POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE (40 MIL, 1-1/2" WIDE STRAP) (TYPICAL) DOUBLE STRAND 14 GA. WIRE, 2 SPACED EQUALLY AT OPPOSITE SIDES MULCH REFER TO SPECIFICATION) PLANTING SOIL PER SPECIFICATION GROUNDCOVER, PER PLAN TOPSOIL ROOTBALL TO SIT ON SUBGRADE, CUT ALL ROPES AND REMOVE NON-ORGANIC CONTAINERS. IF B&B STOCK, REMOVE BURLAP AND ROPES FROM TOP 1/3RD OF ROOT BALL, CUT WIRE BASKET DOWN TO SECOND HORIZONTAL WIRE FROM THE BOTTOM, AND DISPOSE OF OFF-SITE. IF CONTAINER STOCK, REMOVE CONTAINER SUBGRADE EXPOSE ROOT FLARE BY REMOVING EXCESS SOIL FROM THE TOP OF THE SOIL BALL AND ENSURE THAT THE FIRST MAIN LATERAL ROOT IS WITHIN TWO INCHES OF FINISHED GRADE WITHOUT EXCEEDING FINISHED GRADE 12" MIN 18" MIN 6'-0" STEEL STAKE 4' - 0 " + / - 2' M I N . NOTES: 1.CONIFER TO HAVE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. NO MULCH TO BE IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK. 2.SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING. 3.TWO ALTERNATE METHODS OF TREE STAKING ARE ILLUSTRATED. 4.IT IS THE CONTRACTORS OPTION TO STAKE TREES; HOWEVER, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGHOUT THE GUARANTEE PERIOD. 5.DO NOT PLANT TOO DEEP: EXPOSE TOP OF ROOT FLARE AND PULL MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK. VA R I E S 2' M I N . 18" MIN 6'-0" STEEL STAKE DOUBLE STRAND 14 GA. WIRE, 3'0" @ 120' INTERVALS (TYPICAL) 16" POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE (40 MIL, 1-1/2" WIDE STRAP) (TYPICAL) FLAGGING (ONE PER WIRE) MULCH REFER TO SPECIFICATION PLANTING SOIL, PER SPECIFICATION WOOD OR STEEL STAKE SET AT ANGLE GROUNDCOVER, PER PLAN ROOTBALL TO SIT ON SUBGRADE, CUT ALL ROPES AND REMOVE INORGANIC CONTAINERS SUBGRADE thirty 0'15'30'60' LA N D S C A P E P L A N & D E T A I L S scale: 1" = 30' landscape plan1 A 1.CONFIRM ALL QUANTITIES, SHAPES AND LOCATIONS OF BEDS, AND ADJUST AS REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO THE SITE CONDITIONS. CONFIRM ANY ADJUSTMENTS WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 2.LOCATE ALL UTILITIES. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONFLICTS WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION. 3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE FROM THE SITE ALL SOD/TURF WHICH HAS BEEN REMOVED. 4.ANY PLANT STOCK NOT PLANTED ON DAY OF DELIVERY SHALL BE HEELED IN AND WATERED UNTIL INSTALLATION. PLANTS NOT MAINTAINED IN THIS MANNER WILL BE REJECTED. 5.THE PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE PLANT SCHEDULE IF DISCREPANCIES EXIST. ADVISE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 6.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AVOID DAMAGING EXISTING TREES. DO NOT STORE OR DRIVE HEAVY MATERIALS OVER TREE ROOTS. DO NOT DAMAGE TREE BARK OR BRANCHES. 7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP PAVEMENTS, FIXTURES AND BUILDINGS CLEAN AND UNSTAINED. ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING FACILITIES SHALL BE REPAIRED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. THE PROJECT SITE SHALL BE KEPT CLEAR OF CONSTRUCTION WASTES AND DEBRIS. 8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ANY EXISTING TURFGRASS DAMAGED DURING TREE REMOVALS OR OTHER CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. 9.THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANTING SOIL QUANTITIES TO COMPLETE THE WORK SHOWN ON THE PLAN. MULCH, PLANTING SOIL AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS PLANTING COMPONENTS SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE RELATED PLAN. VERIFY ALL QUANTITIES. 10.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WATERING AND ALL PLANT CARE UNTIL FINAL ACCEPTANCE BY THE OWNER. 11.PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE PROTECTED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL THE INSTALLATION OF PLANTINGS IS COMPLETE, INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND PLANTING IS ACCEPTED EXCLUSIVE OF THE GUARANTEE 12.MAINTENANCE SHALL INCLUDE WATERING, WEEDING, MULCHING, REMOVAL OF DEAD MATERIAL PRIOR TO GROWING SEASON, RE-SETTING PLANTS AND PROPER GRADE, AND KEEPING PLANTS IN A PLUMB POSITION. AFTER ACCEPTANCE, THE OWNER SHALL ASSUME MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES. HOWEVER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTINUE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING THE TREES PLUMB THROUGHOUT THE GUARANTEE PERIOD. 13.WATERING: MAINTAIN A WATERING SCHEDULE WHICH WILL THOROUGHLY WATER ALL PLANTS ONCE A WEEK AND SOD EVERY OTHER DAY UNTIL ACCEPTANCE BY THE OWNER. IN EXTREMELY HOT, DRY WEATHER, WATER MORE OFTEN AS REQUIRED BY INDICATIONS OF HEAT STRESS SUCH AS WILTING LEAVES. CHECK MOISTURE UNDER MULCH PRIOR TO WATERING TO DETERMINE NEED. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE THE NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS FOR WATER. 14.SEE TYPICAL PLANTING DETAILS ON THIS SHEET planting notes ALL LAWN AREA SHALL RECEIVE 4" MIN. COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW MN DOT SPEC. 3877-1A soils notes n SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVALS: 18" SPRUCE, 16" SPRUCE, 12" SPRUCE TOTAL CALIPER INCHES OF SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVALS = 46 MINIMUM TREE REPLACEMENT TOTAL CALIPER INCHES (1:2 RATIO) = 23 PROPOSED TOTAL TREE REPLACEMENT CALIPER INCHES = 31 tree replacement calcs. planting schedule A A A A L1.0 75 5 p r i o r a v e n u e n s u i t e 1 0 3 , s t . p a u l , m n 5 5 1 0 4 65 1 . 3 4 1 . 3 6 1 1 o r 6 5 1 . 2 4 8 . 6 1 5 5 au n e f e r n a n d e z la n d s c a p e a r c h i t e c t s scale: NTS deciduous tree planting typ.2 scale: NTS coniferous tree planting typ.3 Page 1 of 2 PC Agenda Item – 3B MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2026 (Revised 7/7/2026) TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jake Reilly, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case #26-009 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Roers Companies Property Location: 3499 Lexington Avenue N. Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review Requested Action Roers Companies (“The Applicant”), is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master Planned Unit Development (with flexibility), Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review, to redevelop the existing office building property at 3499 Lexington Avenue North, PID 343023110005 (“Subject Property”) to build a 167-unit multi-family market rate apartment building with 300 parking spaces (148 enclosed) . Background 1. Overview of Request The Applicant has submitted a land use application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendments, Master Planned Unit Development (PUD), Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review, to redevelop the approximately six acre site at the corner of Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue North. Catholic United Financial (Catholic Aid Association) owns the subject property which contains an office building constructed in 1974. The project proposer has executed a purchase agreement with the property owner, contingent upon the entitlements process. The property is guided for Community Mixed Use in the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan (2019, as amended). The property was first guided for Community Mixed Use with the adoption of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan (2008) and has been guided for commercial uses since at least the 2020 Comprehensive Plan (1998), with a “Commercial” land use designation. The area is also subject to the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District (2008) which was developed to create a long-term redevelopment plan for the area. Page 2 of 3 The property is zoned B-2 - General Business District. The property to the west is zoned R-4 – Multiple Dwelling Unit District, the property to the north is zoned B-2 – General Business District and the properties to the south are zoned R-3 – Townhouse and Low Density Multiple Dwelling District. The properties to the west and south are used for residential uses and the properties to the north are used for business uses, primarily retail. The Subject Property is accessed by Harriet Avenue to the south. The City Council reviewed a concept plan from the Applicant for a 167-unit apartment building with amenities such as a dog run, pickle ball courts, an outdoor pool, playground, and sidewalk connections on Lexington Avenue (to complete the sidewalk south to Harriet Avenue), Harriet Avenue, and to the Arden Plaza shopping center at the February 9, 2026, City Council work session. The City Council confirmed an expectation that the sidewalk along the west side of Lexington Avenue be constructed to complete the north-south sidewalk to the corner with Harriet Avenue and then provide additional sidewalk from west along the north side of Harriet Avenue from Lexington to the property line with 4 Pine Tree Drive. Council also requested the developer ensure a connection to the north and the Arden Plaza Shopping Center and evaluate the opportunity to ensure that the project offers affordable units. Aerial map of the subject property 2. History of the Subject Property The Subject Property was developed in 1974 as an office building for a financial institution, the Catholic Aid Association (now known as Catholic United Financial). The existing two-story office building is approximately 35,169 square feet with approximately 84,000 square feet of parking and drive areas. In 2000 U.S. Wireless received a special use permit to install a cellular communications antenna on the building (Planning Case 00-002) and in 2002, Catholic Aid Association received a sign standard adjustment via site plan review to allow for a 20 foot sign rather than the permitted 16-foot sign (Planning Case 01-28). Page 3 of 4 Zoning Map of the subject property Future Land Use Map of the subject property Page 4 of 5 Requested Approvals 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Municipal Planning Act (1965), as amended from time to time, establishes the legal foundation for city land use ordinances in Minnesota. State statute ( Minn. Stat. §§ 462.357 – .365) requires that all communities within the seven-county metropolitan area update Comprehensive Plans every ten years. The purpose of a Comprehensive Plan is to ensure the orderly and economic development of the community and establish the policy statements, goals, standards, and maps that guide both public and private future physical, social and economic development. A comprehensive plan lays out a vision for the city’s future land development and land use dictating where growth should occur, the type of growth that is allowed in various areas, and the density or intensity of that growth. Planning Commission and City Council members use comprehensive plans to articulate the basis for its legislative decisions and are required to evaluate development proposals of any kind as compared with adopted comprehensive plan policies. The Comprehensive Plan and all its amendments must reflect the adopted regional policies in the Metropolitan Council’s system and policy plans. Local planning efforts are linked to the larger regional infrastructure of parks and trails, road networks, and wastewater infrastructure, and the City’s plan must conform to the regional vision. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan requires a recommendation from the Planning Commission following a public hearing, and adoption of a resolution by the City Council. Adjacent communities must be given up to 60 days to review and comment on the proposed amendment before it can be reviewed and approved by the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council has the final determination as to whether to allow a CPA or not, though they provide great deference to the city as long as the proposed land use change does not have a negative impact on a regional system (i.e. transportation, sanitary sewer, and regional parks). City of Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan The property was previously guided for commercial uses since at least the 2020 Comprehensive Plan (1998), with a “Commercial” land use designation. It was first guided for Community Mixed Use with the adoption of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan (2008). The 2040 Comprehensive Plan continues the policy direction established in 2008 and guides the site as Community Mixed Use (CMU) with a density of 12 to 20 units per acre and a development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR. The Community Mixed Use designation also sets expectations for a share of uses within this area are as follows: 10% to 50% Light Industrial; 10% to 70% Retail; 10% to 70% Office; and 10% to 50% Residential. The table below shows the development intensity expected in each of those planning documents based on the future land use and the description of that land use category, based on data that would have been available at the time the plan was prepared. Page 5 of 6 Plan Year (adopted) Existing Land Use Future Land Use Development Intensity/Density 2040 (2019) OFC - Office CMU – Community Mixed Use Areas designated for a broad range of retail, shopping, services, and office space to meet the needs of the community and surrounding areas. This area may also include medium to high density housing with a potential density of three to 20 units/acre. 3-20 units/acre 87 - 385 workers 1 2030 (2008) OFC - Office CMU – Community Mixed Use Areas designated for a broad range of retail, shopping, services, and office space to meet the needs of the community and surrounding areas. This area may also include medium to high density housing with a potential density of three to 20 units/acre. 3-20 units/acre 66 - 331 workers 2 2020 (1998) OFC - Office C – Commercial Areas designated for a broad range of retail shopping and services to meet the needs of the community. Compatible uses such as office buildings are also intended for this area. 20 - 480 workers 3 The area is also subject to the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District (2008) which was developed to create a long-term redevelopment plan for the area. The guiding principles for that plan included the following: • Place: Create a visual impression that the B-2 District is a distinct, identifiable and • special place in Arden Hills. • Land Uses: Allow and encourage a variety of land uses in the district potentially including retail and service businesses, offices, high-density housing, places to eat and drink, industry that has high employment density and attractive buildings, education and indoor recreation. • Intensity and Scale: As redevelopment occurs, generally increase the height of the buildings and amount of each site they cover. • Local: Create a district that serves the needs and desires of residents of Arden Hills. • Quality: Ensure that all private and public improvements are of a high quality in terms of appearance, function and longevity. 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration Summary Table B2 Building Characteristics (2018). Accessed June 25, 2026. 2 U.S. Energy Information Administration Summary Table B2 (2003). Accessed June 25, 2026. 3 U.S. Energy Information Administration Buildings Characteristics (1995). Accessed June 25, 2026. Page 6 of 7 • Civic: Communicate that the district is “everybody’s neighborhood” and a center of public life in Arden Hills (a distinction perhaps to be shared with the redeveloped TCAAP site) through the use of public plazas or open space, small private spaces usable by the public, improved sidewalks and streetscape. • Movement: Provide for safe and efficient auto movement as land use intensifies but also greatly improve the environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. • Green: Provide year-round greenery and color throughout the district through generous landscaping of private sites and the public street edges. Add one or more green gathering spaces in the corridor. Improve the public’s use of the Country Insurance woods, its intended purpose. • Role of the City: Establish the primary role of the City in the district as planning, leadership, zoning and public improvements. Do not rule out the application of municipal financial assistance in land redevelopment. • Continuity: Maintain long-term support for the principles and policies of the Guiding Plan for the B2 District throughout the entire Arden Hills family including elected and appointed officials and staff. • Environmental Conservation and Sustainability: Promote the use of green building practices, sustainability, and energy conservation to reduce the environmental impact of new development and redevelopment. Guiding Plan for the B-2 District Study area Page 7 of 8 2. Zoning Code Amendments Municipal zoning codes are regulations adopted by ordinance through which the policy directions and land use goals in the Comprehensive Plan are implemented. The zoning code must not conflict with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and for this proposed project a related change to the zoning code is needed. The change to the zoning code proposed is to amend Section 1320.06 District Requirements Chart to increase 5. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from 0.8 to 1.0 in the B-2 District and 9. PUD & SUP Maximum Dwelling Unit Density Per Net Acre from 20 units to 25 units, shown below. Requirement B-2 District Standards as existing and proposed Maximum Floor Area Ratio 0.8 1.0 PUD & SUP Maximum Dwelling Unit Density Per Net Acre 2025 units In addition, this project must comply with Section 1320.16 - Requirements for Affordable Housing. The Applicant, in exchange for providing 17 units (10%) at a rental rate that is affordable to those households making approximately 80% of the Area Median Income, is eligible for and has requested a density bonus of 25% more units, for a total potential number of units per acre of 30. The project as proposed has a net density of 29.5 units per acre (167 units on a 5.66 acre site). 3. Master and Final Planned Unit Development Section 1320.085 Special Requirements for the B-2 General Business District states that new developments and redevelopments must follow the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. The Applicant has applied concurrently for Master and Final Planned Unit Development for this project. Flexibility from established standards can be requested through this process. The project as a multi-family residential structure requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and the Applicant has asked for flexibility through the PUD process including modifications to the established criteria (conditions) for multi-family buildings, described below. 2. Conditional Use Permit A “Dwelling: multiple family” (multiple family dwelling) is a conditional use in the B-2 General Business District. City Code Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the general criteria for evaluating a CUP. The Planning Commission and City Council should consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the owners and occupants of the surrounding land and the community, in general, including but not limited to the following factors: a) Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; b) Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics; c) Drainage; d) Population density; Page 8 of 9 e) Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; f) Adjoining land values; g) Park dedications where applicable; h) Orderly development of the neighborhood and the city within the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. City Code Section 1325.045 Multi-family Dwelling Units Additional Conditional Use Permit Criteria establishes eight criteria specific to multi-family dwelling units: Subd. 1 Minimum Unit Size. Efficiency units shall be a minimum of five hundred and fifty (550) square feet; one-bedroom units shall be a minimum of seven hundred (700) square feet; two-bedroom units shall be a minimum of nine hundred and fifty (950) square feet; and three-bedroom units shall be a minimum of twelve hundred (1,200) square feet. For each additional bedroom, an additional one hundred and fifty (150) square feet is required. Garages, breezeways, common hallways, balconies, and porch floor spaces shall not be credited in determining the required floor area of units. Subd. 2 Security Plan Component. A complete security plan shall be submitted at the time of the development proposal, subject to the approval of the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department Subd. 3 Lighting Plan Component. A complete photometric plan shall be submitted in compliance with the recommendations of the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department. Compliance with this requirement shall be in addition to any maximum lighting requirements, as described elsewhere in the City's Zoning Code. Subd. 4 Parking. A minimum of one enclosed parking stall shall be provided per dwelling unit. Enclosed parking structures shall be attached to at least one of the principal structures to which parking is being provided. Subd. 5 Common Area. Common area devoted to recreation or leisure activities shall be provided. Common area must include a combination of both indoor and outdoor space. Subd. 6 Efficiency Apartments. The number of efficiency units in a multiple dwelling shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the total number of apartments. Subd. 7 Bicycle Parking. Enclosed bicycle parking shall be provided at a rate of .5 spaces for every dwelling unit. Subd. 8 Window coverings. All windows which are visible to the outside shall be provided with window treatments. Window treatments shall be consistent throughout each multi-family dwelling structure or development. 4. Site Plan Review A site plan review is required for new development or additions in any business, industrial or multiple family zoning districts, for PUDs, and CUPs. The applicant submitted all Page 9 of 10 required elements for site plan review including an ownership report, a survey, all required site plan elements as described in Appendix A of the City’s Code of Ordinances, lighting/photometric plan, drainage plan and stormwater treatment plan, utilities plan, . landscape plan, signage plan, building plans (90%), tree preservation plan, traffic study, and safety plan. In addition, the applicant provided a shadow study to show the potential impacts of the proposed building on neighboring structures for both the summer equinox (the longest day of the year) and the winter equinox (the shortest day of the year and the time of year when there is likely to be the least amount of natural cover/shade). Plan Evaluation Section 1345.04 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Consistency In the granting of conditional use permits for medium- and high-density residential uses and business or industrial uses the council shall first find that the proposed development is in compliance with the adopted comprehensive development plan and the Zoning Map for Arden Hills, both in terms of the various policy statements and the site location set forth therein. If such proposal is not in compliance with the comprehensive development plan and zoning map, a comprehensive plan amendment and zoning map amendment application must accompany the application for a conditional use permit. Pursuant to the above, the Applicant has made a concurrent application for comprehensive plan amendment, zoning map amendment and conditional use permit as evaluated below. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review 1. Section 6.4.10, Development Capacity and Net Residential Density The Applicant has requested an amendment to the existing language in Chapter 6, Land Use Section 6.4.10. The Applicant is requesting a comprehensive plan amendment to Chapter 6 – Land Use in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to change the density range and Floor Area Ratio for the Community Mixed Use land use as shown: 10. Community Mixed Use (CMU) – areas designated for a broad range of retail, shopping, services, and office space to meet the needs of the community and surrounding areas. This area may also include high density housing with a potential density of twelve (12) to twenty (20) thirty (30) units per acre. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 10% to 50% Light Industrial; 10% to 70% Retail; 10% to 70% Office; and 10% to 50% Residential. A development intensity of up to 0.8 1.0 FAR may be allowed. (p. 6-14). The Future Land Use designation of Community Mixed Use allows densities of 12 to 20 units per acre and a Floor Area Ratio of 0.8. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required for development density and development intensity for floor area ratio. When determining density for a proposed development net acreage for the site must be used. Net residential acreage is calculated by subtracting wetlands, water bodies, public parks, arterial streets, and identified natural resources that are protected by ordinance from gross acres. The Subject Property does not contain water bodies, public parks, arterial streets, or identified natural resources that are protected by ordinance from gross acres but does Page 10 of 11 include a portion of a one acre wetland/stormwater retention pond, trees, and other vegetation in the northeast corner of the property. This area is approximately 19,000 square feet on the site. At 20 units per acre, approximately 8.35 net acres would be required for a 167-unit development. As proposed, a Comprehensive Plan amendment to Chapter 6 Section 6.4.10, Development Capacity and Net Residential Density is required for this development. Density Calculation Total Site Acreage 6.0 Total Wetland Acreage 0.44 Net Acres 5.66 Proposed Units 167 Density (Units/Net Acres) 29.5 The table below shows the existing and proposed percentages of light industrial, retail, office and residential uses in the area guided for CMU in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Existing Proposed Land Use Square feet Percent Square feet Percent Light Industrial 437,342 10 437,342 10 Retail 1,176,991.2 26 1,176,991.2 26 Office 2,121,372 47 1,874,822.4 42 Residential 746,618.4 17 993,168 22 Total 4,482,324 100 4,482,324 100 The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent and purpose of the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The city’s 2040 Land Use Plan Goal is to develop and maintain a land use pattern that strengthens the vitality, quality, and character of our residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, and industrial areas while protecting the community’s natural resources and developing a sustainable pattern for future development. This application meets the adopted policies associated with the land use goal including to, “evaluate and amend the land use regulations to achieve the highest possible development standards, support and vital mix of land uses, and promote flexible approaches to implement the Comprehensive Plan.” This proposal also has the potential to support policies associated with, “preserving the stability and quality of the city’s neighborhoods while allowing for redevelopment that is complementary to existing development.” By adding more land dedicated to residential uses to the area guided for Community Mixed Use this project moves the area closer to the desired share of land uses and helps to diversify land uses to provide a balanced mix of uses. The city’s adopted Housing Goal is, “Develop and maintain a strong, vital, diverse and stable housing supply for all members of the community.” In the housing chapter the following policies support this proposal: • Promote the development of a variety of housing options by preserving and increasing high-quality housing opportunities that are suitable for a mix of ages, incomes and household types. Page 11 of 12 • Encourage the incorporation of affordable and life-cycle housing into new development and redevelopment where feasible. • Preserve and strengthen the community’s neighborhoods to maintain a high quality of life for residents. As stated in the housing chapter, “…providing long-term opportunities for new housing is important to the ongoing vitality of the community and to retaining Arden Hills’ reputation as a highly desirable place to live.” One component of strengthening a community’s vitality and providing stability and quality of neighborhoods is providing sufficient supply of homes for people to live in and by increasing the city’s overall net tax capacity. Both of these outcomes provide economic benefit to the community at large including: local retail establishments are potentially benefited through residents’ spending money on goods and services provided by local establishments; property owners are more likely than not to see a potential reduction in the overall individual property tax burden. The site has an existing taxable market value of $2,180,600. Based on an evaluation of similar properties developed on similar sites in suburban Ramsey County in the last four years, when redeveloped the site is more likely than not to have an estimated taxable market value at or above $40,000,000. Increasing the city’s net tax capacity is a key component of the Economic and Redevelopment Goal in Chapter 8 of the Comprehensive Plan. This private development project, which seeks no financial support, aligns with the following policies: • Engage the private sector to encourage development and redevelopment projects that are beneficial to the City and identify incentives or programs where applicable that promote private sector investment. • Capitalize on existing community strengths, such as location, freeway access, and a well-educated population. • Identify incentives or programs that provide housing choice. Planning staff reviewed the proposed amendments with Metropolitan Council staff who indicated support for the request. If approved, and after the expiration of a required 60-day review period for adjacent jurisdictions (including but not limited to surrounding municipalities, counties and school districts), Staff will submit the amendment to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval. Zoning Code Amendment Regulations Review Section 1320 - District Provisions (B-2 General Business District) Subd. 7. B-2 General Business District identifies the purpose of this zoning district as intended: • To be a place in which people can live, work and play. • To create a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly community with a distinct identity. • To provide a connected sidewalk system and places for people to gather and socialize. • To implement design standards to promote an attractive environment with lasting and sustainable value. Page 12 of 13 • To group compatible retail and service business uses that tend to draw trade that is naturally interchangeable and promotes business prosperity. • To provide an adequate supply of businesses and professional service areas to meet the needs of the residents. • To minimize the effects of traffic congestion, noise, odor, glare and similar safety problems. • To implement the Plan known as the "Guiding Plan for the B2 District," which was adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2008. The Applicant has requested an amendment to the Section 1320.06 District Requirements Chart as shown below. The Applicant states the amendments are necessary to construct the project. Based on earlier conversations with the City Council and with the property owner and broker, this site is highly sought after as a multi-family site given its proximity to retail, commercial and employment uses. Office space of this type and variety has limited appeal to the market. Densities greater than 20 units per acre also respond to market conditions and concerns given the cost of labor, materials, construction. Since the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code were adopted and/or amended since 2019 the housing market has changed significantly. In recent history the city has considered applications for residential densities up to 24 units per acre. In January 2024 the Council amended the city’s Comprehensive Plan to allow up to 24 units per acre in the area east of Interstate 35W, south of County State Aid Highway 96, west of Snelling Avenue North and north of interstate 694. The Comprehensive Plan states that the density may be increased by up to 100% through the use of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process if the intent is to meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. For context in the City of Arden Hills overall, the TCAAP Redevelopment Code, Master Plan and the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identify a range of allowed residential densities between 21 and 67 units per acre in the areas guided for residential and mixed residential/commercial development at Rice Creek Commons. Direction 2040 Comp. Plan Land Use Zoning Existing Land Uses North CMU – Community Mixed Use B-2 – General Business Retail shopping center South LDR – Low Density Residential R-3 – Townhouse and Low Density Multiple Dwelling District Attached and detached single-family homes East N/A N/A Right-of-Way (Lexington Avenue N) West HDR – High Density Residential R-4 – Multiple Dwelling District Residential condominiums Conditional Use Permit Application Review Section 1320 - District Provisions (B-2 General Business District) Multiple family dwellings require a CUP in the B-2 district. The table below provides the required standards for the B-2 District and the preliminary analysis for the proposed development of the principal structure and the site. Zoning codes establish lot standards for Page 13 of 14 a variety of reasons, including to ensure there is enough space for utility easements, driveways, stormwater drainage; to ensure developments do not exceed the capacity of wastewater systems; to provide keep the overall mass of buildings proportional to the land beneath them and to minimize stormwater runoff. These metrics taken together limit the size, scale, massing, location, and intensity of a development on a property. In considering the feasibility of a site for multi-family development, the dwelling units per acre is the single most important number when evaluating whether a residential project is financially feasible. As shown in the table, the project as proposed has a floor area ratio of 0.96, a minimum lot area per unit of approximately 1,400 square feet and an anticipated number of units per acre of 29.5. The Applicant has requested a zoning code amendment to allow up to 25 units per acre in a PUD combined with the 25% density bonus for providing affordable units established in Section 1320.16 – Requirements for Affordable Housing for a total potential number of units per acre of 30. Ordinance Requirements B-2 District Standards Application Maximum Floor Area Ratio 0.8 0.96 Maximum Structure Coverage 45% 22% Minimum Landscape Lot Area 20% 35.4% Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 feet 50 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 feet 50 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback 10-20 feet 35 – 75 feet Minimum Lot Area (per dwelling unit) 2,178 sq. ft. ~1,400 sq. ft. Maximum Building Height 50 feet 49 ft. 1.5 in. PUD & SUP Maximum Dwelling Unit Density Per Net Acre 20 units 29.5 units Chapter 6 outlines how the City Code includes PUD regulations that allow for higher quality and compatible development of property by encouraging reasonable flexibility from applicable standards, including at higher densities than would be allowed under the underlying zoning district and/or guided land use designation. Maximum Floor Area Ratio – Zoning Code Amendment requested. A floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.8 is permitted within the B-2 zoning district. The proposed development has a FAR of 0.98. Floor area ratio is a density metric like units per acre, but it is designed to control the bulk or mass of a structure on a site. It is calculated by dividing a building’s total floor area across all stories by the buildable area of the lot. An FAR of Page 14 of 15 1.0 means building a total amount of floor space equal to the lot size. For example, a single story covering the entire buildable area or two stories covering half, or three covering a third. On a 10,000-square-foot lot with a FAR of 1.5 a 15,000 square foot building could be constructed spread across however many stories the height limit allows. In this case, the height limit is 50 feet, the lot is 5.66 acres of buildable area, and the FAR is 0.8. Applicant is requesting a change in the city’s zoning code to allow for up to a 1.0 FAR. The table below shows an example of the potential on the site given the existing FAR, the minimum lot area per dwelling unit, the maximum building height and the total number of units/acre possible on the site today compared with the application. B-2 District Standards Allowed Application Floor Area Ratio 0.8 197.549.6 SF 249,944 SF 0.96 Minimum Lot Area (per dwelling unit) 2,178 sq. ft. 113 units 167 units ~1,400 sq. ft. Maximum Building Height (stories) 50 feet 5 stories 4 stories 49 ft. 1.5 in. Units 20/acre ~23/floor ~42/floor 29.5/acre 1320.085 Special Requirements for the B-2 General Business District As described in the Zoning Code, the B-2 General Business District encompasses a primary gateway into the City. The aesthetic and transportation impacts from new developments and redevelopments must be evaluated to help ensure the long-term viability and success of the B-2 District. Accomplishing the purpose of the B 2 District requires particular concern for the design of buildings, site features (such as landscaping, lighting, and signage), site layout, building materials, site design, and other related design elements. To that end, new development and redevelopment shall conform to the standards in this and related zoning requirements. The "Guiding Plan for the B2 District" shall act as a guide for development but is not part of the Zoning Code. The Guiding Plan is adopted as a component of the city’s Comprehensive Plan and as such guides the decision-making process. In reviewing and approving land use applications, the City Council shall make the final determination on the compatibility and consistency with all provisions in this and related sections of the Zoning Ordinance. This section of the code requires new construction, redevelopment of a site, and significant modifications to existing sites to use the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. The PUD proposal shall identify any requested modifications from the applicable zoning requirements and from the "Guiding Plan for the B2 District" as well as the reasons why the modifications would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the purpose of the B-2 District. The code also states that provisions in this Section may be modified by the City Council to allow planning flexibility without the need for a variance to encourage cooperative dialogue between the applicant and the City. The code identifies Page 15 of 16 that the following land uses are not compatible with the stated purpose of the B-2 District and shall be prohibited: 1. Individual retail businesses larger than 50,000 square feet except for Sports and Fitness Clubs. 2. Open sales, rental or storage lots, including but not limited to cars, buses, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, recreational vehicles, trailers, boats, mobile homes, machinery, lumber, building materials, and similar items. Approved open air garden centers shall be exempt. 3. Mini storage facilities; 4. Tattoo parlors; 5. Consumer Small Loan establishments; 6. Outdoor bulk storage buildings, including but not limited to, forest, metal, concrete, agricultural and petroleum products, chemicals and similar products; and, 7. Manufacturing or processing that generates hazardous waste without a valid Hazardous Waste Generator's license from the Ramsey County Public Health Department. This project does not contemplate any of the above uses. Other uses allowed by right (no conditional use permit required) in the B2-General Business District include medical offices/clinic, sports and fitness club, indoor commercial recreation, daycare, bank, funeral home/mortuary, restaurants and retail. Those allowed after obtaining a conditional use permit include dog kennel, hotel/motel, micro-brewery/distiller, drive-through window. 1320.14 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay District The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) District is to promote the development of land in a unified manner by treating the entire development as a single entity and relaxing the strict application of standard zoning and subdivision requirements, in exchange for a project that better forwards the goals and purpose of the City's Comprehensive Plan. While PUD's may be allowed in any district, they are required for some types of development in certain districts. As described above, development and redevelopment in the B-2 District requires a PUD. Further, if a zoning change is required to accommodate the uses or general intensity of development in the PUD, an application for a Zoning District change shall be made concurrently with the PUD application and, if approved, the Zoning Map shall be changed both as to the underlying zoning district and designation as a PUD district. The Applicant has complied with this provision. The Applicant will be required to provide either land or a cash contribution in lieu of land dedication. The City Council determines whether the land or a fee is required. Section 11230.08 Public Use Dedications identifies the requirements. For a residential project that has a proposed density of greater than eight units per acre, the parkland dedication required is 20 percent of the land area or a per unit fee of $6,500 for a potential total park dedication fee of $1,085,500. 1320.16 Requirements for Affordable Housing. Page 16 of 17 This is a new multifamily residential development creating 20 or more dwelling units and is therefore subject to this section of code. The Applicant has confirmed that 10% of the units – or 17 will be affordable to those making 80% of the Area Median Income. The table below shows the 2026 affordable rent limits for various household sizes and income levels as established in June. For context, the Area Median Income for the entire Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is $131,500. This information is based on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) area median income (AMI) calculations. Other options for developments subject to this section are shown below: Options (Choose one) Affordability Standard Maximum Household Income Minimum % of Units 1 Ext. low income 30% AMI 5% 2 Very low income 50% AMI 5% 3 Low income 60% AMI 7.5% 4 Workforce housing 80% AMI 10% There are provisions associated with parking, unit location and integration and design standards. The Applicant has indicated all those provisions will be met within the development as proposed. To offset the costs of providing affordable housing without public subsidy, developments meeting the requirements of this section are eligible for regulatory incentives. In this case the Applicant has requested a Density Bonus as provided in this code section. The Applicant may also qualify for a reduction in the minimum lot size of 25%. That would allow for a minimum lot size of 1,633.5 square feet. The Applicant has requested a minimum lot size of approximately 1,400 square feet. Section 1325.045 Multi-family Dwelling Units Additional Conditional Use Permit Criteria Subd. 1 Minimum Unit Size – Flexibility requested The City Code sets minimum unit size based on the type of unit within the multi-family dwelling. The Applicant is proposing one- two- and three-bedroom units. One-bedroom Page 17 of 18 units must be a minimum of 700 square feet, two- bedroom units must be a minimum of 950 square feet, and three-bedroom units must be a minimum of 1,200 square feet. The Applicant proposes a minimum unit size of 663 square feet for one-bedroom units, not to exceed 20% of the units in the building. Other unit sizes meet or exceed the minimum requirements listed above. The Applicant is requesting a modification of Subd. 1 Minimum Unit Size for a portion of the one-bedroom units. The minimum one-bedroom unit size is 700 square feet, and the proposal includes 32 units (19% of the total number of units or 46% of the one-bedroom units) at 663 square feet. Subd. 2 Security Plan – Under Review The Applicant has included a detailed security plan in the application. The Ramsey County Sherrif’s Office is reviewing the security plan. Security will include surveillance cameras in common areas, exterior areas, surface lots, and underground garages. Controlled access will be used for entrances into the building. Exterior portions of the site will be illuminated through the fixtures shown on the lighting plan. Subd. 3 Lighting Plan Component Lighting meets the standards within Section 1325.05. Subd. 4 Parking – Flexibility requested A minimum of one enclosed parking stall shall be provided per unit. Enclosed parking structures shall be attached to at least one of the principal structures to which parking is provided. Parking is reviewed below along with the request to modify the requirement for a 1:1 ratio of units to enclosed parking spaces established in the City Code. Subd. 5 Common Area Common area devoted to recreation or leisure activities shall be provided. Common area must include a combination of both indoor and outdoor space. The Applicant lists features and amenities in the narrative that are both indoor and outdoor. These include an indoor community room and an outdoor patio and pool, an area for dogs to exercise, playground equipment, and pickleball courts. Subd. 6 Efficiency Apartments The number of efficiency units in a multiple dwelling shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the total number of apartments. No efficiency apartments are proposed. Subd. 7 Bicycle Parking Enclosed bicycle parking shall be provided at a rate of 0.5 spaces for every dwelling unit. Bicycle parking is reviewed above. The applicant is providing 150 bicycle parking stalls for a ratio of 0.9 stalls per unit. Subd. 8 Window Coverings All windows which are visible to the outside shall be provided with window treatments. Window treatments shall be consistent throughout each multi-family dwelling structure or development. The Applicant has stated an intent to comply with the provision Page 18 of 19 requiring window coverings. Compliance with the requirements for window coverings will be done as part of an inspection of the building once construction has begun. Section 1325.05 - Design Standards The Applicant has provided information that demonstrates the design standards for landscaping, drainage, wetlands, and flood plain, lighting, and screening are met. Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts Additional design standards are applied to projects proposed in the B-2 and B-3 districts. The purpose of these additional design standards is to promote a high level of architectural, landscaping, and site design in the business districts of Arden Hills. The City seeks to create a unified, harmonious, and high-quality environment to foster a distinct, positive, and successful image for the City. Buildings within the B-2 zoning district are subject to requirements regarding exterior materials. Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts establish additional design standards to promote a high level of architectural, landscaping, and site design in the business districts of Arden Hills. The city seeks to create a unified, harmonious, and high-quality environment to foster a distinct, positive, and successful image for the city. Established in the code are standards for exterior materials, building design, window and door openings, building color, fences, site furnishings and seating areas, screening, landscaping, parking, a requirement to provide a traffic study, lighting, pedestrian and bicycle circulation and bicycle parking and a drainage/water management plan. The code also states that the city encourages the use of green materials and environmentally friendly construction and site design such as the use of pervious surfaces, green rooftops, energy efficient materials, LEED standards, and other green building techniques. The code does not require these actions. The Applicant is proposing a mix of brick veneer, castfit stone, fiber cement panels, vertical metal siding, wood tone fiber cement lap siding, vinyl patio doors and windows, and metal accent features. Approximately 30% of the façade materials facing a public street are shown as windows/glazing. The first floor is distinct from others as described in the design standards. At least 75% of the exterior building materials are of brick masonry, tile masonry, natural stone (or synthetic equivalent), decorative concrete plank, transparent glass or any combination thereof. The plans do not include any EIFS or stucco on any façade. The table below evaluates the building design standards and landscaping standards, as evaluated later in the report. Design standard B-2 District Standards Proposed Development “Enduring timeless and well-detailed: exterior materials 75% 75% EIFS At least 12 feet above ground Not proposed Front setback location 50% of building at front setback 50 feet Façade articulation 20-40 feet 20-40 feet Residential façade transparency 20% facing public street 30% Bright/contrasting colors 5% maximum 4% (white) Page 19 of 20 Design standard B-2 District Standards Proposed Development Landscaping - Planting Islands 10% of parking area 11% of parking area Landscaping – Tree Mitigation 458.7 caliper inches required for replacement 808.75 caliper inches proposed for replacement Landscaping – Boulevard and Island Trees Boulevard Trees – 38 Island Trees – 14 Boulevard Trees – 38, Existing Vegetation Island Trees – 24 Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation Provide circulation plan and bike rack Bicycle parking provided for residents 0.9 bike spaces per unit The Zoning Code requires that direction of lighting to be arranged away from adjoining lots and public streets, that lighting sources be concealed or hooded, and intensity of lighting any light or combination of lights shall not cast light that exceeds a meter reading of one foot candle on the travel lanes of adjoining public streets or 0.4 foot candles on adjoining residential property. For non-residential uses visible from residentially zoned property, the Code limits lighting to a maximum of 25% percent of the facade visible from such residential property to be illuminated by direct lighting from spotlights or flood lights. The proposed lighting plan includes wall mounted building lighting, flush-mounted lights, and light poles that are downward cast with 90-degree cut offs. The Applicant is also proposing pole lights placed throughout the parking lot. The Applicant has submitted a photometric plan that shows the submitted lighting package is consistent with the City Code. Section 1325.055 - Tree and Landscaping Preservation Arden Hills has a commitment to environmental sustainability and development that preserves and enhances the community through tree preservation and mitigation strategies. The submitted Tree Preservation and Landscaping plans are evaluated below. Subd. 2. Tree Preservation Plan The proposed site plan shows a landscaped area of 87,324.6 square feet, 35.4 percent of the Subject Property. Landscaped area will consist of ponding areas, tree, grass, and shrub plantings as well as rock mulch, all of which are permitted types of landscaping. Section 1320.06 – District Requirements Chart requires all uses in the B-2 Zoning District maintain a minimum landscaped area of 25 percent and the proposed exceeds this requirement. Of the total landscaped area, the Applicant proposes to plant 9,888.63 square feet, 11.3 percent, with perennials and/shrubberies. Section 1325.05 – Design Standards requires at least 10 percent of the total landscaped area shall be covered with perennials and/or shrubbery and the proposed complies. In parking lots, planting islands are required to break up expanses of hard-surface parking, identify rows of parking, and provide safe and efficient traffic movement. The landscaping plans show 17 parking islands which occupy 6,974.05 square feet of the 59,482.94 square foot parking area. At 11.7 percent, the proposed parking island area meets the requirement. Twenty-one trees are proposed within the parking islands, although some parking islands do not include a tree. Section 1325.05 requires planting islands to be edged with concrete Page 20 of 21 curbs, be a minimum of 150 square feet in area, and include at least one tree. The Planning Commission may consider if the proposed plans meet these minimum requirements or if flexibility is required for the proposed distribution of parking island trees. Section 1325.055 – Tree and Landscaping Preservation permits up to 10 percent of existing significant trees to be removed without requiring replacement. For significant trees removal above the permitted 10 percent, caliper inches shall be replaced at a ratio of one new caliper inch for every two caliper inches removed. Staff reviewed the Applicant’s plans and found they propose to remove 1,055.08 caliper inches of 1,376.3 caliper inches of existing significant trees, meaning the Applicant is responsible for mitigation of 917.45 caliper inches removed above 10 percent. The Applicant intends to plant the 487.5 caliper inches required based on the total inches removed and the rate of replacement. The proposed tree mitigation plan exceeds the minimum requirement of 458.7 caliper inches replacement trees. The Applicant is also subject to a minimum caliper inch requirement of one caliper inch per 320 gross square footage of all floors of the building and a percentage of trees of various caliper inches given the building height. The landscaping plans show 321.25 caliper inches of existing trees will remain, and 487.5 caliper inches of new trees in line with the required percentages will be planted, for a total of 808.75 caliper inches on the site. With a building gross square footage of 190,094 square feet, the Applicant is required to show at least 619 caliper inches, which the plans address. The minimum tree size at time of planting shall be 2.5 caliper inches for deciduous trees and the percentage of trees planted of various caliper inches shall meet the requirements of the table provided. The landscaping plan currently states trees ranging from 2.5 caliper inches to 4.5 caliper inches will be planted on the site. The landscape plan notes the Applicant proposes to plant 30 trees along the Subject Property’s street frontage, which includes 586.6 feet of frontage along Harriet Avenue and 445.7 feet Lexington Avenue. Staff found that 29 trees are shown as proposed along the frontage. Section 1325.05 – Design Standards requires a minimum of one tree be provided along the right-of-way for every 50 feet of public street frontage, with new developments in the B-2 Zoning District requiring a minimum of one tree for every 40 feet of public frontage. A minimum of 26 trees would be required for the property’s frontage, and the proposed 29 trees would exceed this requirement. The minimum tree size at time of planting shall be 2.5 caliper inches for deciduous trees and the percentage of trees planted of various caliper inches shall meet the requirements of the table provided. The landscaping plan currently states trees of two caliper inches will be planted on the site. The submitted plans show plantings within drainage and utility easements. These plantings must be moved outside of the easements. The City Code requires a minimum of one tree be provided along the right-of-way for every 50 feet of public street frontage. The Subject Property survey shows the northern property along County Highway 96, Snelling Avenue North, and State Highway 10. Both the frontages along County Highway 96 and Snelling Avenue North are heavily vegetated. Page 21 of 22 Additional frontage along State Highway 10 is currently less vegetated and will be impacted by construction. The Applicant is proposing 38 trees along 398 feet of abutting right-of-way that will be disturbed. Section 1325.06 Requirements for Parking, Loading, and Circulation & Section 1325.07 Performance Standards– Flexibility Requested Requirements for Parking, Loading, and Circulation in Section 1325.06 and the Performance Standards in Section 1325.07 are met; however flexibility has been requested regarding the number of required enclosed parking stalls as evaluated below. Based on comments received from the public additional detail is provided for the performance standards associated with the traffic study and site circulation and pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Section 1325.06, establishes the number of required parking spaces. Multiple family dwellings require 1.1 per efficiency and 1 bedroom dwelling units and 2 for each 2+ bedroom dwelling unit. In addition to these standards, multiple family dwellings that require a CUP shall provide a minimum of one enclosed parking stall per dwelling unit. Enclosed parking structures shall be attached to at least one of the principal structures to which parking is provided. With 167 units, the multiple family dwelling is required to provide 273 stalls and 167 of those stalls must be in an enclosed parking structure that is attached to the principal structure. The Applicant is proposing 300 parking stalls for the multifamily dwelling use, 148 of which would be located in the underground parking facility. Units Unit Counts Required Stalls Number of Stalls Provided by Units Total Number of Stalls Provided Parking Surplus 1-bedroom units (1.1 stalls) 69 76 76 300 +28 2 or more bedrooms (2 stalls) 98 196 196 Total 167 272 272 The Applicant has requested modification of the requirement to provide one enclosed parking stall per dwelling unit. Unit count Enclosed Stalls Required Enclosed Stalls Provided Flexibility requested 167 167 148 -19 enclosed Page 22 of 23 Traffic Study and Site Circulation – Under Review The applicant provided a third-party traffic study (Attachment G). The traffic study demonstrates that there will be no markedly different traffic generated by the site from the existing condition and identifies ways to ensure the change to the site layout are sensitive to potential neighborhood concerns. Draft conditions of approval are included for the Commission’s consideration. At the time of writing this report, the application is still under review of the Public Works Director/City Engineer as well as Ramsey County. If comments were received regarding the traffic study, city staff may recommend incorporating additional conditions. Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation – Meets Requirements The Applicant has stated that this project will include sidewalks around the proposed apartment building. A sidewalk will be extended along the southern property line on Harriet Avenue and will extend north on Lexington Avenue to meet with the existing sidewalk. Additional sidewalks will be installed to facilitate a pedestrian connection to the Arden Plaza shopping center to the north in addition to sidewalks internal to the site. The Applicant is proposing bicycle parking as part of this development within the underground parking. City Code requires multifamily dwellings that require a CUP to provide enclosed bicycle parking at a rate of 0.5 spaces for every dwelling unit, for a total of 83.5 required stalls. The submitted plans and narrative state that bicycle parking will be provided at a rate of 0.91 spaces per unit for a total of approximately 152 bicycle parking spaces which exceeds the requirement for bicycle parking. Freestanding Signs - Meets Requirements The Subject Property is in Sign District 5. Properties in Sign District 5 are allowed to have one freestanding sign with 100 square feet in copy area and not exceeding 16 feet in height. Freestanding signs shall be located at least five feet from any property line. Sign copy area is defined as the area in square feet of the smallest rectangle, circle, or triangle that contains the sign copy. Signs in Sign District 5 may be externally, internally, or backlit. The sign proposed in the Applicant’s materials meets these requirements. Procedural Requirements for Specific Applications – Section 1355 The following applications requiring a public hearing are considered within this staff report as evaluated above: A. Amendment to the Zoning Code regulations B. Conditional Use Permit for a Conditional Principal Use C. Planned Unit Development D. Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Applicant also applied for Site Plan Review. Site Plan Reviews do not require a public hearing. A public hearing is required before the request can be brought before the City Council. The applicant or its representative shall be given the opportunity to appear before the Planning Commission to answer questions or give explanations regarding the proposal. Upon completion of the public hearing and its study and consideration of the application, the Planning Commission Page 23 of 24 shall submit its written report, containing its findings, conclusions, and recommendations as to the application, to the City Council. Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on June 26, 2026. Notice was prepared by the City and mailed to property owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property. The public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 1355.01 Procedure for Public Hearings Subd. 4 Public Hearing by Planning Commission. The City Council may hold additional hearings. Comprehensive Plan Amendments require four affirmative votes of the City Council. Plan Evaluation Summary The table below provides the performance standards for the B-2 District and the preliminary analysis for the proposed development. Requirements where the submitted plans are inconsistent with City Code and require revision are highlighted in grey. Requirements where the Applicant has requested flexibility are highlighted in orange: Ordinance Requirements B-2 District Standards Proposed Development Minimum Lot Area (per dwelling unit) 2178 sq. ft. 246,549.60 sq. ft. 1476.35 sq. ft. Maximum Floor Area Ratio 0.8 0.98 Maximum Building Height 50 feet 49.5 feet Maximum Structure Coverage 45% 22% Minimum Landscape Lot Area 25% 35.4% Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 feet 50 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback 50 feet 50 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback 10 feet (min)/20 feet (total) 35 feet/ 75 feet Front Setback Location 50 feet (min) ~160 feet PUD & SUP Maximum Dwelling Unit Density Per Net Acre 20 units 29.5 units Minimum Unit Size 1-BR = 700 sf min 2-BR = 950 sf min 3-BR = 1,200 sf min +150 SF for each additional BR 1-BR = 663 sf 2-BR = 994 sf 3-BR = 1,311 sf Minimum Parking Requirements (Dwelling, multiple family) 1.1 per efficiency and 1 bedroom dwelling units; 2 for each 2+ bedroom dwelling units (Total Required- 272 spaces) 300 stalls Enclosed Parking 1 per unit 0.89 per unit Lighting Not to exceed one foot candle on the travel lanes of adjoining public streets 0.1-foot candles shown on photometric plan Screening/Fencing Screened from residential uses Vegetative screening along western boundaries Landscaping - Planting Islands 10% of parking area 11% of parking area Landscaping – Tree Mitigation 458.7 caliper inches required for replacement 808.75 caliper inches proposed for replacement Landscaping – Boulevard and Island Trees Boulevard Trees – 38 Island Trees – 14 Boulevard Trees – 38, Existing Vegetation Island Trees – 24 Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation Provide circulation plan and bike rack Bicycle parking provided for residents 0.9 bike spaces per unit Page 24 of 25 Additional Review Building Official The Building Official has reviewed the plans and has no additional comments at this time. A Building Permit will be required prior to any construction taking place. Public Works Director/City Engineer The Public Works Director/City Engineer is reviewing the plans. Fire Marshal The Fire Marshal is reviewing the plans. No additional conditions have been included at this time Ramsey County Ramsey County Public Works has not yet provided comments. Minnesota Department of Transportation MnDOT did not provide comments at the time of writing this report. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources DNR did not provide comments at the time of writing this report. Findings of Fact Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, and Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1. The property located at 3499 Lexington Avenue is guided for Community Mixed Use in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan (2019, as amended). 2. The property located at 2499 Lexington Avenue is subject to the provisions in the adopted Guiding Plan for the B2 District (2008). 3. The proposed project is for 167 units of market-rate rental housing on 5.66 acres of land for a net density of 29.5 units per acre and a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.96. 4. Community Mixed Use has a maximum net density of 20 units per acre and an FAR of 0.8. 5. The Applicant has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the maximum net density for Community Mixed Use to 30 units per acre. 6. The requested density and related FAR increase is consistent with the policy provisions adopted in the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 7. The property located at 3499 Lexington Avenue is zoned B-2 General Business District. 8. Residential projects located in the B-2 General Business District The maximum permitted density in the B-2 General Business District is 20 units per acre if a proposed project uses the PUD process. 9. The Applicant has applied for a zoning code amendment to allow up to 25 units per acre if a proposed project uses the PUD process. 10. The zoning code amendment is consistent with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with the purpose statement for the B-2 General Business District. 11. New building construction or site modification identified requires the submittal of a Site Plan Review application prior to construction. 12. For proposals for new construction and/or redevelopment of a site a PUD is required 13. The PUD process allows for flexibility within the City’s regulations through a negotiated process with a Developer. Page 25 of 26 14. The Applicant has applied for a Site Plan Review, Master Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit, in order to construct a 167-unit market-rate apartment building. 15. The Applicant has proposed a Master Planned Unit Development for the development of one approximate 249,944 square foot multiple family dwelling on the Subject Property. 16. The Master Planned Unit Development generally conforms to the requirements of the City Zoning Code and design standards. 17. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City Code, the Applicant has requested flexibility. 18. A public hearing for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit request is required before the request can be brought before the City Council. Options and Motion Language Staff have provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support a recommendation. • Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-009 for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review for a Multiple Family Dwelling at 3499 Lexington Avenue N, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the July 8, 2026, Report to the Planning Commission: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the Community Development Director shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and Master Planned Unit Development shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the City Council. The City Council may extend the expiration date of such approval upon written application by the person to whom the approval was granted. 3. A violation of any condition set forth in the permit shall be a violation of this Code and shall be cause for revocation of the permit. 4. Prior to the release of the Final Planned Unit Development for recording, the Applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement. 5. The Final PUD shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. A Master and Final PUD Development Agreement shall be prepared by the City Attorney and subject to City Council approval for the Development. The Master and Final PUD Development Agreement shall be fully executed prior to the issuance of building permits. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security equal to 125% of the cost of the landscaping to be installed on the site shall be submitted. The Applicant must submit a detailed cost estimate for the landscaping so staff can determine the final amount. Landscape financial security shall be held for two full growing seasons. For any landscaping that is not in accordance with the approved landscaping plan at the end of two growing seasons, the Developer shall replace the material to the satisfaction of the City before the guarantee is released. Where this is Page 26 of 27 not done, the City, at its sole discretion, may use the proceeds of the performance guarantee to accomplish performance. 7. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, MnDOT and Ramsey County (i.e., ROW or access) prior to the start of any site activities. 8. The final plans shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer, Building Official, and Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit and shall be consistent with the memorandum from the City Engineer. 9. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the final plans shall show that landscaping will not inhibit clear sight lines into and out of the property. 10. Final landscaping plans shall be revised to relocated trees outside of any drainage and utility easements and shown with trees with a minimum caliper inch of 2.5 inches. 11. Final grading, drainage, utility, and site plans shall be subject to approval by the Public Works Director, City Engineer, and Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit or other development permits. 12. Upon completion of grading and utility work on the site, a grading as-built and utility as-built shall be provided to the City for review. 13. Heavy duty silt fence and adequate erosion control around the entire construction site shall be required and maintained by the Developer during construction to ensure that sediment and storm water does not leave the project site. 14. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities. Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 15. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush lenses. 16. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with the same materials used on the building in accordance with City Code requirements. 17. A separate sign permit shall be required for all signs on the site. 18. Any future trash enclosures shall utilize gates and be constructed on three sides using the same materials and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 19. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary charges. Rates applied shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. 20. All disturbed boulevards shall be restored with sod. All areas of the site, where practical, shall be sodded or seeded and maintained. The property owner shall mow and maintain all site boulevards to the curb line of the public streets. 21. A right-of-way permit shall be required for work performed within the City and/or Ramsey County right-of-way. 22. The proposed structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. • Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 26- 009 for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master Planned Page 27 of 27 Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review for a Multiple Family Dwelling at 3499 Lexington Avenue N, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the July 8, 2026, Report to the Planning Commission. • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 26-009 for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review for a Multiple Family Dwelling at 3499 Lexington Avenue N, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the July 8, 2026, Report to the Planning Commission: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 26-009 for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Master Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review for a Multiple Family Dwelling at 3499 Lexington Avenue N, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the July 8, 2026, Report to the Planning Commission: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Public Comments The city received several public comments regarding this case (Attachment K). Additional comments received between now and 4 p.m. on Wednesday, July 8, 2026, will be provided at the meeting. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on June 24, 2026. The deadline for action on this application is August 23, 2026 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. Attachments A. Land Use Application B. Applicant Narrative C. Architectural Plans/Renderings D. Civil and Landscape Plans E. Survey F. Stormwater Management Plan G. Traffic Study H. Lighting Plan I. Tree Survey J. Developer Response to comments K. Public Comments (to City as of July 2, 2026) L. Guiding Plan for the B-2 District (2008) ALTA survey Shane LaFave 2 Carlson Pkwy N #400, Plymouth, MN 55447 763.300.1861 Shane@roerscompanies.com Applicant Written Statement / Narrative 3499 Lexington Avenue North, Arden Hills, MN | PC 26-009 Roers Companies | Submitted to City of Arden Hills I. Comprehensive Plan Amendment A. Existing Plan Language and Proposed New Language The City of Arden Hills Comprehensive Development Plan currently designates the subject property at 3499 Lexington Avenue North for Community Mixed Use. As described on page 6-14 of the Comprehensive Plan, Community Mixed Use guided properties may contain commercial uses and residential uses. While the future land use designation and associated plan policies do expressly contemplate higher-density multi- family residential development on this parcel, . Under item 10, on page 6-14 of the Comprehensive Plan the maximum permitted density for multi-family development is 20 dwelling units per acre with a maximum FAR of 0.8. We request an amendment to item 10, on page 6-14 of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the allowable density from up to 20 dwelling units per acre to up to 30 dwelling units per acre and an increase to the Floor Area Ratio from 0.8 to 1.0. Roers Companies requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the language in the land use plan to allow for an appropriately scaled multi-family residential use, either as a standalone designation or as a mixed/integrated use within the commercial corridor along Lexington Avenue North. The proposed amendment would be consistent with the overarching goals of the plan to redevelop locations well served by transportation infrastructure and in proximity to neighborhood services and retail. The requested language would address two related development standards in the Zoning Code in Section 1320.06 District Requirements Chart: FAR and residential density. This request is discussed later in this narrative. B. Purpose and Need for the Proposed Change The proposed amendment responds to demonstrated market need and evolving community priorities. Arden Hills has historically had a significantly smaller share of multi- family housing than surrounding communities: the Comprehensive Plan itself notes that multi-family units comprise only 10.5 percent of the city's housing stock, compared to 32 percent in Ramsey County and 26 percent across the seven-county metro area. The same plan identifies limited housing turnover and high property values as barriers for younger households and workforce-age residents seeking to relocate to Arden Hills. The subject site, located near the intersection of Lexington Avenue North and I-694, is one of the most transit- and access-rich locations in the city. Its proximity to commercial services at the adjacent Arden Plaza shopping center, regional roadways, and pedestrian infrastructure makes it ideally suited for residential integration. The proposed amendment acknowledges this locational advantage and aligns the plan with contemporary best practices in mixed-use corridor planning, site design, and an efficient and economical approach to the use of the 5.66 acre site. C. Why the Change Is in the Public Interest Approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is in the public interest for the following reasons: • Housing Supply: The amendment enables additional market-rate and rent restricted rental housing in an under-served product type, helping to diversify Arden Hills' housing stock and improve affordability through increased supply. • Demographic Balance: The Comprehensive Plan identifies a 32 percent decline in the 25–34 age cohort between 1990 and 2000. Multi-family rental housing is the primary product type that attracts and retains this demographic, and the amendment directly supports the plan's goal of rebuilding age diversity. • Connectivity and Active Living: The development will add a sidewalk along Lexington Avenue North and a looped pathway connecting to Arden Plaza, advancing active living principles outlined in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of the Comprehensive Plan. • Efficient Land Use: Residential intensification of a commercially designated parcel along a major arterial represents an efficient use of urban land and existing public infrastructure, consistent with regional sustainability goals. D. Consistency with the City's Comprehensive Development Plan The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Development Plan in the following respects. The plan recognizes a need to expand and diversify the city's housing stock and specifically identifies younger households and workforce residents as underserved segments. The amendment is also consistent with the plan's transportation and connectivity goals, as the development will invest in sidewalk and pathway infrastructure that closes existing gaps along Lexington Avenue North. Finally, the plan's commercial district policies support land uses that generate activity and vitality, and a well-designed residential community adjacent to Arden Plaza advances this intent by increasing foot traffic and residential population proximate to existing retail. E. Criteria Under Section 1355.04 Subd. 2 – Zoning Code changes/Comprehensive Plan The applicant respectfully submits that the following considerations support approval under Section 1355.04 Subd. 2: • The proposed amendment is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code, which seeks to accommodate a range of land uses appropriate to their locations. Multi-family residential use is permitted by conditional use in the B-2 district, and the amendment formalizes the plan's support for this use at this location. • The modification from the adopted Comprehensive Development Plan is in the public interest because it directly responds to identified housing deficiencies, supports demographic diversity, and generates infrastructure improvements that will benefit the broader community. • The proposed change is compatible with surrounding land uses. The site is bounded by commercial uses to the south and west, and the proposed development will include screening, landscaping, and design elements that buffer the residential use from adjacent commercial activity. II. Conditional Use Permit A. Intent and Purpose of the B-2 General Business District Multi-family residential development requires a Conditional Use Permit in the B-2 General Business District. Roers Companies submits that the proposed development meets the intent and purpose of the district, as addressed below. a. To be a place in which people can live, work, and play. The proposed development at 3499 Lexington Avenue North is designed precisely to advance this goal. The site will provide 167 market-rate apartments, bringing residents directly into the commercial corridor. These residents will patronize surrounding businesses, animate the streetscape, and contribute to a more vibrant environment along Lexington Avenue. Indoor amenities including a community room, fitness center, sauna, frost locker, locker room, lounge, work from home space, 2nd floor sky lounge and golf simulator, combined with outdoor amenities such as a pool, pickleball courts, patio, and playground, create a living environment where people can live and play on-site. b. To create a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly community with a distinct identity. The development is designed as a cohesive, architecturally distinctive community that complements the surrounding commercial context. The building design will incorporate varied massing, high-quality exterior materials, and architectural treatments that create visual interest and a distinct identity for the site. The project includes enclosed bicycle parking at a rate of 0.91 spaces per dwelling unit, a looped pedestrian pathway connecting to Arden Plaza, and new sidewalk infrastructure along Lexington Avenue North, directly advancing the pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly objectives of the district. c. To provide a connected sidewalk system and places for people to gather and socialize. The project will construct a new concrete sidewalk from the intersection of Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue North extending north to the existing sidewalk and along Harriet Avenue, closing an existing gap in the pedestrian network. On-site, a looped pathway will connect residents to Arden Plaza and surrounding uses. The outdoor amenity areas, including a 1,600–2,300 square foot patio with grills, seating, and fire pits, a pool deck, and a yard game area, provide multiple dedicated gathering spaces for residents and their guests. d. To implement design standards to promote an attractive environment with lasting and sustainable value. Roers Companies is committed to design quality and long-term stewardship of this property. The project will comply with the City's design standards under Section 1325.50, and the applicant will submit detailed architectural plans, material specifications, and exterior color palettes as part of the application package. The development is intended to be a lasting community asset that enhances the visual character of the Lexington Avenue corridor. e. To group compatible retail and service business uses that tend to draw trade that is naturally interchangeable and promotes business prosperity. By adding 167 households immediately adjacent to Arden Plaza, this development will meaningfully expand the customer base for existing and future retail and service tenants in the surrounding commercial district. Residents of the development will be natural, frequent patrons of nearby businesses, creating a mutually reinforcing relationship between the residential and commercial uses that supports the long-term commercial viability of the corridor. f. To provide an adequate supply of businesses and professional service areas to meet the needs of residents. The project is positioned within immediate walking distance of the Arden Plaza shopping center, which offers a range of retail, food service, and convenience uses. The development does not propose to displace commercial uses but rather to add residential density that supports the continued viability of the surrounding business ecosystem. On- site amenities, including a business center with work-from-home rooms, supplement the professional services available to residents. g. To minimize the effects of traffic congestion, noise, odor, glare, and similar safety problems. The site plan has been designed to internalize parking and vehicular circulation, minimizing conflict between vehicles and pedestrians. A complete photometric plan will be submitted in compliance with the recommendations of the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department, and the project will comply with all applicable lighting standards. Exterior mechanical equipment will be screened in accordance with Section 1325.50. The applicant will also submit a Security Plan subject for review and approval by the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department. The developer will implement recommended mitigation measures identified in the Traffic Study assessing the development's impact on surrounding roadways. B. Multi-Family Conditional Use Permit Criteria The development will comply with the multi-family conditional use permit criteria as follows: Minimum Unit Size: The City’s minimum size requirement for one-bedroom units is 700 square feet. The proposed development includes 32 one-bedroom units, representing approximately 19 percent of the total unit count, that are below this minimum. The proposed one-bedroom unit is 663 square feet. Roers Companies has found that folks looking for a 1-bedroom unit are often price conscious, living alone, and are looking for the most efficient housing option available that still provides a plethora of amenities in the community areas. Given this, we have found that the smaller 1-bedroom units have been very popular within our portfolio. The larger 1 bed units require higher rents and renters often do not see the value in an additional 100 SF for a unit that accomplishes the same thing. Here are a few examples of recent Roers Companies projects that had smaller 1-bedroom units that performed very well. Northlake Lofts (Lakeville, MN) - 686 SF 1-bedroom units - 1 unit available in the entire property Terra Residences (Maple Grove, MN) - 515-666 SF 1-bedroom units - property is 3.6% vacant Savor Apartments (West St. Paul, MN) - 660-677 SD 1-bedroom units - property is 5% vacant We recently ordered a market study for a project in Ramsey, MN. The comparable properties included Aster, Aurora Vista, The Bowline, Delta, Golden Aspen Flats, Lyra at Riverdale Station, Parkview Grand, Parkview East, The Residence at the COR, Sapphire and The Village. All these properties have 1-bedroom units that are less than 700 SF. Based on the market data provided, the applicant requests a variance from the 700-square-foot minimum unit size requirement for these one-bedroom units. Security Plan: A complete security plan will be submitted with the application package, subject to approval by the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department. Lighting Plan: A complete photometric plan will be submitted in compliance with Ramsey County Sheriff's Department recommendations and the City's maximum lighting requirements. Parking: The proposed development provides a total of 300 parking stalls on site, equal to approximately 1.78 stalls per dwelling unit. Of these, 148 stalls are enclosed, providing approximately 0.89 enclosed stalls per dwelling unit. Although the overall parking supply is adequate and exceeds one stall per unit, the number of enclosed stalls does not meet the required 1:1 enclosed parking ratio. Accordingly, the applicant requests a variance from the enclosed parking ratio requirement. The enclosed parking structure will be attached to at least one principal structure. Common Area: The development provides both indoor and outdoor common areas devoted to recreation and leisure, as described in detail under Item 8 of the original narrative. Indoor amenities include a community room, fitness center, sauna, frost locker, locker room, lounge, work from home space, a 2nd floor sky lounge, and golf simulator. Outdoor amenities include a pool, patio, yard game area, pickleball courts, playground, and dog run. Efficiency Apartments: There are not any efficiencies/studios in this project. Bicycle Parking: Enclosed bicycle parking will be provided at a rate of 0.91 spaces per dwelling unit. Window Coverings: All windows visible from the exterior will be provided with consistent window treatments throughout the development. III. Zoning Code Amendment A. Proposed Code Amendment Roers Companies requests a Zoning Code Amendment to modify the density standard applicable to the subject property. Under the existing B-2 General Business District regulations, the maximum permitted density for multi-family development is 20 dwelling units per acre, which would limit the subject 6± acre site to approximately 120 units. Additionally, Roers Companies requests a modification to the floor area ratio (FAR). The code establishes a maximum FAR of 0.8, while the proposed development would have an FAR of 0.96. We’d like to propose a FAR increase to 1.0 This increase is directly related to the requested increase in dwelling units per acre and is necessary to accommodate the project’s overall density and design. The proposed amendments would increase the allowable density within the Planned Unit Development to up to 25 dwelling units per acre, allowing up to approximately 150 units on the subject site. With the addition of having 10% of the units affordable to 80% AMI, this would allow us a density bonus of 25% more units than permitted, allowing us to achieve up to 30 dwelling units per acre, which would give us with the ability to provide up to 180 units on the subject site. With the increased dwelling units per acre, the direct relation to an increased FAR is to be expected. These amendments are requested in conjunction with the Master Planned Unit Development application and is necessary to make the project financially feasible while supporting the broader goals of the development and the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. B. Reasons the Modification Is Necessary At the current maximum of 20 units per acre, the project cannot achieve the financial performance required to support construction costs, land acquisition, and long-term operation of a high-quality market-rate community with the level of amenities proposed. Increasing the density to up to 30 units per acre as well as increasing the FAR to 1.0 is the minimum adjustment necessary to make the development viable without compromising design quality or amenity programming. The subject site is one of the most appropriate locations in Arden Hills for higher-density residential use. It is located on a major arterial corridor (Lexington Avenue North), adjacent to I-694, and immediately proximate to established commercial services at Arden Plaza. These attributes make it well-suited to support higher residential density without placing undue burden on surrounding neighborhoods or infrastructure. C. Public Interest and Consistency with the Comprehensive Development Plan The proposed density increase and FAR is in the public interest because it enables a development that directly addresses the city's identified housing needs. As noted in the Comprehensive Plan, Arden Hills has a significantly smaller proportion of multi-family housing than peer communities, and the city has identified workforce and younger households as underserved segments. A development of sufficient scale to generate meaningful housing supply and support amenity investment requires a density level above the current base standard. The modification is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Development Plan, which identifies housing diversification as a priority and acknowledges the importance of attracting younger households. The plan also supports active living infrastructure, and the development will contribute new sidewalk and pathway connections that advance this goal. Increased density at a well-located corridor site is consistent with regional growth management objectives and the plan's vision for Lexington Avenue as a vibrant mixed- use corridor. D. Criteria Under Section 1355.04 Subd. 3(B) The applicant respectfully submits that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment satisfies the criteria of Section 1355.04 Subd. 3(B). The amendment is narrowly tailored: it does not propose a blanket change to the B-2 density standard but rather authorizes an increased density within the context of a Planned Unit Development, where the City retains full discretionary control over design, layout, and conditions of approval. The PUD process ensures that any density increase is accompanied by corresponding public benefits, including high-quality design, affordable housing compliance, and infrastructure investment. The amendment is also consistent with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, which recognizes PUD as a mechanism for achieving development outcomes that exceed the baseline standards while advancing community goals. IV. Planned Unit Development 1. Size of the Development Tract The subject property at 3499 Lexington Avenue North, Arden Hills, Minnesota, encompasses approximately 6± acres. The developable acreage is included in the survey and legal description submitted as part of the application package and is approximately 5.66 acres. 2. Nature of the Applicant's Interest Roers Companies is the developer and prospective owner of the proposed project. The applicant has a contractual interest in the property and intends to develop, own, and operate the multi-family residential community upon receipt of all required land use approvals. 3. Density of Land Use The proposed development will consist of 167 market-rate multi-family rental units on the 5.66-acre site, yielding a density of approximately 28 dwelling units per acre. As noted in the Zoning Code Amendment narrative, the existing B-2 standard allows up to 20 units per acre (approximately 120 units on this site). The applicant requests a modification to the minimum lot area requirement of 2,178 square feet of lot per dwelling unit as part of the PUD, increasing density to 30 units per acre as well as the FAR. This modification is addressed in detail in the Zoning Code Amendment narrative and is necessary to achieve project feasibility while delivering the amenities and design quality proposed. 4. Function, Ownership, and Maintenance of Common Open Space All common open space, including interior amenity areas, outdoor gathering spaces, the pool and patio area, pickleball courts, playground, dog run, pedestrian pathways, and landscaped areas, will be owned and maintained by the property owner, Roers Companies or its successor in interest. Common areas will be maintained to a high standard as part of the ongoing management of the residential community. No common open space is proposed for public dedication, though the sidewalk improvements along Lexington Avenue North and Harriet Avenue will be constructed to public standards and may be offered for public dedication or maintained as public infrastructure as agreed with the City. 5. Feasibility of Sanitary Waste and Storm Water Disposal The subject site is served by existing municipal sanitary sewer and water infrastructure. The applicant will coordinate with the City and applicable utility authorities to confirm capacity and identify any required upgrades. Storm water management will be designed in accordance with applicable City and watershed district requirements. Drainage calculations, including sizing of pipes, structures, and water storage areas, gradients, and invert elevations, will be provided as part of the complete Drainage Plan submitted with the Site Plan Review application materials. 6. Development Period and Staging Schedule Roers Companies intends to develop the project as a single-phase development. Subject to land use approval by the City, the applicant anticipates commencing construction in 2027, with a projected construction period of approximately 18 months. A more detailed staging and phasing schedule will be provided as the project timeline is confirmed following approval. 7. Requested Modifications to Zoning and Subdivision Regulations The following modifications to otherwise applicable zoning and subdivision regulations are requested as part of the Planned Unit Development: • Density: Increase in maximum density from 20 dwelling units per acre to 30 dwelling units per acre in addition to the FAR, as described in the Zoning Code Amendment narrative. • Minimum Lot Area per Unit: Corresponding modification to the minimum lot area requirement of 2,178 square feet per dwelling unit to permit 30 units per acre. No additional modifications to zoning or subdivision regulations are anticipated at this time. The applicant reserves the right to identify additional modifications as detailed design progresses and will address any such modifications in subsequent submissions. 8. Public Interest and Consistency with the Comprehensive Development Plan The modifications requested under the Planned Unit Development are in the public interest and consistent with the City's Comprehensive Development Plan and the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code for the following reasons: • Housing Need: The Comprehensive Plan identifies a significant undersupply of multi-family housing in Arden Hills. Increasing density at this well-located site enables a development of sufficient scale to make a meaningful contribution to housing supply and support the range of amenities that distinguish a high-quality residential community from a marginal one. • Demographic Goals: The plan identifies attracting younger households and workforce residents as a priority. The proposed development, offering market- rate rentals with contemporary amenities near employment and transportation, is exactly the product type that appeals to this demographic. • Public Benefits: The PUD produces demonstrable public benefits commensurate with the density increase, including new sidewalk and pathway infrastructure, affordable housing compliance under Section 1320.16, high-quality architectural design, and enhanced connectivity between the residential community and Arden Plaza. • Appropriate Location: The subject site's location on a major arterial adjacent to I- 694 and established commercial uses makes it one of the most suitable locations in the city for higher-density residential development. The requested density is consistent with the intensity of land use that this locational context can support. • Zoning Code Intent: The PUD mechanism is specifically designed to allow flexible application of zoning standards where the resulting development achieves outcomes superior to what strict application of the base standards would produce. This project exemplifies that purpose: a well-designed, amenity- rich, mixed-income residential community that advances the city's housing, connectivity, and community vitality goals. Submitted by Roers Companies | 3499 Lexington Avenue North, Arden Hills, MN | PC 26-009 50' - 0" 10 ' - 0 " 20' - 0" 20 ' - 0 " COMMONS 167 UNITS @ 4 STORIES 1 LEVEL OF GARAGE BELOW GARAGE ENTRYPOOLTOT LOT PATIO ENTRY TRASH PAD GARAGE ENTRY TRASH PAD RETENTION 6.1 1 6.1 2 6.1 3 6.2 1 6.2 5 COURTS DOG RUN RETENTION RETENTION 6.2 4 6.2 3 6. 2 2 6.1 1 PLANNING METRICS Zoning Current: B-2 -General Business District Proposed: PUD Height Allowed: __ Stories / 50 Feet Proposed:4 Stories / 49'-1 1/2" Density Allowed: 20 Units per Acre (0.8 F.A.R.) Proposed:30 Units per Acre (0.96 F.A.R.) Lot Coverage Allowed: __ % Impervious Coverage Proposed:__ % Impervious Coverage Setbacks Allowed: 50 Front / 20 Rear / 10-20 Side Proposed:50 Front / 50 Rear / 35-75 Side Vehicle Parking Required: 273 (1.1/1BR & 2/2BR+) Proposed:300 (1.79) N kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 4 8 : 3 0 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsSITE PLAN 2.0 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 1" = 80'-0"1 Level 1 - Site Plan PARKING Level Type Description Count Level -1 GARAGE 9' x 18' ADA Accessible 2 Level -1 GARAGE 9' x 18' Standard 146 148 148 Level 1 SURFACE 9' x 18' ADA Accessible 6 Level 1 SURFACE 9' x 18' Standard 146 152 152 300GROSS AREA - TOTAL Level Area Level 4 47,895 SF Level 3 47,895 SF Level 2 47,896 SF Level 1 53,984 SF Level -1 52,273 SF Grand total 249,944 SF UNIT MIX - GROSS AREA Name Count Unit Gross Area %Main Floor 1BR Unit 1-0 32 663 SF 19% Unit 1-1 33 729 SF 20% Unit 1-3 4 945 SF 2% 69 41% 2BR Unit 2-0 10 994 SF 6% Unit 2-1 55 1,062 SF 33% Unit 2-2 6 1,245 SF 4% Unit 2-3 7 1,336 SF 4% Unit 2-4 8 1,064 SF 5% 86 51% 3BR Unit 3-0 4 1,311 SF 2% Unit 3-1 8 1,511 SF 5% 12 7% Grand total 167 100% kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 5 : 3 2 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsRENDERINGS 5.0 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 5 : 3 2 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsRENDERINGS 5.1 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 5 : 3 2 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsRENDERINGS 5.2 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 N kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 5 : 3 3 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsEXTERIOR MATERIALS 6.0 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 Siding - Fiber Cement Panel - James Hardie - Arctic White Metal Panel - Elevate - Bone White Lap Siding - James Hardie - Rich EspressoSiding - Fiber Cement Panel - James Hardie - Iron Gray Brick-SiouxCity-Glacier Gray Western Stone-CS_Profile-Cast-Fit-PARCHMENT-8x16 Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2" 49 ' - 1 1 / 2 " Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2"IRON GRAY CFB PANEL WHITE CFB PANEL JAMES HARDIE LAP SIDING FIRESTONE VERTICAL METAL PANEL BRICK VENEER CASTFIT STONE RTU RTU Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2" RTU / 1 6. 1 /26.1 / 3 6. 1 /46.1 Level 1 100' -0" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" MATERIAL AREA % ON FACADE WINDOWS - MAGICPAK - WOODTONE LAP SIDING - WHITE CFB PANEL - GRAY CFB PANEL - BRICK - CASTFIT STONE - METAL PANEL - 22,997 SQFT 966 SQFT 15,557 SQFT 2,998 SQFT 12,398 SQFT 6,112 SQFT 12,227 SQFT 1,238 SQFT 74,493 SQFT 30.87% 1.30% 20.88% 4.02% 16.64% 8.20% 16.41% 1.66% kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 5 : 4 0 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 6.1 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 1" = 30'-0"1 West Elevation 1" = 30'-0"2 North Elevation 1" = 30'-0"3 East Elevation - 1 1" = 30'-0"4 North Elevation - 2 Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2" RTU Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2" _____________________ 6.2 6 49 ' - 1 1 / 2 " Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2" Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2" IRON GRAY CFB PANEL FIRESTONE VERTICAL METAL PANEL JAMES HARDIE LAP SIDING BRICK VENEER CASTFIT STONE RTU Level 1 100' -0" Level -1 88' -8" Level 2 111' -1 7/8" Level 3 122' -3 3/4" Level 4 133' -5 5/8" Truss Brg. 144' -7 1/2" RTU / 2 6. 2 /16.2 / 4 6. 2 /36.2 /56.2 MATERIAL AREA % ON FACADE WINDOWS - MAGICPAK - WOODTONE LAP SIDING - WHITE CFB PANEL - GRAY CFB PANEL - BRICK - CASTFIT STONE - METAL PANEL - 22,997 SQFT 966 SQFT 15,557 SQFT 2,998 SQFT 12,398 SQFT 6,112 SQFT 12,227 SQFT 1,238 SQFT 74,493 SQFT 30.87% 1.30% 20.88% 4.02% 16.64% 8.20% 16.41% 1.66% SIGNAGE HEIGHT AND WIDTH WILL VARY BASED ON FINAL PROJECT NAME 1'- 5 " kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 5 : 5 9 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 6.2 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 1" = 30'-0"1 South Elevation -1 1" = 30'-0"2 West Elevation - 2 1" = 30'-0"3 South Elevation - 2 1" = 30'-0"4 East Elevation - 2 1" = 30'-0"5 South Elevation - 3 3/32" = 1'-0"6 Enlarged Plan -Placeholder Signage N kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 6 : 1 5 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsSHADOW STUDY - Summer & Winter Solstice 7.0 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 Dec. 21st -9am Dec. 21st -12pm Dec. 21st -3pm Jun. 21st -9am Jun. 21st -12pm Jun. 21st -3pm N kaas wilson architects 5/ 2 9 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 2 6 : 3 2 P M Roers-Arden Hills-3499 Lexington Ave N AptsSHADOW STUDY - Spring & Fall Equinox 7.1 ADDRESS 26052 05.15.2026 Sept. 21st -9am Sept. 21st -12pm Sept. 21st -3pm Mar. 21st -9am Mar. 21st -12pm Mar. 21st -3pm 36 18 18 29 18 18 7 7 1313 2 N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 1 - 1 E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 7 : 0 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 1. THE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN WAS PREPARED FROM AN A ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS. UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS PLAN, SUCH AS SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STORM SEWER, FORCEMAIN, ETC. IS PER RECORD PLANS PROVIDED BY THE CITY. EXISTING CONDITIONS GENERAL NOTES EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-1 GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES. PARKING STALL COUNT DISABLED PARKING STALL MAPLE ASH 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE EXISTING BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC ELECTRIC METER GAS METER CONIFEROUS TREE PINE DECIDUOUS TREE GUY WIRE 1 SCHEDULE B II ITEM ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER HAND HOLE ROOF DRAIN FOUND 1/2 INCH OPEN IRON MONUMENT UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE SET 1/2 INCH X 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT, MARKED "LS 54100" MAPPED WATERMAIN PAVERS RIP-RAP MAPPED UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE BENCH WILLOW SPRUCE LINDEN BOXELDER MULBERRY BIRCH ELM MISC FRUIT ARBORVITAE OAK WATER LINE FLAG POLE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT LOCUST CEDAR SETBACK LINE FOUND STONE FOUND RAMSEY COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT YARD LIGHT 36 18 18 29 18 18 7 7 1313 2 REMOVE BUILDING W/ ASSOCIATED PAVEMENTS, UTILITIES & STRUCTURES REMOVE FENCE-TYP. REMOVE SIGN-TYP. REMOVE TREE-TYP. REMOVE WALL-TYP. REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. REMOVE GRAVEL-TYP. REMOVE CURB & GUTTER-TYP. REMOVE CURB & GUTTER-TYP. REMOVE ELECTRIC LINE-TYP. (COORDINATE W/ ELECTRICAL & UTILITY COMPANY) REMOVE LIGHT POLE & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE-TYP. (COORDINATE W/ ELECTRICAL & UTILITY COMPANY) REMOVE LIGHT POLE & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE-TYP. (COORDINATE W/ ELECTRICAL & UTILITY COMPANY) REMOVE SANITARY SEWER-TYP. REMOVE FIBER OPTIC LINE-TYP. (COORDINATE W/ UTILITY COMPANY) "DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT" TO BE VACATED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT REMOVE TREE-TYP. REMOVE TREE-TYP. REMOVE SIGN-TYP. REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. REMOVE TREE-TYP. REMOVE FLAG POLE REMOVE CURB & GUTTER-TYP. REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. TREE PROTECTION FENCE-TYP. SAWCUT, REMOVE & REPLACE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AS NEEDED FOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION (SEE UTILITY PLAN) REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. REMOVE & SALVAGE SIGN (COORDINATE W/ CITY) REMOVE STORM SEWER STRUCTURE-TYP. REMOVE STORM SEWER-TYP. REMOVE STORM SEWER STRUCTURE-TYP. REMOVE WALL-TYP. REMOVE GRAVEL-TYP. REMOVE GRAVEL-TYP. REMOVE UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE-TYP. (COORDINATE W/ UTILITY COMPANY) REMOVE STORM SEWER-TYP. REMOVE STORM SEWER STRUCTURE-TYP. REMOVE STORM SEWER-TYP. REMOVE BENCH N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 1 - 2 S I T E D E M O P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 6 3 : 2 3 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. REMOVE EXISTING CURB & GUTTER, RETAINING WALLS, FENCE, ETC. REMOVE EXISTING MANHOLES, POWER POLES, LIGHT POLES, BOLLARDS, PARKING METERS, SIGNS, ETC. REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE PAVING, SIDEWALKS, ETC. REMOVE EXISTING TREES REMOVE EXISTING UTILITIES REMOVE EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVING REMOVE EXISTING BUILDING REMOVE EXISTING GRAVEL TREE PROTECTION FENCE DEMOLITION LEGEND DEMOLITION PLAN C1-2 GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES. PARKING STALL COUNT DISABLED PARKING STALL MAPLE ASH 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE EXISTING BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC ELECTRIC METER GAS METER CONIFEROUS TREE PINE DECIDUOUS TREE GUY WIRE 1 SCHEDULE B II ITEM ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER HAND HOLE ROOF DRAIN FOUND 1/2 INCH OPEN IRON MONUMENT UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE SET 1/2 INCH X 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT, MARKED "LS 54100" MAPPED WATERMAIN PAVERS RIP-RAP MAPPED UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE BENCH WILLOW SPRUCE LINDEN BOXELDER MULBERRY BIRCH ELM MISC FRUIT ARBORVITAE OAK WATER LINE FLAG POLE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT LOCUST CEDAR SETBACK LINE FOUND STONE FOUND RAMSEY COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT YARD LIGHT LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 1 - 3 G E N E R A L N O T E S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 6 3 : 2 3 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION GENERAL NOTES C1-3 1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND/OR RELOCATE EXISTING PRIVATE UTILITIES AS NECESSARY. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ACTIVITIES WITH UTILITY COMPANIES & OWNER. 2. CLEAR AND GRUB AND REMOVE ALL TREES NOTED FOR REMOVAL, VEGETATION AND SITE DEBRIS WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PRIOR TO GRADING. STRIP TOP SOIL AND STOCKPILE ON-SITE. ALL REMOVED MATERIAL SHALL BE HAULED FROM THE SITE DAILY. ALL CLEARING AND GRUBBING AND REMOVALS SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY ESTABLISHED UPON REMOVAL. SEE THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) / GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ENGINEER WITH ANY CONFLICTS OR PLAN DISCREPANCIES. 4. CONTRACTOR TO SCHEDULE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING(S) WITH UTILITY OWNER(S) TO DISCUSS DISCONNECTIONS AND/OR RELOCATIONS. 5. REFER TO TREE INVENTORY, TREE PRESERVATION, AND TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN FOR REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF ON SITE TREES. 6. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION OF SEPTIC FIELD(S) & WELL(S) ON SITE. COORDINATE REMOVALS AND/OR ABANDONMENT WITH THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING APPLICABLE PERMITS. WELLS ON THE PROPERTY SHALL BE SEALED BY A MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (MDH) LICENSED CONTRACTOR. 7. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVALS ARE TO BE MADE TO A VERTICAL SAW CUT OR TO A NEAT MILLED EDGE. 8. CONCRETE PAVEMENT, SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER AND OTHER POURED CONCRETE ITEMS ARE TO BE REMOVED TO AN EXISTING EXPANSION OR CONTRACTION JOINT. SAW CUT AS NECESSARY FOR A NEAT EDGE OF REMOVAL. 9. ANY DAMAGE TO ITEMS NOT NOTED TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED TO ORIGINAL CONDITION WITH NO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION. 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WITH THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. 11. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ALL WORK WITHIN THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITH THE OWNER AND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. 12. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE DEMOLITION PHASING WITH ALL DISCIPLINES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, & OWNER. 13. REFER TO THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED BY XXX, DATED XX, XXXX FOR INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXCAVATION DEWATERING. 14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE OWNER FOR ANY REPAIRS TO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT IS AFFECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION. SITE DEMOLITION NOTES 1. MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE REQUIRES NOTIFICATION PER "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY GRADING, EXCAVATION OR UNDERGROUND WORK. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THIS PROJECT. 4. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD) AND THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES UNLESS APPROVED BY THE GOVERNING AGENCY. 5. IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. 6. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTORS PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTORS SAFETY MEASURES IN, OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. 7. BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS AND THE ASSOCIATED PROJECT PLANS AND DETAILS. 8. ALL CONSTRUCTION PERMITS, APPLICATIONS, BONDS, AND FEES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. 9. ALL ENTRANCES, CONNECTIONS TO CITY STREETS, SIDEWALKS, CURBS AND RAMPS IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL PERMITS AND NOTIFICATIONS AS REQUIRED. 10. ADJUST ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES, BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE TO THE PROPOSED GRADES WHERE DISTURBED AND COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE UTILITY OWNERS. STRUCTURES BEING RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LOADING. 11. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT HAVE ANY CONTROL OR CHARGE OF AND SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION MEANS, METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES OR PROCEDURES OR THE SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND PROGRAMS IN CONNECTION WITH THE WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTRACTORS SCHEDULES OR FAILURES TO CARRY OUT THE WORK. THE ENGINEER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR, SUBCONTRACTOR, OR THEIR AGENTS OR EMPLOYEES OR OF ANY OTHER PERSON PERFORMING PORTIONS OF WORK. GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL PAVING, CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN PER THE DETAIL SHEET(S) AND APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCY REQUIREMENTS. 2. ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SHALL BE PROVIDED PER CURRENT ADA STANDARDS AND APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCY REQUIREMENTS. 3. ALL CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4. ALL BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5. BITUMINOUS IMPREGNATED FIBER BOARD TO BE PLACED AT FULL DEPTH OF CONCRETE ADJACENT TO EXISTING STRUCTURES AND BEHIND CURB ADJACENT TO DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS. 6. SEE SITE ELECTRICAL PLAN FOR SITE LIGHTING. 7. REFER TO THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED BY XXX, DATED XX, XXXX FOR AN EXISTING SUBSURFACE SITE CONDITION ANALYSIS AND CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PAVEMENTS AND EXTERIOR SLABS. SITE NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SITE SIGNAGE AND STRIPING AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL PAINT ALL ACCESSIBLE STALLS, LOGOS AND CROSS HATCH LOADING AISLES WITH WHITE OR YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING PAINT, 4" IN WIDTH. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL PAINT ANY/ALL DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC ARROWS, AS SHOWN, IN WHITE OR YELLOW PAINT. 4. ALL SIGNAGE SHALL INCLUDE POST, CONCRETE FOOTING AND STEEL CASING WHERE REQUIRED. 5. ALL SIGNAGE NOT PROTECTED BY CURB, LOCATED IN PARKING LOT OR OTHER PAVED AREAS TO BE PLACED IN STEEL CASING, FILLED WITH CONCRETE AND PAINTED YELLOW. REFER TO DETAIL(S). 6. ANY/ALL STOP SIGNS TO INCLUDE A 24" WIDE PAINTED STOP BAR IN WHITE PAINT, PLACED AT THE STOP SIGN LOCATION, A MINIMUM OF 4' FROM CROSSWALK IF APPLICABLE. ALL STOP BARS SHALL EXTEND FROM DIRECTIONAL TRANSITION BETWEEN LANES TO CURB. 7. ALL SIGNS TO BE PLACED 18" BEHIND BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SIGNAGE AND STRIPING NOTES 1. SPOT ELEVATIONS REPRESENT FINISHED SURFACE GRADES, GUTTER/FLOW LINE, FACE OF BUILDING, OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. ALL ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH A CROSS SLOPE NOT EXCEEDING 2% AND A RUNNING SLOPE NOT EXCEEDING 5%. 3. AT TURNING POINTS ALONG THE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE THE PAVEMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED 2% IN ANY DIRECTION FOR AN AREA 60" IN DIAMETER. 4. ALL PUBLIC SIDEWALKS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH A CROSS SLOPE NOT EXCEEDING 2% AND A RUNNING SLOPE NOT EXCEEDING 5%. 5. CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALL CATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.16 FEET. RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON PLANS DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS. 6. REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT (REPORT XXX), DATED XX XX, XXXX AS PREPARED BY XXX, FOR AN EXISTING SUBSURFACE SITE CONDITION ANALYSIS AND CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: A. REUSE OF ON-SITE SOILS B. GROUNDWATER AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXCAVATION DEWATERING. C. SITE GRADING AND SUBGRADE PREPARATION. D. PAVEMENTS AND EXTERIOR SLABS. E. TRENCH EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL. F. EXTERIOR UTILITY SUPPORTS. G. FROST PROTECTION. 7. EXISTING SOILS ARE ASSUMED TO BE FINE-GRAINED SOILS (ML, CL) PER THE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ENGINEER IF EXISTING CONDITIONS DIFFER FROM ASSUMED SOIL CONDITIONS. 8. GRADING, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL, OF THE FILTRATION AREA(S) SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USING LOW-IMPACT EARTH-MOVING EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION OF THE UNDERLYING SOILS. SMALL TRACKED DOZERS AND BOBCATS WITH RUNNER TRACKS ARE RECOMMENDED. NO WHEELED MACHINES SHALL BE USED. 9. A FLOOD TEST OR DOUBLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST SHALL BE COMPLETED FOR THE FILTRATION SYSTEM TO VERIFY INFILTRATION RATES ARE WITHIN THE ACCEPTABLE RANGE OF +0.8 IN/HR. 10. CITY AND WATERSHED SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 24 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF STORMWATER BMPS. 11. ALL DISTURBED UNPAVED AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES OF TOP SOIL AND SEED/MULCH OR SOD. THESE AREAS SHALL BE WATERED/MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. REFER TO THE LANDSCAPE PLANS, DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR FINAL SITE STABILIZATION. 12. FOR SITE RETAINING WALLS "TW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT TOP FACE OF WALL (NOT TOP OF WALL), "GW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT WALL GRADE TRANSITION, AND "BW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT BOTTOM FACE OF WALL (NOT BOTTOM OF BURIED WALL COURSES). 13. FOR SITE STAIRS, "TS" EQUALS SURFACE ELEVATION AT TOP OF STAIRS AND "BS" EQUALS SURFACE ELEVATION AT BOTTOM OF STAIRS. REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR NUMBER OF RISERS AND RISER HEIGHT. 14. STREETS MUST BE CLEANED AND SWEPT WHENEVER TRACKING OF SEDIMENTS OCCURS AND BEFORE SITES ARE LEFT IDLE FOR WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS. A REGULAR SWEEPING SCHEDULE MUST BE ESTABLISHED. 15. DUST MUST BE ADEQUATELY CONTROLLED. 16. SEE SWPPP FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES AND REQUIREMENTS. 17. SEE UTILITY PLAN FOR WATERMAIN, STORM SEWER, AND SANITARY SEWER INFORMATION. 18. SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND BITUMINOUS TAPER LOCATIONS. 19. REFERENCE ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS. 20. THE CONTRACTOR ALONG WITH THE OWNER SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND APPROVALS FROM GOVERNING AUTHORITIES, INCLUDING ANY CITY PERMITS AND THE NPDES PERMIT. 21. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL AND TREE PROTECTION MEASURES BEFORE BEGINNING SITE GRADING ACTIVITIES. SOME EROSION CONTROLS SUCH AS BALE CHECKS AND TEMPORARY SILT PONDS MAY BE INSTALLED AS GRADING OCCURS IN SPECIFIC AREAS. MAINTAIN EROSION CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE GRADING PROCESS AND REMOVE WHEN TURF HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. 22. PER NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM/STATE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (NPDES/SDS) REQUIREMENTS, THE WASHOUT AND CLEANOUT OF STUCCO, PAINT, CONCRETE, FORM RELEASE OILS, CURING COMPOUNDS, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS SHALL BE PROPERLY CONTAINED AND DISPOSED OF. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND USING APPROVED METHODS OF CONTAINMENT SUCH AS PRE-FABRICATED WASHOUT CONTAINERS, CONCRETE WASHOUT TOTE, READY MIX TRUCKS WITH SELF-CONTAINED CHUTE CLEANOUT, ETC. 23. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AS-BUILT INFORMATION OF GRADING ACTIVITIES AS NEEDED PER APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND/OR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. ALL STORM SEWER, SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN UTILITIES SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS,THE MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE, THE LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT, AND THE STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), CURRENT EDITION. 2. ALL UTILITY PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE COMPACTED SAND OR FINE GRANULAR MATERIAL. ALL COMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CEAM SPECIFICATION AND THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. 3. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, OR WORK IMPACTING PUBLIC UTILITIES. 4. CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE THAT MECHANICAL JOINTS COMPLY WITH ASTM C1173 OR ASTM C1461 AND THE MECHANICAL JOINT TYPE IS INTENDED FOR THE SPECIFIC TRANSITION PER MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE (SECTION 705.10 JOINTS BETWEEN VARIOUS MATERIALS). 5. ALL SITE UTILITY SERVICES SHALL TERMINATE 5' FROM THE EXTERIOR BUILDING WALL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THE SITE UTILITY CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR, MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR AND MECHANICAL ENGINEER TO DETERMINE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF BRINGING THE SERVICE(S) INTO THE BUILDING, INSPECTIONS AND TESTING PER APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. 6. ALL NEW WATERMAIN AND SERVICES MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF 8.0 FEET OF COVER. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD ADJUST WATERMAIN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, AND SERVICES AS REQUIRED. INSULATION OF WATERMAIN AND SANITARY SEWER LINES SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE 8.0 FEET MINIMUM DEPTH CAN NOT BE ATTAINED. 7. PER MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY REQUIREMENTS, A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED FROM WATERMAIN TO ANY MANHOLE, SEPTIC SYSTEM, CATCH BASIN, SEWER PIPE, OR OTHER SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION, MEASURED FROM THE OUTER EDGE OF THE PIPE TO THE OUTER EDGE OF THE CONTAMINATION SOURCE UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN. 8. ALL STORM SEWER DOWNSPOUT COLLECTION PIPES AND WYES SHALL BE PVC (SCHEDULE 40). 9. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OF SANITARY & STORM STRUCTURE(S) AND UNDERGROUND SYSTEM(S) FOR ENGINEER'S REVIEW. 10. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY UNDERLYING SOILS BENEATH ALL STORMWATER FACILITIES, AND PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION TO THE ENGINEER, PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE FACILITIES. 11. ALL PORTIONS OF THE SANITARY & STORM SEWER SYSTEMS, INCLUDING CATCH BASINS, LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714. 12. ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 13. HYDRANT USE: CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO NOTIFY THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS WHEN THEY NEED TO USE A HYDRANT; ONLY PRE-AUTHORIZED HYDRANTS WILL BE USED. HYDRANTS TO BE OPERATED ONLY WITH PROPER EQUIPMENT SUCH AS A HYDRANT NUT WRENCH, NOT A PIPE WRENCH, HYDRANT METER IS AVAILABLE FROM THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS. ANY TRUCK, ETC. FILLED FROM A HYDRANT MUST BE METERED, MUST HAVE PHYSICAL BREAK OR BACK-FLOW PREVENTER APPROVED BY THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS. ALSO APPLIES TO SUBCONTRACTORS. 14. OPERATING VALVES FOR TURNING WATER MAIN ON/OFF: THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS WILL OPERATE ALL VALVES AND FILL ALL WATER MAINS (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE). CONTRACTOR SHALL GIVE AT LEAST 24 HOURS NOTICE TO HAVE WATER SHUT OFF AND SHALL NOTIFY IN WRITING, ALL AFFECTED CUSTOMERS AT LEAST 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE BEFORE SHUT OFF; ATTACH TO DOOR, ETC., NOT IN MAILBOXES. 15. TEMPORARY SERVICE: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY SERVICE IF SERVICE CANNOT BE RESTORED SAME DAY. IF USING HYDRANT FOR TEMPORARY SERVICE, NOTIFY THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS AND USE ONLY PRE-APPROVED HYDRANT AND SUPPLIED HYDRO METER WITH BACK FLOW. THE CONTRACTOR'S TEMPORARY MAIN SHALL BE DISINFECTED, FLUSHED AND BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS SHOWN NEGATIVE PRIOR TO PUTTING THE TEMPORARY SYSTEM IN SERVICE. THE TEMPORARY WATER SYSTEM SHALL BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS SHUTTING OFF ANY WATER MAINS. 16. REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT (REPORT XX), DATED XX XX, XXXX AS PREPARED BY XX, FOR AN EXISTING SUBSURFACE SITE CONDITION ANALYSIS AND CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: A. REUSE OF ON-SITE SOILS B. GROUNDWATER AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXCAVATION DEWATERING. C. SITE GRADING AND SUBGRADE PREPARATION. D. PAVEMENTS AND EXTERIOR SLABS. E. TRENCH EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL. F. EXTERIOR UTILITY SUPPORTS. G. FROST PROTECTION. 17. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AS-BUILT INFORMATION OF CONSTRUCTED UTILITIES (RECOMMENDED PRIOR TO BACKFILLING) PER APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND/OR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. 18. ALL UNUSED UTILITY SERVICES SHALL BE ABANDONED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. 19. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED UTILITY PERMITS FROM THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. UTILITY NOTES PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73 20.0' 50.0' 10.0' 20.0' 26.0' TYP. 18.0' TYP. 9.0' TYP. 5 9.0' TYP. 18.0' TYP. 26.0' TYP. 7.0' TYP. 50' BUILDING & PARKING SETBACK 20' BUILDING & PARKING SETBACK 20' BUILDING & PARKING SETBACK 10' BUILDING & PARKING SETBACK 12 12 27 27 7 7 8 6 8 9 6 5 6 6 15'R 41'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 15'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 8'R 8'R 10'R 46'R 15'R 15'R 20'R 3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R10'R 15'R15'R 20'R 36'R 10'R 46'R 10'R 10'R 8'R 8'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R3'R3'R 15'R10'R10'R 10'R10'R 3'R 3'R3'R 5.0' 5.0' 5.0' 5.0' 7.0' TYP. 7.0' TYP. 17.7' 9.0' TYP. 18.0' TYP. STOP (R1-1) SIGN-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) STOP (R1-1) SIGN-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ADA PARKING SIGN/BOLLARD COMBO-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ADA PARKING SIGN/BOLLARD COMBO-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ADA PARKING SIGN/BOLLARD COMBO-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ADA ACCESS AISLE STRIPING-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ADA PARKING STALL STRIPING-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ADA PARKING STALL STRIPING-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) PEDESTRIAN RAMP-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) B612 CURB & GUTTER-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) B612 CURB & GUTTER-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) B612 CURB & GUTTER-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) B612 CURB & GUTTER-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE SIDEWALK-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE SIDEWALK-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE SIDEWALK-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) HEAVY-DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) HEAVY-DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) DRIVEWAY APRON (SEE DETAIL) DRIVEWAY APRON (SEE DETAIL)MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER 5' B612 TO B618 CURB TRANSITION 5' B612 TO B618 CURB TRANSITION CONCRETE STAIRS & RAILINGS (SEE GRADING PLAN, ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) CONCRETE STAIRS & RAILINGS (SEE GRADING PLAN, ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) FENCE (SEE LANDSCAPE) FENCE (SEE LANDSCAPE) CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) RETAINING WALL-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) AMENITY AREA (SEE LANDSCAPE) TOT LOT (SEE LANDSCAPE) ADA ACCESS AISLE STRIPING-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ADA PARKING STALL STRIPING-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) SPORTS COURTS (BY OTHERS) DOG RUN (SEE LANDSCAPE) PATIO (SEE LANDSCAPE) PATIO-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) BALCONY-TYP. (SEE ARCHITECTURAL) PATIO-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) BALCONY-TYP. (SEE ARCHITECTURAL) TRASH STAGING AREA (SEE DETAIL) TRASH STAGING AREA (SEE DETAIL) 5.0' 5.0' 5.0' 5.0' 70.0' 40.0' 26.0' TYP. 26.0' TYP. 5.0' 7.0' TYP. REPLACE SALVAGED SIGN (COORD. W/ CITY & COUNTY) CONCRETE SIDEWALK-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) RETAINING WALL-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) SIDEWALK CONNECTION (COORD. W/ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER & COUNTY) SIDEWALK CONNECTION (COORD. W/ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER) HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) 5.0' 7.0' TYP. RETAINING WALL-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) B618 CURB & GUTTER-TYP. (SEE DETAIL)CITY STREET BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CITY STREET BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CITY STREET BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) RETAINING WALL-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) PEDESTRIAN GATE-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE STAIRS & RAILINGS (SEE GRADING PLAN, ARCHITECTURE & STRUCTURAL) 82.5' ROW 60.0' ROW LIGHT POLE-TYP. (SEE ELECTRICAL) LIGHT POLE-TYP. (SEE ELECTRICAL) SNOW STORAGE AREA-TYP. SNOW STORAGE AREA-TYP. (1) BIKE RACK (SEE LANDSCAPE) MONUMENT SIGN (SEE ARCHITECTURAL) 26.9' 29.2' 25.3' 194.4' 136.7' 116.1'115.6' PROPOSED EASEMENT PROPOSED EASEMENT PROPOSED EASEMENT 2.0'8.0' LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 2 - 1 S I T E P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 8 / 2 0 2 6 1 0 : 4 0 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 SITE PLAN C2-1 CURRENT ZONING: B2 (GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT) PROPOSED ZONING: PUD PROPERTY AREA (GROSS): 6.00 ± AC RIGHT OF WAY AREA: 0.34 ± AC PONDING AREA: 0.24 ± AC BUILDABLE PROPERTY AREA (NET): 5.66 ± AC GROSS SITE DENSITY: 28.0 UNITS/AC. NET SITE DENSITY: 29.7 UNITS/AC. FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR):0.96 BUILDING HEIGHT:49 FT 11 2 IN DISTURBED AREA: 5.32 ± AC EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 2.21 ± AC (39.0%)* PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA: 3.28 ± AC (58.0%)* *IMPERVIOUS AREAS BASED ON NET PROPERTY AREA ONLY SITE DATA PARKING STALL COUNT ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE WATER MANHOLE / WELL CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WATER SERVICE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER TREE LINE EXISTING PROPOSED 972 DRAINTILE FORCEMAIN    PARKING SETBACK LINE BUILDING SETBACK LINE 2 FENCE FLARED END SECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE BENCHMARK SOIL BORING  DIRECTION OF FLOW 1.0% 972.5 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. YARD (BUILDING) SETBACKS: FRONT (LEXINGTON)50 FT MINIMUM SIDE 10 FT MINIMUM SIDE-CORNER (HARRIET)20 FT MINIMUM REAR 20 FT MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING SETBACKS: FRONT (LEXINGTON)50 FT MINIMUM SIDE 10 FT MINIMUM SIDE-CORNER (HARRIET)20 FT MINIMUM REAR 20 FT MINIMUM MINIMUM PARKING LAYOUT DIMENSIONS (90 DEGREE PATTERN): PARKING SPACE WIDTH = 9 FT PARKING SPACE LENGTH = 18 FT DRIVE LANE WIDTH = 26 FT* *ASSUMED TO FOLLOW IFC REQUIRED DIMENSIONS PARKING LOT ISLAND/PENINSULA REQUIREMENTS: PLANTING ISLANDS SHALL OCCUPY AT LEAST 10 PERCENT OF THE PARKING AREA. MINIMUM ISLAND/PENINSULA AREA SHALL BE 150 SQ FT. PROPOSED SURFACE ACCESSIBLE PARKING: 6 STALLS PROPOSED GARAGE ACCESSIBLE PARKING: 2 STALLS TOTAL 8 STALLS REQUIRED ACCESSIBLE PARKING: 8 STALLS** **REQUIRED MINIMUM NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE SPACES FOR 301 TO 400 STALLS DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS OFF-STREET PARKING CALCULATIONS PROPOSED APARTMENT UNITS = 168 UNITS TOTAL ONE-BEDROOM UNITS:= 64 UNITS @ 1.1 STALLS PER UNIT = 71 STALLS TOTAL TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: = 92 UNITS @ 2 STALLS PER UNIT = 184 STALLS TOTAL THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: = 12 UNITS @ 2 STALLS PER UNIT = 24 STALLS TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 279 STALLS PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING = 151 STALLS PROPOSED GARAGE PARKING = 149 STALLS TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED = 300 STALLS ACCESSIBLE PARKINGGENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES. PAVEMENT LEGEND BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK CITY STREET BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT SNOW STORAGE AREA B612 CURB & GUTTER (STANDARD) B612 CURB & GUTTER (TIP OUT) FLAT CURB & GUTTER (STANDARD) FLAT CURB & GUTTER (TIP OUT) NOTE: SEE CURB & GUTTER DETAILS ON SHEET C8-2. CURB TYPES DESCRIPTION UNIT BUILDINGS AC PARKING LOT & DRIVEWAYS AC WALKWAYS & PATIOS AC POOLS AC DECORATIVE PONDS AC QUANTITY (EXISTING) 0.27 1.87 0.07 0.00 0.00 PERVIOUS AC 3.45± COVERAGE CALCULATIONS QUANTITY (PROPOSED) 1.18 1.39 0.69 0.02 0.00 2.38± PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73 SEE ARCHITECTURAL FOR CONTINUATION SEE ARCHITECTURAL FOR CONTINUATION SEE ARCHITECTURAL FOR CONTINUATION VERIFY WIDTH, LATCH SIDE, & SWING DIRECTION OF PEDESTRIAN GATES PROVIDE ADEQUATE MANEUVERING CLEARANCE ON BOTH SIDES OF GATE VERIFY WIDTH, LATCH SIDE, & SWING DIRECTION OF PEDESTRIAN GATES PROVIDE ADEQUATE MANEUVERING CLEARANCE ON BOTH SIDES OF GATE LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 2 - 2 A C C E S S I B L E R O U T E P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 9 : 2 6 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-2 PARKING STALL COUNT ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE WATER MANHOLE / WELL CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WATER SERVICE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER TREE LINE EXISTING PROPOSED 972 DRAINTILE FORCEMAIN    PARKING SETBACK LINE BUILDING SETBACK LINE 2 FENCE FLARED END SECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE BENCHMARK SOIL BORING  DIRECTION OF FLOW 1.0% 972.5 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES. ACCESSIBLE ROUTE 5' ACCESSIBLE MANEUVERING CLEARANCE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE NOTES 1. ALL WALKS AND STALLS CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF AN ADA ROUTE SHALL MEET CURRENT ADA STANDARDS, AS WELL AS STATE/LOCAL REQUIREMENTS. 2. WALKS AND STALLS SHALL MEET ADA REQUIREMENTS FOR CROSS AND RUNNING SLOPES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ENGINEER IF ANY ADDITIONAL AREAS, WHICH DO NOT MEET REQUIREMENTS, ARE DISCOVERED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 4. SEE DETAIL SHEET(S) FOR GRADING AND ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS. 5. ACCESSIBLE ROUTE REQUIREMENTS: RUNNING SLOPE:5.0% MAX (4.5% DESIGN) CROSS SLOPE:2.0% MAX (1.5% DESIGN) RAMP RUNNING SLOPE 8.33% MAX (8.0% DESIGN) STALL/ACCESS AISLE SLOPE: 2.0% MAX (1.5% DESIGN) SIDEWALK WIDTH:36" MIN. (60" DESIGN) ACCESSIBILITY LEGEND PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73 Front-Loading Garbage Truck Front-L o a d i n g G a r b a g e T r u c k F r o n t - L o a d i n g G a r b a g e T r u c k Front-Loadin g G a r b a g e T r u c k Front-Loading Garbage Truck Front-Loading Garbage Truck Front-Loa d i n g G a r b a g e T r u c k Fr o n t - L o a d i n g G a r b a g e T r u c k Front-L o a d i n g G a r b a g e T r u c k Front-Loading Garbage Truck Front-Loading Garbage Truck PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10 FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73 E-ONE HP95 Mid Mount E- O N E H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t E-ONE H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t E-ON E H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t E- O N E H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t E-ON E H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t E-O N E H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t E-ONE H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t E-ONE H P 9 5 M i d M o u n t LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 2 - 3 T U R N I N G M O V E M E N T S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 6 3 : 2 6 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION N SCALE IN FEET 0 40 80 TURNING MOVEMENTS C2-3 PARKING STALL COUNT ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE WATER MANHOLE / WELL CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WATER SERVICE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER TREE LINE EXISTING PROPOSED 972 DRAINTILE FORCEMAIN    PARKING SETBACK LINE BUILDING SETBACK LINE 2 FENCE FLARED END SECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE BENCHMARK SOIL BORING  DIRECTION OF FLOW 1.0% 972.5 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES. 33 10.5 17.5 Front-Loading Garbage Truck Overall Length 33.000ft Overall Width 8.500ft Overall Body Height 12.359ft Min Body Ground Clearance 1.048ft Track Width 8.500ft Lock-to-lock time 6.00s Curb to Curb Turning Radius 29.200ft GARBAGE TRUCK TURNING MOVEMENT FIRE TRUCK TURNING MOVEMENTS 47.75 7.917 18.417 4.833 20.833 E-ONE HP95 Mid Mount Overall Length 47.750ft Overall Width 8.333ft Overall Body Height 11.000ft Min Body Ground Clearance 1.393ft Track Width 8.333ft Lock-to-lock time 6.00s Max Wheel Angle 45.00° PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10                                      9 4 5 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 6 940 937938939941942943 9 4 5 9 4 1 9 4 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1 936 936 937 938 935 940 936937938939 941 935 932 933 934 936 937 938 936 937 938 93 6 93 6 937 938 947 94 6 946 9 4 6 946 93 5 9 3 3 93 3 93 493 6 93 7 935 940 934 936 937 938 939 930 931 932 933 9 3 0 9 3 5 9 3 1 9 3 2 9 3 3 9 3 4 9 3 6 9 3 7 93 0 93 5 92 9 93 1 93 2 93 3 93 4 936 937 941 93 6 94 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1 FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10     FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73      38.47± EX. 39.00± EX. 40.00± EX. 40.61± EX. 41.00± EX. 42.72± EX. 42.00± EX. 43.00± EX. 44.00± EX. 45.00± EX. 46.00± EX. 46.83± EX. 46.87± EX. 46.00± EX. 45.41± EX. 45.00± EX. 44.81± EX. 44.96± EX.45.00± EX.44.00± EX.43.00± EX.42.00± EX.41.23± EX.41.00± EX. 39.82± EX. 39.00± EX.38.00± EX.37.00± EX.36.00± EX.35.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.39± EX. 34.00± EX. 33.40± EX. 33.18± EX. 33.00± EX. 33.45± EX. 35.17± EX. 34.72± EX. 34.27± EX. 34.41± EX. 33.74± EX. 33.12± EX. 33.00± EX. 32.70± EX. 32.24± EX.32.01± EX.32.62± EX. 31.51± EX.31.59± EX.31.45± EX.31.25± EX. 32.00± EX. 33.07± EX.33.50± EX.34.00± EX.35.00± EX.34.19± EX.36.00± EX.36.36± EX. 35.47± EX.35.84± EX.36.02± EX.36.05± EX. 37.00± EX. 46.75 37.39 37.03 36.85 36.25 36.25 36.25 36.16 36.17 39.5146.36 47.24 47.24 47.25 47.24 47.25 46.75 47.1847.1847.2547.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 42.27 41.2936.2536.25 38.84 45.43 45.77 44.1444.80 41.56 39.27 43.97 38.72 44.67 2. 5 % 2. 1 % 2 . 1 % 39.78 39.83 35.75 35.7535.90 37.11 37.18 37.18 37.11 38.41 38.41 38.24 37.92 36.0936.27 39.78 38.32 40.55 39.58 40.27 40.63 2.0% 42.11 42.41 44.24 42.77 2.0% 44.60 2.0% 41.84 42.31 42.13 1. 0 % 43.48 43.30 1. 0 % 36.84 36.66 1. 0 % 36.28 34.67 34.78 35.14 2. 0 % 41.47 41.83 2. 0 % 40.73 41.09 2. 0 % 40.33 2. 0 % 40.69 38.56 34.01 33.61 33.09 33.39 EOF 34.58 35.48 35.88 37.96 33.65 38.06 37.70 39.92 39.56 39.22 42.64 44.45 43.48 45.35 42.47 2.0% 44.47 46.09 46.49 46.34 46.07 44.88 44.16 43.77 43.41 40.64 40.82 37.27 38.13 36.81 37.99 36.81 37.95 38.1341.38 41.02 31.8331.70 33.04 32.59 32.60 45.15 46.61 33.21 35.66 38.14 36.99 37.4046.34 36.06 38.1737.77 36.63 45.91 44.52 45.22 45.66 45.13 45.09 46.00 46.47 47.26 46.96 45.18 38.32 1. 0 % 2. 0 % 1. 0 % 2. 0 % 3.3% 3.3%3.3% 3.3% 2.5%3.4% 2.5%3.4% 1.6%3.4% 3.8%3.8%1.5%2.8% 4.2%1.8%4.0% 1.6%3.4% 3. 8 % 3. 8 % 2. 4 % 2.0% 3.3% 3. 1 % 3. 1 % 3. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 4. 2 % 4. 6 % 1. 5 % 1. 5 % 1.2% 7. 3 % 2. 1 % 1. 5 % 2. 1 % 7. 3 % 3 . 9 % 8 . 0 % 2.7%38.63 1 . 5 % 1 . 0 % 2. 9 % 2. 9 % 2. 9 % 2. 9 % TW=47.16 TW=45.76 TW=43.37 BW=47.16 BW=43.88 BW=43.37 TW=44.26 BW=44.26 TW=45.76 BW=43.95 TW=47.16 BW=47.16 TS=47.16 BS=43.94 45.20 45.47 45.46 EOF 45.87 EOF 46.05 EOF 46.05 EOF 44.77 EOF TW=40.88 BW=40.00 TW=37.63 BW=38.51 TW=37.63 BW=38.51 3. 2 % 3.0% 3.0%1.5% 1.5% 1.8%1. 0 % 1. 0 % 1. 0 % 1.5% 1.5% 1.7 % 1. 0 % 1. 0 % 3. 3 % 3. 3 % 2.1% 2.1% 4. 4 % 1.0 % 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%37.22 1 . 8 % 3. 9 % 3. 9 % 2. 9 % 1. 5 % 1. 5 % 2. 9 % 3. 9 % 4. 0 % 1. 6 % 1.0% 1.8% 2. 1 % 2.6% 2.6% 1.7% 35.75 35.85 35.75 46.93 47.11 46.78 0.7% 1.5% 4. 7 % 4.7% 4. 6 % 36.09 TW=40.88 BW=40.00 46.87 46.1946.19 46.39 35.62 37.11 33.30 35.22± EX. 2.8% 2.0%2.0% 30.00 30.00 33.50 EOF 4. 4 % 3. 9 % 1. 5 % 1. 5 % 33.50 EOF 33.00 33.00 4 : 1 33.80 4: 1 30.00 TW=35.00 BW=35.00 TW=37.57 BW=35.00 TW=39.00 BW=35.00 TW=38.48 BW=35.00 TW=37.06 BW=37.00 TW=33.25 BW=33.25 TW=37.50 BW=33.00 TW=33.50 BW=33.00 4:1 31.00 30.00 4:1 31.00 23 . 4 % 23 . 9 % 37.37 29.00 32.00 4:1 29.00 32.00 4: 1 29.00 32.00 4:1 32.50 EOF 32.80 32.80 38.03 37.63 36.2036.60 34.85 34.77 2.1% 7.4 % 35.38 34.22 35.96 36.0940.40 40.35 40.30 40.3545.11 45.03 1.6%4.5% 35.50 1.0% 33.60 38.20 38.1539.51 37.96 37.91 33.16 36.58 36.25 EOF 3. 7 % 3. 8 % 3. 3 % 3. 1 % 33.66 32.00 2. 1 % 2 . 1 % 1.1% 2.1% 33.80 33.80 33.80 2 . 0 % 32.50 EOF 32.80 32.80 32.80 32.80 1 . 7 % 45.5945.64 45.21 2 . 1 % 33.35 33.27 33.42± EX. 33.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 36.11± EX.36.50± EX. 35.82± EX. 35.68± EX. 35.61± EX. 35.00± EX. 34.35 39.77± EX. 32.57 1. 8 % 6.5% 37.77 37.5437.88 37.46 2. 8 % 21 . 2 % 27.0 % 46.62 TW=34.71 BW=34.71 TW=35.44 BW=33.59 TW=35.98 BW=34.75 TW=36.32 BW=34.56 TW=36.62 BW=35.79 35.47 37.65 37.65 1.1% 34.01± EX. RIP-RAP BASIN OVERFLOW (SEE DETAIL) RIP-RAP BASIN OVERFLOW (SEE DETAIL) N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 3 - 1 G R A D I N G P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 6 3 : 2 7 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION PARKING STALL COUNT ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE WATER MANHOLE / WELL CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WATER SERVICE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER TREE LINE EXISTING PROPOSED 972 DRAINTILE FORCEMAIN    PARKING SETBACK LINE BUILDING SETBACK LINE 2 FENCE FLARED END SECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE BENCHMARK SOIL BORING  DIRECTION OF FLOW 1.0% 972.5 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. GRADING PLAN C3-1 LOUCKS IS PLEASED TO OFFER CONSTRUCTION STAKING SERVICES. PLEASE CONTACT BRIAN PECHACEK FOR INQUIRIES. EMAIL: BPECHACEK@LOUCKSINC.COM PHONE: 763.424.5505 CONSTRUCTION STAKING GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES. PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10                                      9 4 5 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 6 940 937938939941942943 9 4 5 9 4 1 9 4 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1 936 936 937 938 935 940 936937938939 941 935 932 933 934 936 937 938 934 936 937 938 93 6 93 6 937 938 947 94 6 946 9 4 6 946 93 5 9 3 3 93 3 93 493 6 93 7 93 4 935 940 934 936 937 938 939 934 930 931 932 933 9 3 0 9 3 5 9 3 1 9 3 2 9 3 3 9 3 4 9 3 6 9 3 7 9 3 4 93 0 93 5 92 9 93 1 93 2 93 3 93 4 936 937 93 4 941 93 6 94 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1 FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10     FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73      38.47± EX. 39.00± EX. 40.00± EX. 40.61± EX. 41.00± EX. 42.72± EX. 42.00± EX. 43.00± EX. 44.00± EX. 45.00± EX. 46.00± EX. 46.83± EX. 46.87± EX. 46.00± EX. 45.41± EX. 45.00± EX. 44.81± EX. 44.96± EX.45.00± EX.44.00± EX.43.00± EX.42.00± EX.41.23± EX.41.00± EX. 39.82± EX. 39.00± EX.38.00± EX.37.00± EX.36.00± EX.35.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.39± EX. 34.00± EX. 33.40± EX. 33.18± EX. 33.00± EX. 33.45± EX. 35.17± EX. 34.72± EX. 34.27± EX. 34.41± EX. 33.74± EX. 33.12± EX. 33.00± EX. 32.70± EX. 32.24± EX.32.01± EX.32.62± EX. 31.51± EX.31.59± EX.31.45± EX.31.25± EX. 32.00± EX. 33.07± EX.33.50± EX.34.00± EX.35.00± EX.34.19± EX.36.00± EX.36.36± EX. 35.47± EX.35.84± EX.36.02± EX.36.05± EX. 37.00± EX. 46.75 37.39 37.03 36.85 36.25 36.25 36.25 36.16 36.17 39.5146.36 47.24 47.24 47.25 47.24 47.25 46.75 47.1847.1847.2547.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 42.27 41.2936.2536.25 38.84 45.43 45.77 44.1444.80 41.56 39.27 43.97 38.72 44.67 2. 5 % 2. 1 % 2 . 1 % 39.78 39.83 35.75 35.7535.90 37.11 37.18 37.18 37.11 38.41 38.41 38.24 37.92 36.0936.27 39.78 38.32 40.55 39.58 40.27 40.63 2.0% 42.11 42.41 44.24 42.77 2.0% 44.60 2.0% 41.84 42.31 42.13 1. 0 % 43.48 43.30 1. 0 % 36.84 36.66 1. 0 % 36.28 34.67 34.78 35.14 2. 0 % 41.47 41.83 2. 0 % 40.73 41.09 2. 0 % 40.33 2. 0 % 40.69 38.56 34.01 33.61 33.09 33.39 EOF 34.58 35.48 35.88 37.96 33.65 38.06 37.70 39.92 39.56 39.22 42.64 44.45 43.48 45.35 42.47 2.0% 44.47 46.09 46.49 46.34 46.07 44.88 44.16 43.77 43.41 40.64 40.82 37.27 38.13 36.81 37.99 36.81 37.95 38.1341.38 41.02 31.8331.70 33.04 32.59 32.60 45.15 46.61 33.21 35.66 38.14 36.99 37.4046.34 36.06 38.1737.77 36.63 45.91 44.52 45.22 45.66 45.13 45.09 46.00 46.47 47.26 46.96 45.18 38.32 1. 0 % 2. 0 % 1. 0 % 2. 0 % 3.3% 3.3%3.3% 3.3% 2.5%3.4% 2.5%3.4% 1.6%3.4% 3.8%3.8%1.5%2.8% 4.2%1.8%4.0% 1.6%3.4% 3. 8 % 3. 8 % 2. 4 % 2.0% 3.3% 3. 1 % 3. 1 % 3. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % 4. 2 % 4. 6 % 1. 5 % 1. 5 % 1.2% 7. 3 % 2. 1 % 1. 5 % 2. 1 % 7. 3 % 3 . 9 % 8 . 0 % 2.7%38.63 1 . 5 % 1 . 0 % 2. 9 % 2. 9 % 2. 9 % 2. 9 % TW=47.16 TW=45.76 TW=43.37 BW=47.16 BW=43.88 BW=43.37 TW=44.26 BW=44.26 TW=45.76 BW=43.95 TW=47.16 BW=47.16 TS=47.16 BS=43.94 45.20 45.47 45.46 EOF 45.87 EOF 46.05 EOF 46.05 EOF 44.77 EOF TW=40.88 BW=40.00 TW=37.63 BW=38.51 TW=37.63 BW=38.51 3. 2 % 3.0% 3.0%1.5% 1.5% 1.8%1. 0 % 1. 0 % 1. 0 % 1.5% 1.5% 1.7 % 1. 0 % 1. 0 % 3. 3 % 3. 3 % 2.1% 2.1% 4. 4 % 1.0 % 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%37.22 1 . 8 % 3. 9 % 3. 9 % 2. 9 % 1. 5 % 1. 5 % 2. 9 % 3. 9 % 4. 0 % 1. 6 % 1.0% 1.8% 2. 1 % 2.6% 2.6% 1.7% 35.75 35.85 35.75 46.93 47.11 46.78 0.7% 1.5% 4. 7 % 4.7% 4. 6 % 36.09 TW=40.88 BW=40.00 46.87 46.1946.19 46.39 35.62 37.11 33.30 35.22± EX. 2.8% 2.0%2.0% 30.00 30.00 33.50 EOF 4. 4 % 3. 9 % 1. 5 % 1. 5 % 33.50 EOF 33.00 33.00 4 : 1 33.80 4: 1 30.00 TW=35.00 BW=35.00 TW=37.57 BW=35.00 TW=39.00 BW=35.00 TW=38.48 BW=35.00 TW=37.06 BW=37.00 TW=33.25 BW=33.25 TW=37.50 BW=33.00 TW=33.50 BW=33.00 4:1 31.00 30.00 4:1 31.00 23 . 4 % 23 . 9 % 37.37 29.00 32.00 4:1 29.00 32.00 4: 1 29.00 32.00 4:1 32.50 EOF 32.80 32.80 38.03 37.63 36.2036.60 34.85 34.77 2.1% 7.4 % 35.38 34.22 35.96 36.0940.40 40.35 40.30 40.3545.11 45.03 1.6%4.5% 35.50 1.0% 33.60 38.20 38.1539.51 37.96 37.91 33.16 36.58 36.25 EOF 3. 7 % 3. 8 % 3. 3 % 3. 1 % 33.66 32.00 2. 1 % 2 . 1 % 1 . 1 % 2.1% 33.80 33.80 33.80 2 . 0 % 32.50 EOF 32.80 32.80 32.80 32.80 1 . 7 % 45.5945.64 45.21 2 . 1 % 33.35 33.27 33.42± EX. 33.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 34.00± EX. 36.11± EX.36.50± EX. 35.82± EX. 35.68± EX. 35.61± EX. 35.00± EX. 34.35 39.77± EX. 32.57 1. 8 % 6.5% 37.77 37.5437.88 37.46 2. 8 % 21 . 2 % 27. 0 % 46.62 TW=34.71 BW=34.71 TW=35.44 BW=33.59 TW=35.98 BW=34.75 TW=36.32 BW=34.56 TW=36.62 BW=35.79 35.47 37.65 37.65 1.1% 34.01± EX. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) SILT FENCE-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) TRENCH DRAIN INLET PROTECTION-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) EROSION CONTROL BLANKET-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) EROSION CONTROL BLANKET-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) EROSION CONTROL BLANKET-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) TRENCH DRAIN INLET PROTECTION-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) SILT FENCE-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) DOUBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE (SEE DETAIL) INLET PROTECTION-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) INLET PROTECTION-TYP. (SEE DETAIL) N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 3 - 2 S W P P P P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 7 : 5 1 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION PARKING STALL COUNT ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE WATER MANHOLE / WELL CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WATER SERVICE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER TREE LINE EXISTING PROPOSED 972 DRAINTILE FORCEMAIN    PARKING SETBACK LINE BUILDING SETBACK LINE 2 FENCE FLARED END SECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE BENCHMARK SOIL BORING  DIRECTION OF FLOW 1.0% 972.5 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES AND SHEET C3-3 FOR SWPPP NOTES. INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERN BIO ROLLS EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SWPPP LEGEND DESCRIPTION UNIT TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA PREFABRICATED CONCRETE WASHOUT EA SILT FENCE (STANDARD)LF EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SY INLET PROTECTION EA QUANTITY 2 NOT ALLOWED 2,470 1,530 12 SEEDING AC 1.60± ESTIMATED QUANTITIES SWPPP C3-2 LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 3 - 2 S W P P P P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 7 : 5 3 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION SWPPP NOTES C3-3 1. THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL CONSIST OF CONSTRUCTING A PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION, SURFACE PAVEMENTS, UTILITIES, AND UNDERGROUND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. 2. THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ARE AS FOLLOWS: A. INSTALL VEHICLE TRACKING BMP (DATE) B. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION (DATE) C. INSTALL SILT FENCE AROUND SITE (DATE) D. CLEAR AND GRUB SITE (DATE) E. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL (DATE) F. REMOVE PAVEMENTS AND UTILITIES (DATE) G. ROUGH GRADE SITE (DATE) H. IMPORT CLEAN FILL FOR REPLACEMENT AND BALANCE (DATE) I. INSTALL UTILITIES (DATE) J. INSTALL BUILDING FOUNDATIONS (DATE) K. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER (DATE) L. INSTALL PAVEMENTS AND WALKS (DATE) M. FINAL GRADE SITE (DATE) N. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM STORMWATER SYSTEMS (DATE) O. SEED AND MULCH (DATE) P. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED, REMOVE SILT FENCE, INLET PROTECTION, AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL. 3. SITE DATA: DISTURBED AREA: 5.32 AC PRE-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS AREA: 2.21 AC POST-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS AREA: 3.28 AC GENERAL SOIL TYPE: SEE GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT BY XXX HYDROLOGY INFORMATION: SEE HYDROLOGY REPORT PREPARED BY LOUCKS 4. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS WERE DESIGNED TO EFFECTIVELY CONTROL STORMWATER RUNOFF WITHIN THE PROJECT AREAS. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL HAVE BEEN PROPOSED TO MINIMIZE CHANNEL EROSION AND SCOUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS. FACTORS THAT WERE CONSIDERED INCLUDE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREAS, SLOPE OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE DISCHARGE POINTS, AND ANNUAL AVERAGE PRECIPITATION DATA FOR THE PROJECT AREA. 5. RAMSEY COUNTY RECEIVES AN AVERAGE OF 31 INCHES OF PRECIPITATION PER YEAR. THE FOLLOWING COUNTY 24-HOUR STORM EVENTS ARE BASED ON ATLAS 14 RAINFALL DATA: 2-YR 2.81 INCHES 10-YR 4.20 INCHES 100-YR 7.34 INCHES 6. SEE "EXHIBIT: PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREAS" FOR SITE MAP WITH DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARIES. 7. THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH FLAGS, STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC. BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL RAIN GAUGE ON SITE. 9. GROUNDWATER & DEWATERING A. REFER TO THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED BY XX DATED XX, XXXX FOR INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXCAVATION DEWATERING. B. FOLLOW LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS FOR GROUNDWATER PUMPING AND OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS. A WATER USE PERMIT FROM THE DNR IS REQUIRED WHEN WITHDRAWING MORE THAN 10,000 GALLONS OF WATER PER DAY OR 1 MILLION GALLONS PER YEAR. C. DISPERSE DISCHARGE USING APPROPRIATE ENERGY DISSIPATION MEASURES. D. BMPS SHALL BE USED TO PREVENT TURBID OR SEDIMENT LADEN WATERS FROM LEAVING SITE. E. DEWATERING SHALL NOT CAUSE NUISANCE CONDITIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO EROSION OR SCOUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS OR INUNDATION OF WETLANDS THAT CAUSES SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO THE WETLAND. 10. REFER TO THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED BY XXX DATED XX, XXXX FOR INFORMATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO SOIL CONTAMINATION. 11. ALL DISTURBED GROUND LEFT INACTIVE FOR SEVEN (7) OR MORE DAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SEEDING OR SODDING (ONLY AVAILABLE PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 15) OR BY MULCHING OR COVERING OR OTHER EQUIVALENT CONTROL MEASURE. 12. ON SLOPES 3:1 OR GREATER MAINTAIN SHEET FLOW AND MINIMIZE RILLS AND/OR GULLIES, SLOPE LENGTHS CAN NOT BE GREATER THAN 75 FEET. 13. ALL STORM DRAINS AND INLETS MUST BE PROTECTED UNTIL ALL SOURCES OF POTENTIAL DISCHARGE ARE STABILIZED. 14. SOIL COMPACTION SHALL BE MINIMIZED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 15. TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROL AND CAN NOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS OR STORM WATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS. TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF SILT, CLAY, OR ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ARE EXEMPT EX: CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCK PILES, DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES. 16. SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALL DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETERS AND UPGRADIENT OF ANY BUFFER ZONES. 17. SEDIMENT LADEN WATER MUST BE DISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN WHENEVER POSSIBLE. IF NOT POSSIBLE, IT MUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMP'S. 18. SOLID WASTE MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUST COMPLY WITH MPCA DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS. 19. NO VEHICLE WASHING ALLOWED ON SITE. 20. NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE. 21. THE OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT. THE OPERATOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTIONS 3, 4, 6-22, 24 AND APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN SECTION 23. 22.TERMINATION OF COVERAGE-PERMITTEE(S) WISHING TO TERMINATE COVERAGE MUST SUBMIT A NOTICE OF TERMINATION (NOT) TO THE MPCA. ALL PERMITTEE(S) MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET: A. PERMIT TERMINATION CONDITIONS, PER NPDES PERMIT SECTION 13.1 HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED ON ALL PORTIONS OF THE SITE FOR WHICH THE PERMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE. A.A. PERMANENT UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATIVE COVER MUST BE ESTABLISHED AT 70% DENSITY OF ITS EXPECTED FINAL GROWTH. A.B. THE PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM IS CONSTRUCTED, MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS, AND IS OPERATING AS DESIGNED. A.C. ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS MUST BE REMOVED. A.D. CLEAN OUT SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS AND PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS (RETURN TO DESIGN CAPACITY). 23. INSPECTIONS A. INITIAL INSPECTION FOLLOWING SILT FENCE INSTALLATION BY CITY REPRESENTATIVE IS REQUIRED. B. EXPOSED SOIL AREAS: ONCE EVERY 7 DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING A 0.5" OVER 24 HOUR RAIN EVENT. C. STABILIZED AREAS: ONCE EVERY 30 DAYS D. FROZEN GROUND: AS SOON AS RUNOFF OCCURS OR PRIOR TO RESUMING CONSTRUCTION. E. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED FOR 3 YEARS AFTER FILING OF THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION AND MUST INCLUDE: DATE AND TIME OF ACTION, NAME OF PERSON(S) CONDUCTING WORK, FINDING OF INSPECTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION, DATE AND AMOUNT OF RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. F. OBSERVE ANY DISCHARGE OCCURRING ONSITE AND DOCUMENT CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN. DISCHARGE SHOULD BE DESCRIBED AND PHOTOGRAPHED. 24. MINIMUM MAINTENANCE A. ALL NONFUNCTIONAL BMPS MUST BE REPAIRED, REPLACED, OR SUPPLEMENTED WITH FUNCTIONAL BMPS BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW. B. REPAIR, REPLACE, OR SUPPLEMENT ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1 2 THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE. C. SEDIMENT BASINS DRAINED AND SEDIMENT REMOVED WHEN REACHES 1/2 STORAGE VOLUME. D. SEDIMENT REMOVED FROM SURFACE WATERS WITHIN (7)SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS OF DISCOVERY. E. CONSTRUCTION SITE EXITS INSPECTED, TRACKED SEDIMENT REMOVED WITHIN (1)ONE CALENDAR DAY. F. PROVIDE COPIES OF EROSION INSPECTION RESULTS TO CITY ENGINEER FOR ALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 12" IN 24 HOURS. 25. THE SWPPP, INCLUDING ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY BY THE PERMITTEE(S) WHO HAVE OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THE SITE. 26. OWNER MUST KEEP RECORDS OF ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT, THE SWPPP, ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE, PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS, AND REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. THESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED FOR THREE YEARS AFTER FILING NPDES NOTICE OF TERMINATION. 27. SWPPP MUST BE AMENDED WHEN: A. THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS THAT HAS A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON DISCHARGE B. INSPECTIONS INDICATE THAT THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE AND DISCHARGE IS EXCEEDING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. C. THE BMP'S IN THE SWPPP ARE NOT CONTROLLING POLLUTANTS IN DISCHARGES OR IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT. 28. CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA A. THE WASHOUT AND CLEANOUT OF STUCCO, PAINT, CONCRETE, FORM RELEASE OILS, CURING COMPOUNDS, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS SHALL BE PROPERLY CONTAINED AND DISPOSED OF. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND USING APPROVED METHODS OF CONTAINMENT SUCH AS PRE-FABRICATED WASHOUT CONTAINERS, CONCRETE WASHOUT TOTE, READY MIX TRUCKS WITH SELF-CONTAINED CHUTE CLEANOUT, ETC. B. ALL SPILLS SHALL BE CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY. 29. IN THE EVENT OF ENCOUNTERING A WELL OR SPRING DURING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR TO CEASE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND NOTIFY ENGINEER. 30. PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER. 31. FINAL STABILIZATION FINAL STABILIZATION REQUIRES THAT ALL SOIL DISTURBING ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND THAT DISTURBED AREAS ARE STABILIZED BY A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATIVE COVER WITH 70% OF THE EXPECTED FINAL DENSITY, AND THAT ALL PERMANENT PAVEMENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. ALL TEMPORARY BMP'S SHALL BE REMOVED, DITCHES STABILIZED, AND SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM PERMANENT CONVEYANCES AND SEDIMENTATION BASINS IN ORDER TO RETURN THE POND TO DESIGN CAPACITY. 32. RESPONSIBILITIES A. THE OWNER MUST IDENTIFY A PERSON WHO WILL OVERSEE THE SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION AND THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE: CONTACT: XXX COMPANY: XXX PHONE: XXX B. THE OWNER MUST IDENTIFY THE A PERSON WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: CONTACT: XXX COMPANY: XXX PHONE: XXX 33. THE WATERSHED DISTRICT OR THE CITY MAY HAVE REQUIREMENTS FOR INSPECTIONS OR AS-BUILT DRAWINGS VERIFYING PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF THE BMPS. 34. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES CANNOT BE REMOVED UNTIL THE WATERSHED DISTRICT HAS DETERMINED THE SITE HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY RESTABILIZED AND SHALL BE REMOVED WITHIN 30 DAYS THEREAFTER. SWPPP NOTES CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER SPECIAL WATERS SEARCH MAP SITE VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE * PROJECT SITE * PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10                                      FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10     FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73      64 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00% 62 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00% 31 LF 15" HDPE @ 1.00% 73 LF 15" HDPE @ 1.00% 161 LF 15" HDPE @ 3.29% 21 LF 12" HDPE @ 7.35% 187 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.59% 48 LF 12" HDPE @ 2.41% 28 LF 18" HDPE @ 0.57% 40 LF 6" PVC @ 4.07% NYLOPLAST 44 RIM=945.09 INV(W)=941.09 NYLOPLAST 43 RIM=945.13 INV(E)=940.45 INV(W)=940.35 CBMH 42 RIM=945.66 INV(E)=939.73 INV(N)=939.73 INV(S)=939.53 CBMH 41 RIM=945.22 INV(N)=939.22 INV(S)=939.12 CBMH 40 RIM=944.52 SUMP=935.29 INV(N)=938.39 INV(NE)=938.39 INV(W)=938.39 INV(S)=938.29 TRENCH DRAIN 31 RIM=935.48 INV(E)=934.75 INV(W)=934.65 OUTLET=934.15 INSTALL TIDEFLEX CHECKMATE ULTRAFLEX INLINE CHECK VALVE (SEE DETAIL) FES 30 W/ RIP-RAP INV= 933.00 INV=933.00 CBMH 12 RIM=936.58 INV(N)=932.63 INV(W)=932.63 INV(S)=932.53 TRENCH DRAIN 13 RIM=935.48 INV(N)=934.75 INV(S)=934.65 OUTLET=934.15 INSTALL TIDEFLEX CHECKMATE ULTRAFLEX INLINE CHECK VALVE (SEE DETAIL) CBMH 11 RIM=933.16 SUMP=926.16 INV(N)=929.56 INV(W)=929.16 INV(E)=929.16 FES 10 W/ RIP-RAP INV= 929.00 RAIN GUARDIAN 23 RIM=937.91 RAIN GUARDIAN 22 RIM=939.51 RAIN GUARDIAN 21 RIM=938.15 RAIN GUARDIAN 20 RIM=933.60 60" PERFORATED CMP UNDERGROUND FILTRATION SYSTEM 1P (778 LF TOTAL) TOP OF PIPE=935.00 OUTLET=930.00 INV=930.00 CONNECT TO EXISTING 8" WATERMAIN (FIELD VERIFY SIZE, LOCATION, & MATERIAL) 5 LF 8" DIP WATERMAIN 8" 45° BEND 4 LF 8" DIP WATERMAIN 8" 45° BEND 167 LF 8" DIP WATERMAIN 8" WATER SERVICE STUB (COORDINATE W/ MECHANICAL) (VERIFY SIZE, INVERT, & LOCATION W/ MECHANICAL) EXTEND EX. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE INV(N)= 920.44± (FIELD VERIFY EX. LOCATION, SIZE, & INV.) 173 LF 6" SANITARY @ 2.10% 6" SANITARY SEWER SERVICE INV=924.08 (VERIFY LOCATION & INV. W/ MECHANICAL) TRENCH DRAIN 40A ACO KLASSIKDRAIN 168 LF W/ PARALLEL STORM SEWER PIPE (SEE DETAIL) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FDC (COORDINATE W/ MECHANICAL) 6" CLEANOUT INV=928.00 (SEE DETAIL) 6" CLEANOUT INV=928.00 (SEE DETAIL) 6" CLEANOUT INV=928.00 (SEE DETAIL) 21 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 12 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 242 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 44 LF 24" HDPE @ 0.00% INV=930.00 INV=930.00 6" CLEANOUT INV=928.00 (SEE DETAIL) 216 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 214 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 207 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 210 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 27 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 37 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 94 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 6" CLEANOUT INV=928.00 (SEE DETAIL) 6" CLEANOUT INV=928.00 (SEE DETAIL) 6" CLEANOUT INV=928.00 (SEE DETAIL) OCS 50 RIM=932.50 INV(N)=928.00 INV(S)=926.50 19 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.33% CONNECT TO EX. STRUCTURE @ INV(N)=926.25 (FIELD VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE, & INVERT) ACCESS RISER 26 RIM=939.55 ACCESS RISER 25 RIM=939.11 ACCESS RISER 28 RIM=938.34 ACCESS RISER 27 RIM=938.27 6" CLEANOUT INV=927.00 (SEE DETAIL) INV=930.00 31 LF 24" HDPE @ 0.00% 27 LF 24" HDPE @ 0.00% STMH 24 RIM=937.82 INV(W)=930.00 INV(S)=930.00 INV=930.00 19 LF 12" PVC @ 2.00% 12" ROOF DRAIN STUB INV(E)=933.00 (VERIFY SIZE, LOCATION, & INV W/ MECHANICAL) 9 LF 12" PVC @ 2.00% 12" ROOF DRAIN STUB INV(S)=939.91 (VERIFY SIZE, LOCATION, & INV W/ MECHANICAL) 21 LF 12" PVC @ 2.00% 12" ROOF DRAIN STUB INV(E)=938.81 (VERIFY SIZE, LOCATION, & INV W/ MECHANICAL) INV=940.00 6" CLEANOUT INV=927.00 (SEE DETAIL)44 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 52 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 38 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 31 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 29 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 24 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 97 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) 6" CLEANOUT INV=927.00 (SEE DETAIL) BUILD OCS 1 OVER EX. LINE RIM=932.00 INV(N)=927.00 INV(S)=925.63± (FIELD VERIFY LOCATION & INVERT) 15 LF OF DRAINTILE (SEE DETAIL) RIP-RAP OVERFLOW (SEE DETAIL) RIP-RAP OVERFLOW (SEE DETAIL) 33 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.18% 26 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.18% CB 62 RIM=936.30 INV(W)=932.30 CBMH 61 RIM=936.51 SUMP=928.89 INV(E)=931.99 INV(NW)=931.89 FES 60 W/ RIP-RAP INV= 931.50 CB 71 RIM=933.92 INV(E)=929.92 40 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.59% CBMH 70 RIM=932.92 INV(W)=929.28 INV(E)=929.28 25 LF 12" HDPE @ 0.50% 30 LF 15" RCP @ 3.51% FES 80 INV=932.57 CONNECT TO EX. STRUCTURE @ INV(NW)=931.50 (FIELD VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE, & INVERT) N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 4 - 1 U T I L I T Y P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 7 : 4 0 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION PARKING STALL COUNT ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE WATER MANHOLE / WELL CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WATER SERVICE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER TREE LINE EXISTING PROPOSED 972 DRAINTILE FORCEMAIN    PARKING SETBACK LINE BUILDING SETBACK LINE 2 FENCE FLARED END SECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE BENCHMARK SOIL BORING  DIRECTION OF FLOW 1.0% 972.5 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET C1-3 FOR LOUCKS STANDARD NOTES. UTILITY PLAN C4-1 LOUCKS IS PLEASED TO OFFER CONSTRUCTION STAKING SERVICES. PLEASE CONTACT BRIAN PECHACEK FOR INQUIRIES. EMAIL: BPECHACEK@LOUCKSINC.COM PHONE: 763.424.5505 CONSTRUCTION STAKING LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 8 - 1 C I V I L D E T A I L S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 8 : 5 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION CIVIL DETAILS C8-1 FINGER DRAIN DETAIL DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. LOUCKS 8"8" 6" MIN. CL. 5 AGG. BASE BIT. BASE BIT. WEAR PEA ROCK OR WASHED GRAVEL IN THIS AREA MIRAFI 140-S FILTER FABRIC SOCK 4" PERFORATED PVC PIPE - SDR 35 4" PERFORATED PVC PIPE - SDR 35 W/ FABRIC SOCK GROUT INSIDE & OUTSIDE OF CATCH BASIN NOTE: TYPICAL LENGTH = 20 L.F. CUSTOM PEDESTRIAN GATE DRAWN 8/2025 LOUCKS PLATE NO. LOUCKS 5' - 2 " 4" X 4" TUBE STEEL POST 5' - 2 " 4'-0" SEE PLAN 2" X 3" TUBE STEEL POST 2'-0" MIN. 1'-5" MIN. 1'-0" MIN. HATCHED AREA TO BE FLAT (1.50% MAX SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION) AND BE CLEAR OF ALL OBSTRUCTIONS INCLUDING COLUMNS, PLANTINGS, ETC. NOTE: ALL OPENING HARDWARE TO BE 48" HIGH MAXIMUM PER A.D.A FRONT APPROACH REACH RANGE. 6'-0" MINIMUM WALK WIDTH CUSTOM NOTES: 1. POST SIZE DEPENDS ON FENCE HEIGHT, WEIGHT, AND WIND LOADS. SEE MONTAGE II SPECIFICATIONS FOR POST SIZING CHART. 2. SEE AMERISTAR GATE TABLE FOR STANDARD OUT TO OUTS. 3. GATE HARDWARE TO MEET OWNERS SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 8 - 1 C I V I L D E T A I L S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 6 3 : 3 1 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION CIVIL DETAILS C8-2 STANDARD GUTTER 8"12" 6" 13.5" 1 2" RAD. MIN. OF 4" AGG. BASE UNDER CURB (IF TOTAL THICKNESS OF SECTION ALLOWS) 3/8 " LIP 3" RAD. 1 3 3" RAD. AGG. BASE VARIES SLOPE GUTTER TO MATCH PARKING LOT DRAINAGE (3/4" PER FT. TYP.) TIP GUTTER OUT AS REQ'D B6-12 STYLE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER MINIMUM 1' BEHIND BACK OF CURB 7" SPECIFICATION NOTES: 1. UPON COMPLETION, CURBING SHOULD BE SPRAYED WITH A MEMBRANE CURING COMPOUND PER MNDOT 3754. 2. EXPANSION JOINTS AT MAX. SPACING OF 200'. 3. CONSTRUCT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2531. DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2009LOUCKS FLAT CURB AND GUTTER (12") DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2012LOUCKS SLOPE GUTTER TO MATCH PARKING LOT DRAINAGE TIP GUTTER OUT AS REQ'D PAVEMENT SECTION VARIES MIN. OF 4" 3/8 " LIP AGG. BASE UNDER CURB (IF TOTAL THICKNESS OF SECTION ALLOWS) 7" 12"8" AGG. BASE VARIES 1/2" RAD. 20" SPECIFICATION NOTES: 1. UPON COMPLETION, CURBING SHOULD BE SPRAYED WITH A MEMBRANE CURING COMPOUND PER MNDOT 3754. 2. EXPANSION JOINTS AT MAX. SPACING OF 200'. 3. CONSTRUCT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2531. CONCRETE SIDEWALK- WIDTH & SECTION VARY REFER TO SITE PLAN 2" BIT. WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPWEA240C TACK COAT, MN/DOT 2357 2" BIT. NON-WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPNWB230C 6" AGG. BASE, CLASS 5 OR 2 MN/DOT 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE FINISHED GRADE 24" SELECT GRANULAR, MN/DOT 3149.D STANDARD BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION PAVEMENT SECTION BASED ON GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY _____, DATED _____,20__ GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC TYPE V, MN/DOT 3733.2 DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2031LOUCKS 2" BIT. WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPWEA340C TACK COAT, MN/DOT 2357 2" BIT. NON-WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPNWB330C 6" AGG. BASE, CLASS 5 OR 2 MN/DOT 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE FINISHED GRADE 24" SELECT GRANULAR, MN/DOT 3149.D HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION PAVEMENT SECTION BASED ON GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY _____, DATED _____,20__ GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC TYPE V, MN/DOT 3733.2 DRAWN 01/2022 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2032LOUCKS 8" COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE CL. 5 OR 2 MN/DOT 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE FINISHED GRADE 6" CONCRETE MN/DOT 2301 CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION NOTES: 1. CONCRETE 6" THICK OR LESS SHALL BE REINFORCED WITH WELDED WIRE FABRIC OR REINFORCING BARS. CONCRETE 7" THICK OR GREATER SHALL BE REINFORCED PER GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS. 2. SAWED OR FORMED CONTROL JOINTS SHOULD BE INCLUDED FOR EACH 225 SQUARE FEET OF AREA OR LESS (15 FEET BY 15 FEET). 3. SAW CUTS SHOULD NOT CUT THROUGH THE WELDED WIRE FABRIC OR REINFORCING STEEL AND DOWELS SHOULD BE UTILIZED AT FORMED AND/OR COLD JOINTS. DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2033LOUCKS CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTION 4" CONCRETE WALK MN/DOT 2521 4" GRANULAR MATERIAL MN/DOT 3149 DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2034LOUCKS BOLLARD 1/2" CROWN 1" CROWN 3' - 6 " 3' - 0 " 6" 24" DIA. 4,000 PSI CONCRETE 6" DIP, CONC. FILLED, PAINTED OSHA YELLOW DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2039LOUCKSTYPICAL ADA PARKING STALL STRIPING DRAWN 03/2017 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2037LOUCKS LCC 4" WIDE PAINTED LINES, TRAFFIC WHITE 4" WIDE PAINTED LINES, 18" O.C., @ 45 DEG. TRAFFIC WHITE (AISLE TO CONTAIN THE DESIGNATION "NO PARKING" COMPLYING WITH MSBC 1341.0502 IF ACCESS AISLE SIGNS ARE NOT SHOWN REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR ADA PARKING SIGN LOCATION. NO SIGNS TO BE LOCATED WITHIN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE. REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR ACCESS AISLE SIGN LOCATION (AISLE TO CONTAIN THE DESIGNATION "NO PARKING" COMPLYING WITH MSBC 134.0502 IF ACCESS AISLE SIGNS ARE NOT SHOWN). NO SIGNS TO BE LOCATED WITHIN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR STALL DIMENSIONS 40 " PROVIDE PAINTED INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY AT EACH DESIGNATED HANDICAP PARKING STALL. CENTER SYMBOL IN STALL. HC SIGNAGE PER MINNESOTA RULES 1341.0502 ALL LINES 4" WIDE 8" DIAMETER NOT TO SCALE 67.5° 5° 36" CONCRETE PAVEMENT REFER TO SITE PLAN AND SECTION DETAIL VANACCESSIBLE 60 " - 6 6 " 48 " 12" DIA. 36 " TYPICAL ADA PARKING SIGN / BOLLARD COMBO 12x18" STANDARD HANDICAP PARKING SIGN WITH SEPARATE 'VAN ACCESSIBLE' PANEL. WHITE LEGEND ON BLUE BACKGROUND. USE HARDWARE PER SIGN SUPPLIER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. HC SIGNAGE PER MINNESOTA RULES 1341.0502 12x6" STANDARD 'VAN ACCESSIBLE' PANEL. WHITE LEGEND ON BLUE BACKGROUND 2" DIA. 6' LONG MIN. GALVANIZED SCHEDULE 40 STEEL PIPE. EMBED IN CONCRETE FILLED BOLLARD 6" DIA. SCHEDULE 40 GALVENZIED STEEL PIPE 6' LONG MINIMUM HEAVY DUTY HDPE DOME TOP DECORATIVE SLEEVE BLUE IN COLOR. AVAILABLE FROM BOLLARDSNSLEEVES.COM OR EQUAL. COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE. NOTES: 1. BOLLARDS TO BE PLACED 12" BEHIND BACK OF CURB. 2. MAINTAIN PLUMB UNTIL CONCRETE IS SUFFICIENTLY CURED. 3. HOLD CONCRETE FOOTING BELOW GRADE OF FINISHED CONCRETE TO CREATE FINAL PAVING PATTERN AS SHOWN ON PLANS. DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2038LOUCKS 6" PARKING VEHICLE IDREQUIRED UP TO $200 FINEFOR VIOLATION TRAFFIC SIGN 3#/FT. 3#/FT. TRAFFIC SIGN SPECIFICATIONS STOP SIGN SHALL BE R1-1, 30"X30" OR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. MATERIAL ALUMINUM SHALL BE 5052-H38 OR 6061-T6 ALLOY. GAUGE SHALL BE 0.080 ON THE LONGEST SIDE UP TO 30", 0.100 ON THE LONGEST SIDE OVER 30". REFLECTIVE SHEETING SHALL BE DIAMOND GRADE VIP. ALL SIGNS SHALL CONFORM TO MN/DOT 3352, SIGNS, DELINEATORS AND MARKERS - STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION. CHANNEL POST SPECIFICATIONS STEEL CHANNEL POSTS SHALL WEIGH 3LB. /FT. POSTS SHALL BE OF THE 4-RIB DESIGN, GALVANIZED AND PUNCHED ON 1" CENTERS. 3' - 0 " 7' - 0 " IF INSTALLED IN PAVEMENT, INSTALL V-LOC ANCHOR OR APPROVED EQUAL. DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2041LOUCKS NOTE: GRANULAR MATERIALS FURNISHED FOR USE IN FOUNDATION, BEDDING, ENCASEMENT, OR BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: ·FOUNDATION MATERIALS SHALL HAVE 100% PASSING THE 1 1/2" SIEVE AND A MAXIMUM OF 10% PASSING THE No. 4 SIEVE. NOT LESS THAN 50% OF THE MATERIAL RETAINED BY THE No. 4 SIEVE SHALL HAVE ONE (1) OR MORE CRUSHED FACES. HARD, DURABLE CRUSHED CARBONATE QUARRY ROCK MAY BE USED FOR FOUNDATION MATERIALS. ·BEDDING AND ENCASEMENT MATERIALS FOR FLEXIBLE PIPE SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF MNDOT SPECIFICATION 3149.2B1, GRANULAR BORROW, EXCEPT THAT 100% SHALL PASS THE ONE INCH (1") SIEVE. ·BACKFILL MATERIALS SHALL CONSIST OF SUITABLE EXISTING TRENCH MATERIALS, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. SUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE DEFINED AS A MINERAL SOIL FREE OF FOREIGN MATERIALS (RUBBISH, ORGANICS & DEBRIS), FROZEN CLUMPS, OVERSIZE STONE, ROCK, CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS CHUNKS, AND OTHER UNSUITABLE MATERIALS THAT MAY DAMAGE PIPE, PREVENT THOROUGH COMPACTION, OR INCREASE THE RISKS OF SETTLEMENT. PLASTIC PIPE BEDDING PLASTIC PIPE 18"18"PIPE WIDTH ENCASEMENT BEDDING FOUNDATION (MAY NOT BE REQUIRED) 12" 6" BACKFILL COMPACTED AS SPECIFIED EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4008LOUCKS CONCRETE PIPE BEDDING RCP PIPE 18"18"PIPE WIDTH COMPACTED SAND OR 3 4" TO 1-1 2" CLEAR ROCK (AS DIRECTED) COMPACTED SUBGRADE 6" COMPACTED BACKFILL EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH RCP PIPE 18"18"PIPE WIDTH SHAPE BOTTOM OF EXISTING TRENCH MATERIAL TO FIT PIPE BARREL. COMPACTED BACKFILL EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH CLASS C BEDDING CLASS B BEDDING DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4310LOUCKS NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE RETAINING WALL DESIGN/SHOP DRAWINGS SIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR THE FENCE WITH ANCHOR SYSTEM EMBEDDED INTO THE 'SLEEVE IT' FOOTING ANCHOR FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2047RETAINING WALLLOUCKS "SLEEVE IT" ANCHOR SYSTEM SEE DETAIL GEOGRID AS REQUIRED UNDISTURBED SOIL OR COMPACTED FILL CRUSHED OR COMPACTED ROCK (NO CARBONATES) 4" PERFORATED PIPE (NO SOCK) 6" CLASS 5, COMPACTED TO 95% STANDARD PROCTOR RETAINING WALL MODULAR BLOCK UNIT RETAINING WALL CAP UNIT RETAINING WALL INFORMATION: ·CMU MANUFACTURER: TBD (OR APPROVED EQUAL) ·TYPE: TBD (OR APPROVED EQUAL) ·COLOR: PROVIDE STANDARD COLOR SAMPLES FOR SELECTION BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ·PROVIDE CAP TO MATCH ·FINAL MATERIAL SELECTIONS TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER 48 " M I N . NON-WIND LOADED FENCE OR RAILING (SEE LANDSCAPE) VEGETATION (SEE LANDSCAPE) NOTE: GRANULAR MATERIALS FURNISHED FOR USE IN FOUNDATION, BEDDING, ENCASEMENT, OR BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: ·FOUNDATION MATERIALS SHALL HAVE 100% PASSING THE 1 1/2" SIEVE AND A MAXIMUM OF 10% PASSING THE No. 4 SIEVE. NOT LESS THAN 50% OF THE MATERIAL RETAINED BY THE No. 4 SIEVE SHALL HAVE ONE (1) OR MORE CRUSHED FACES. HARD, DURABLE CRUSHED CARBONATE QUARRY ROCK MAY BE USED FOR FOUNDATION MATERIALS. ROCK BEDDING MATERIALS SHALL BE 3/4" TO 1-1/2" CLEAR ROCK. IF IN-SITU MATERIAL UNDER ROCK BEDDING IS UNSTABLE, USE AS MUCH ROCK AS NECESSARY TO STABILIZE. DUCTILE IRON PIPE BEDDING D.I.P. PIPE 18"18"PIPE WIDTH 12" 4" EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH D.I.P. PIPE 18"18"PIPE WIDTH 12" 4" EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH SAND BEDDING ROCK BEDDING DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4615LOUCKS INV= FLOW OUTLET PIPE OPEN GRATE 3/4" NOMINAL ANNULAR SPACE 14" 8" PVC 12" 1-1/2" NEENAH TRENCH GRATE R-4990-DX OR EQUAL TRENCH DRAIN / OUTLET DETAIL GROUTED CONNECTION 8"-90° BEND BLISTER CONCRETE AROUND CASTING, TO PROVIDE 0.2' SUMP FOR SEDIMENT STORAGE. DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4319LOUCKS LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 8 - 1 C I V I L D E T A I L S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 8 : 5 A M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION CIVIL DETAILS C8-3 FILTRATION BASIN DETAIL DRAWN 04/2026 LOUCKS PLATE NO. CUSTOMLOUCKS SLOPES VARIES - 3:1 MAX TOP OF BERM - SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ELEVATION SLOPES VARIES - 3:1 MAX WQV 100-YEAR HWL BIORETENTION SOIL DRAINAGE LAYER PERFORATED PIPE SEED MIX (SEE LANDSCAPE) A A SECTION A-A PLAN VIEW NOTE: SEE MINNESOTA STORMWATER MANUAL FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BIORETENTION SOIL, MULCH, UNDERDRAIN, ETC.NOT TO SCALE NOTE: SEE GRADING, SITE, & STORM SEWER PLANS FOR BASIN DIMENSIONS, LOCATION, ELEVATIONS, ETC. 6" 18 " M I N . CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING FOR BASIN 1. INSTALL APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THE PRACTICE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 2.ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROL BMP'S MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE ANY GRADIENT AND DISTURBING ACTIVITY BEGINS. 3.PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES. 4.INSTALL ALL UTILITIES (WATER, SANITARY, ELECTRIC, GAS, ETC.) PRIOR TO SETTING FINAL GRADE OF FILTRATION DEVICE. 5.ROUGH GRADE SITE. IF FILTRATON AREA IS BEING USED AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN DURING CONSTRUCTION, LEAVE A MINIMUM OF 1' COVER OVER THE PRACTICE TO PROTECT THE UNDERLYING SOILS FROM CLOGGING. 6.COMPLETE, STABILIZE, AND VEGETATE ALL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS. 7.CONSTRUCT AND VEGETATE FILTRATION DEVICE FOLLOWING STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA. ENSURE THAT CRITICAL ELEVATIONS, SUCH AS UNDERDRAIN INVERT, TOP OF MEDIA, AND INVERT OF OVERFLOW STRUCTURE (IF PRESENT) ARE CORRECT. 8.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS ADEQUATELY ESTABLISHED. 9.CONTRACTOR TO HAVE DOUBLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST DONE AFTER FILTRATION BASIN CONSTRUCTION TO VERIFY INFILTRATION RATES. GENERAL NOTES 1.IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EXCAVATION, THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION. 2.SEE MINNESOTA STORMWATER MANUAL FOR SUBGRADE PREPARATION. 3.GRADING OF THE FILTRATION AREAS SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USING LOW IMPACT EARTH MOVING EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION OF THE FILTRATION SOILS OR DAMAGE TO THE UNDERDRAIN. 4.RUNOFF MUST FILTRATE WITHIN 48-HOURS. BASINS UNABLE TO MAINTAIN THESE RATES MUST BE DEEP TILLED, RE-GRADED, AND IF NECESSARY REPLANTED TO RESTORE ORIGINAL FILTRATION RATES. 5.ALL WORK TO BE CONDUCTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND STATE STORMWATER STANDARDS FOR THE PROJECT SITE AS APPROVED BY THE REGULATORY ENGINEER. 6.REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR PLANTING REQUIREMENTS. 15" 18 " GENERAL NOTES: AGGREGATE BASE 4" CLEAN COMPACTED TYP. 1/2" R. #4 @ 12" O.C. #4 @ 18" O.C. #3 NOSING TYP. TYP 6" TY P 1. ALL REBAR TO BE COVERED BY 2" CONCRETE MIN 2. CONCRETE SURFACING TO BE MEDIUM BROOM FINISH PERPENDICULAR TO PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION. 3. HANDRAIL AND POSTS TO BE 1-1/2" O.D. SCHED. 40 HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE 4. SUBMIT SHOP DRAWING FOR HAND RAIL.S 5. ALL WELDS SHALL BE CONTINUOUS AND GROUND SMOOTH. 6. PAINT HANDRAIL WITH ONE COAT OF PRIMER AND TWO FINISH COATS - BLACK IN COLOR. PAINT THICKNESS SHALL BE 6 MILS. (SEE SPECS) 7. SET RAILING POSTS 6" FROM OUTSIDE EDGE OF STAIRS - BOTH SIDES 8. SURFACE MOUNT WITH 4-1/2"x1/2" KWIK BOLT TZ BY HILTI, USE LEAD SHIMS UNDER BASEPLATE TO PLUM RAILINGS 12" R 6 " 6' MAX SPACING 12 " WELD (TYP) 6" 15" 36 " 12" R6" 30" EJ EJ 36 " 36 " CONCRETE STAIR AND RAILING LOUCKS PLATE NO. DRAWN 08/2025 CUSTOMLOUCKS OR APPROVED EQUAL APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINT MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES. 2 1 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW- CLASS 2 RIP RAP OVER GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 10' TYP . 4' T Y P . BASIN OVERFLOW TOP OF BERM OVERFLOW ELEVATION AS SPECIFIED PONDING AREA AS SPECIFIED DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 3010LOUCKS LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ C I V I L \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ C 8 - 1 C I V I L D E T A I L S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 6 3 : 3 2 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Samuel R. Trebesch - PE 56088 260128.00 SRT LAH SRT 05/26/2026 SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION CIVIL DETAILS C8-4 OR APPROVED EQUAL GRATE TO BE ADA ACCESSIBLE. COLOR AND PATTERN TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER. LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ L A N D S C A P E \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ L 0 - 1 T R E E P R E S E R V A T I O N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 1 3 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Kevin V. Kroen - LA 53757 260128.00 SRT LJR/KVK KVK 05/26/2026 C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION TREE INVENTORY L0-1 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS: 1. TREE REMOVAL ALLOWANCE. MITIGATION SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED FOR REMOVING, CUTTING, OR KILLING TREES WHEN: 1.A. FEWER THAN TEN (10) PERCENT OF THE CALIPER INCHES OF THE SIGNIFICANT TREES ON THE PROPERTY ARE CUT, REMOVED, OR KILLED 1.B. THERE IS AN EXISTING PRINCIPAL USE ON THE PROPERTY AND NO CONSTRUCTION, GRADING, OR DEVELOPMENT IS TO OCCUR IN THE LOCATION OF THE REMOVED TREE(S) WITHIN TWO YEARS THEREAFTER. 1.C. THE TREES TO BE REMOVED, CUT, OR KILLED ARE IDENTIFIED AS DISEASED OR NUISANCE TREES. 2. MITIGATION STANDARDS. MITIGATION FOR TREE REMOVAL OF SIGNIFICANT TREES MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC STANDARDS; 2.A. MITIGATION RATE. SIGNIFICANT LIVE TREES LOST OR REASONABLY ANTICIPATED TO BE LOST AS A RESULT OF BUILDING, CONSTRUCTION, OR GRADING IMMEDIATELY OR IN THE FUTURE, SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER BY PLANTING THAT NUMBER OF CALIPER INCHES OF TREES ("REPLACEMENT TREES") DETERMINED AT A RATE OF 1:2 OR ONE INCH REPLACED FOR EVERY TWO INCHES LOST. THE TREES REQUIRED TO BE REPLACED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION SHALL BE IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER TREES REQUIRED TO BE PLANTED PURSUANT TO ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THE CODE. 2.B. MITIGATION SPECIES. REPLACEMENT TREES SHALL BE OF A SPECIES SIMILAR TO THE TREES WHICH ARE LOST OR REMOVED AND SHALL INCLUDE THOSE SPECIES PRE-APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE CITY. THE CITY MAINTAINS A LIST OF TREES PROVIDED FOR GUIDANCE IN SELECTION OF TREES AND SHRUBS. 2.C. GENERAL MITIGATION STANDARDS. 2.C.A. ALL REPLACEMENT TREES SHALL MEET THE AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY STOCK RELATING TO QUALITY OF STOCK AND APPROPRIATE SIZING OF THE ROOT BALL FOR BALLED AND BURLAPPED AND SPADE-MOVED TREES. 2.C.B. TREES PLANTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS SHALL NOT BE COMPRISED OF MORE THAN 25 PERCENT OF THE SAME SPECIES OR SIZE UNLESS APPROVED BY THE CITY. 2.C.C. REPLACEMENT TREES SHALL BE PLANTED ON THE SAME PROPERTY FROM WHICH THE TREES WERE REMOVED. IF THE CITY DETERMINES, AT ITS SOLE DISCRETION, THAT THE NUMBER OF REPLACEMENT TREES TO BE PLANTED EXCEEDS THE NUMBER OF TREES THAT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED PRACTICALLY ON-SITE, OFF-SITE PLANTING MAY OCCUR AT LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY, OR A LANDSCAPING FEE IN LIEU OF OFF-SITE PLANTING MAY BE REQUIRED AS PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH D BELOW. 2.C.D. WHERE TREE REPLACEMENT ON-SITE IN SATISFACTION OF SUBD. 6.A ABOVE IS NOT PRACTICAL AND A SUITABLE OFF-SITE LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY, A LANDSCAPING FEE IN LIEU THEREOF MAY BE ASSESSED FOR THE REPLACEMENT REQUIRED. THE LANDSCAPING FEE AMOUNT SHALL BE THE COST OF MATERIALS AND INSTALLATION OF TREE(S), PLUS TEN (10) PERCENT, AND SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT AND APPROVED BY THE CITY. ALL LANDSCAPING FUNDS COLLECTED SHALL BE EXPENDED EXCLUSIVELY TOWARDS LANDSCAPING, AS DEFINED BY THE ORDINANCE, FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOALS LISTED IN SUBD. 1 OF THIS SECTION AND SECTION 1325.05, SUBD. 1.A. 2.C.E. DEVELOPMENT THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 1325.05 OF THE ZONING CODE MAY COUNT RESERVED TREES TOWARDS THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPING PLAN. THE PLANTING OF TREES FOR MITIGATION SHALL BE IN ADDITION TO THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 1325.05 AND SHALL BE REPLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARAGRAPH C AND/OR D ABOVE. 2.C.F. THE REQUIRED MITIGATION TREES SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER OR ORIGINAL DEVELOPER IF THEY HAVE DIED OR HAVE SEVERELY DECLINED AFTER THE SECOND FULL GROWING SEASON FOLLOWING INSTALLATION. A TREE SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE SEVERELY DECLINED IF MORE THAN 25 PERCENT OF THE CROWN HAS DIED. 2.D DEFINITION OF SIGNIFICANT TREE IS A TREE THAT IS IMPORTANT TO THE SITE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, THAT IS STRUCTURALLY SOUND AND HEALTHY, AND THAT MEETS AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS: (REVISED 04/28/08) 2.D.A. A DECIDUOUS HARDWOOD TREE THAT IS AT LEAST TEN (10) CALIPER INCHES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, IRONWOOD, CATALPA, OAK, HARD MAPLE, WALNUT, HICKORY, BIRCH, BLACK CHERRY, HACKBERRY, LOCUST AND BASSWOOD. 2.D.B. A DECIDUOUS SOFTWOOD TREE THAT IS AT LEAST TWELVE (12) CALIPER INCHES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COTTONWOOD, POPLARS/ASPEN, BOX ELDER, WILLOW, SILVER MAPLE AND ELM. 2.D.C. A CONIFEROUS EVERGREEN TREE HAVING FOLIAGE ON THE OUTERMOST PORTION OF THE BRANCHES YEAR-ROUND AND WHICH IS AT LEAST FIFTEEN (15) FEET OR MORE IN HEIGHT. 2.D.D A GROUP OF DECIDUOUS TREES THAT ARE AT LEAST EIGHT (8) CALIPER INCHES OR CONIFEROUS TREES THAT ARE AT LEAST FIFTEEN (15) FEET IN HEIGHT, THAT PROVIDE A BUFFER OR SCREENING ALONG AN ADJACENT PUBLIC STREET OR BETWEEN DIFFERING LAND USES. 3. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. BEFORE CONSTRUCTION, GRADING OR LAND CLEARING BEGINS; TREES OR TREE AREAS THAT ARE TO BE PRESERVED SHALL BE VISIBLY MARKED AND THE CITY-APPROVED TREE PROTECTION FENCING OR OTHER METHOD SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED AT THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONES OF THE TREES TO BE PROTECTED. THE LOCATION OF THE FENCING SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPROVED TREE PRESERVATION PLAN. THIS FENCING SHALL BE INSPECTED BY CITY STAFF BEFORE SITE WORK BEGINS. 4. DURING CONSTRUCTION. THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREAS OF TREES TO BE PROTECTED. 4.A. TRENCHING; 4.B. TEMPORARY STORAGE OF ANY CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS OR CHEMICALS; AND 4.C. THE ROUTING OR PARKING OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING CARS, TRUCKS, BULLDOZERS AND CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS. 4.D. SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL. ALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION-CONTROL SILT FENCING OR STRAW BALES SHALL BE PLACED AT THE LIMITS OF GRADING OR WHERE NEEDED TO MINIMIZE THE DEPOSITION OF SEDIMENT WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF THE PROTECTED TREE(S). 4.E. ATTACHING PROTECTIVE DEVICES, SIGNS, ETC., TO TREES IS PROHIBITED. NO PROTECTIVE DEVICES, SIGNS, UTILITY POLES OR LINES, OR OTHER OBJECTS SHALL BE NAILED OR ATTACHED TO ANY TREES THAT ARE TO BE PRESERVED. 4.F. OTHER ACTIONS PROHIBITED. ANY OTHER ACTION WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF THE PROTECTED TREE(S) THAT MAY RESULT IN THE SEVERING OF ROOTS OR COMPACTION OF SOIL, OR THAT MAY IMPEDE THE FREE ACCESS OF AIR AND WATER TO TREE ROOTS, SHALL BE PROHIBITED. 4.G. PONDING. WATER RETENTION PONDING MAY NOT BE LOCATED WHERE THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT TREES, UNLESS APPROVED BY THE CITY. 4.H. THE WATER RETENTION PONDING MUST BE CREATED IN A MANNER THAT PREVENTS EROSION INTO ANY NEARBY WATER RESOURCE. 4.I. AMENDMENTS TO PLAN. AN AMENDMENT TO THE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN SHALL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF TREES THAT WERE DESIGNATED FOR PRESERVATION ON THE ORIGINAL TREE PRESERVATION PLAN. THE AMENDMENT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO CITY APPROVAL PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION. TREE REMOVAL GENERAL NOTES 1. THE REMOVAL, PRUNING, AND/OR PLANTING OF TREES ON PUBLIC PROPERTY REQUIRES AN APPROVED FORESTRY TREE WORK PERMIT FROM THE CITY FORESTER ANY WORK MUST BE COMPLETED BY A LICENSED TREE CONTRACTOR. 2. PUBLIC PROPERTY TREES SHALL BE PROTECTED BY ESTABLISHING A TREE PROTECTION ZONE USING 4' TALL FENCING INSTALLED AT THE DRIP LINE OF THE TREE. TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY SITE WORK AND MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. PROPOSED WORK WITHIN, OR CHANGES TO THE LOCATION OF TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY FORESTER PRIOR TO ALTERATION. 3. IN LOCATIONS WHERE PUBLIC TREES CANNOT BE PROTECTED TO THE DRIP LINE WITH TEMPORARY TREE PROTECTION FENCING, THE USE OF A 6" LAYER OF MULCH OR TRACK PADS WILL BE REQUIRED TO LIMIT SOIL COMPACTION AND PROTECT ROOT SYSTEMS WITHIN THE BOULEVARD WHEN ACCESS ROUTES OR MATERIAL STORAGE IS NECESSARY. 4. SEE CIVIL DEMOLITION PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SITE REMOVALS IN ADDITION TO TREES INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO PAVING, UTILITIES, AND STRUCTURES. 5. REFER TO THE FOLLOWING PLANS FOR TREES SLATED TO BE REMOVED TO ALLOW FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. A FULL TREE INVENTORY OF TREES TO BE PRESERVED OR REMOVED IS ATTACHED TO THIS DRAWING SET FOR REFERENCE. 6. CLEAR AND GRUB AND REMOVE ALL TREES NOTED FOR REMOVAL, VEGETATION AND SITE DEBRIS WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PRIOR TO GRADING. STRIP TOP SOIL AND STOCKPILE ON-SITE. ALL REMOVED MATERIAL SHALL BE HAULED FROM THE SITE DAILY. ALL CLEARING AND GRUBBING AND REMOVALS SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY ESTABLISHED UPON REMOVAL. SEE THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) / GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ENGINEER WITH ANY CONFLICTS OR PLAN DISCREPANCIES. 8. CONTRACTOR TO SCHEDULE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING(S) WITH UTILITY OWNER(S) TO DISCUSS DISCONNECTIONS AND/OR RELOCATIONS. 9. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION OF SEPTIC FIELD(S) & WELL(S) ON SITE. COORDINATE REMOVALS AND/OR ABANDONMENT WITH THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING APPLICABLE PERMITS. WELLS ON THE PROPERTY SHALL BE SEALED BY A MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (MDH) LICENSED CONTRACTOR. 10. ANY DAMAGE TO ITEMS NOT NOTED TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED TO ORIGINAL CONDITION WITH NO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION. 11. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WITH THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCIES. 12. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ALL WORK WITHIN THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITH THE OWNER AND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. 13. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE DEMOLITION PHASING WITH ALL DISCIPLINES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, & OWNER. 14. REFER TO THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXCAVATION DEWATERING. 4' - 0 " EXISTING GRADE TREE PROTECTION NOTE: INSTALL SNOW FENCE AROUND EACH TREE TO BE PROTECTED PRIOR TO GRADING. FENCE SHALL BE PLACED AT THE DRIP EDGE OR CRITICAL ROOT ZONES OF THE TREES. FENCING SHALL BE NO CLOSER THAN 6' TO THE TRUNK OF ANY TREE TO BE PROTECTED. THE PERIMETERS FOR TREES BEING PROTECTED SHALL BE DESIGNATED AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT ALL TREE PROTECTION AREAS THAT INSTRUCTS WORKERS TO STAY OUT. CONTRACTOR SHALL AVOID ALL AREAS WITHIN TREE PROTECTION FENCE. SOIL SHOULD BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION AND CHANGES IN CHEMISTRY FROM CONCRETE OR TOXIC MATERIALS SUCH AS FUELS AND PAINTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE "TREE PAINT" ON SITE AT ALL TIMES. IF AN OAK IS WOUNDED DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR MUST IMMEDIATELY APPLY PAINT TO THE WOUND IN ORDER TO PREVENT OAK WILT. ALL DAMAGE TO TREES TO BE PROTECTED SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. DR I P E D G E O F T R E E 2" X 4" WOOD STAKE, POSITIONED AS NOTED. STRING 4' HIGH, ORANGE POLYETHYLENE LAMINAR SAFETY NETTING BETWEEN WOOD STAKES PLACED 5' ON CENTER AND PLACED BETWEEN TREE PROTECTION AND DISTURBED AREAS. DR I P E D G E O F T R E E EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN TREE PROTECTION 1/4" = 1'-0"PROJ-260128-081 .ZLOORZ VSS6:16 )DLU 8 ZLOORZ VSS6:21 )DLU ER[HOGHU 6:10 PRRU ER[HOGHU 6:1)DLU 101 ER[HOGHU 6:8 PRRU 102 ER[HOGHU 6:PRRU 10ER[HOGHU 6:11 )DLU 18 ER[HOGHU 6:14 )DLU 8HOP $PHULFDQ +:12 )DLU 1 PXOEHUU\ ZKLWH +:26 )DLU 4 ER[HOGHU 6:12 )DLU ER[HOGHU 6:)DLU 6 ER[HOGHU 6:10 )DLU 100 HOP $PHULFDQ +:1)DLU 106 ER[HOGHU 6:11 )DLU 11VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 140 )DLU 114 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 140 )DLU 11VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 14 )DLU 118 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 12 )DLU 11VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 120 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 10 )DLU 121 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 14 40 )DLU 122 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 14 )DLU 12VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 126 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 12VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 12 )DLU 10 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 14 40 )DLU 12 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 0 )DLU 14 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 12 )DLU 1VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 16 VSUXFH EOXH CO 1)DLU 1VSUXFH EOXH CO 140 )DLU NOTE: 1. EXISTING TREES BEYOND THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY ARE DEPICTED FOR CONTEXT ONLY. TREE PRESERVATION TOTALS ARE BASED SOLELY ON TREES LOCATED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. 2. ALL PROPOSED TREES TO COUNT TOWARDS TREE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS. REFER TO SHEET L2-1. 1 PDSOH NRUZD\+:11 *RRG 2 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 20 )DLU PDSOH )UHHPDQ +:16 )DLU 4 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 2*RRG VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 2*RRG 6 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 10 0 *RRG VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 20 *RRG 10 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 2*RRG 11 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 10 20 )DLU 12 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 12)DLU 1FUDEDSSOH IORZHULQJ +:10 *RRG 14 RDN VZDPS ZKLWH +:*RRG 1VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 4 1)DLU 16 OLQGHQ $PHULFDQ +:2)DLU 1VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 18 FUDEDSSOH IORZHULQJ +:10 *RRG 1PDSOH VXJDU +:8 *RRG 20 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 2*RRG 21 SLQH UHG CO 6 1*RRG 22 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 10 2*RRG 2SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 12 2*RRG 24 PDSOH NRUZD\+:8 PRRU 2OLQGHQ $PHULFDQ +:22 )DLU 26 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 44 1*RRG 2VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 28 OLQGHQ $PHULFDQ +:2)DLU 2VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 8 2*RRG 0 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 8 2*RRG 1 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 2*RRG 2 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 20 )DLU VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 10 0 *RRG 4 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 8 2*RRG VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 16 4)DLU 6 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 12 40 PRRU VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 140 )DLU 8 PDSOH VXJDU +:1PRRU PDSOH VXJDU +:2)DLU 40 PDSOH NRUZD\+:24 )DLU 41 KRQH\ORFXVW +:1)DLU 42 KRQH\ORFXVW +:12 *RRG 4KRQH\ORFXVW +:10 )DLU 44 KRQH\ORFXVW +:*RRG 4KRQH\ORFXVW +:11 *RRG 46 KRQH\ORFXVW +:1*RRG 4VSUXFH EOXH CO 28 0 )DLU 48 UHGFHGDU HDVWHUQ CO 10 1)DLU 4UHGFHGDU HDVWHUQ CO 1)DLU 0 UHGFHGDU HDVWHUQ CO 10 1)DLU 1 UHGFHGDU HDVWHUQ CO 16 1)DLU 2 PDSOH UHG +:1*RRG VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 8 20 )DLU 4 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 2*RRG VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 2)DLU 6 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 10 )DLU PDSOH )UHHPDQ +:11 *RRG 8 FUDEDSSOH IORZHULQJ +:11 *RRG FUDEDSSOH IORZHULQJ +:10 *RRG 60 FUDEDSSOH IORZHULQJ +:11 *RRG 61 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 20 *RRG 62 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1PRRU 6VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 6 20 )DLU 64 RDN SLQ +:10 *RRG 6VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 20 )DLU 66 RDN SLQ +:*RRG 6PDSOH VLOYHU +:8 )DLU 68 PDSOH VXJDU +:16 PRRU 6PDSOH NRUZD\+:10 *RRG 0 PDSOH NRUZD\+:*RRG 1 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 140 )DLU 2 DUERUYLWDH HDVWHUQ CO 10 1)DLU DUERUYLWDH HDVWHUQ CO 18 1)DLU 4 DUERUYLWDH HDVWHUQ CO 10 1)DLU DUERUYLWDH HDVWHUQ CO 6 1)DLU 6 DUERUYLWDH HDVWHUQ CO 1)DLU DUERUYLWDH HDVWHUQ CO 11 1)DLU 8 DUERUYLWDH HDVWHUQ CO 12 1)DLU ER[HOGHU 6:1)DLU 80 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 81 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 10 0 )DLU 82 PXOEHUU\ ZKLWH +:12 )DLU 8ER[HOGHU 6:2PRRU 84 HOP $PHULFDQ +:1*RRG 8HOP $PHULFDQ +:20 )DLU 86 HOP $PHULFDQ +:11 )DLU 88 ER[HOGHU 6:21 PRRU 8ER[HOGHU 6:16 )DLU 0 ER[HOGHU 6:2)DLU 2 PXOEHUU\ ZKLWH +:1PRRU PXOEHUU\ ZKLWH +:1PRRU 8 PXOEHUU\ ZKLWH +:16 PRRU 104 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1PRRU 10VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 14 2PRRU 10VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 10 PRRU 108 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 10 2)DLU 10SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 8 20 )DLU 110 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 11 2)DLU 111 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1*RRG 112 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 11ELUFK ULYHU +:2 )DLU 116 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 8 0 PRRU 124 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 0 PRRU 12VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 11 0 PRRU 12VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 11 0 PRRU 128 ER[HOGHU 6:1PRRU 11 PXOEHUU\ ZKLWH +:11 PRRU 1ER[HOGHU 6:18 )DLU 1VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 140 VSUXFH ZKLWH CO 1)DLU 141 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 8 20 *RRG 142 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 20 *RRG 14ELUFK ULYHU +:2*RRG 144 SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 8 20 )DLU 14SLQH $XVWULDQ CO 10 20 )DLU NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G                                      9 4 5 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 6 940 937938939941942943 9 4 5 9 4 1 9 4 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1 936 936 937 938 935 940 936937938939 941 935 932 933 934 936 937 938 934 936 937 938 93 6 93 6 937 938 947 94 6 946 9 4 6 946 93 5 9 3 3 93 3 93 493 6 93 7 93 4 935 940 934 936 937 938 939 934 930 931 932 933 9 3 0 9 3 5 9 3 1 9 3 2 9 3 3 9 3 4 9 3 6 9 3 7 9 3 4 93 0 93 5 92 9 93 1 93 2 93 3 93 4 936 937 93 4 941 93 6 94 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1          009 006 005 004 003 002 001 010 011 013 012 014 015 016 018 017 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 031 030 029 133 132 131 134135 136 137 128 130 129 127 126 125 124 123 122 121 120 119 118 117 116 114 113 112 096 098 095 094 093 092 091090 089 088 100 108 109 110 111 107 106 105 104 087 085 086 084 083 071 070 069 068 066 065 062 063 061 060 059 058 064 057 067 082 081 079 080 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 052 053 054 055 056 039038 040 034 037 036 033 035 032 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 115145144 143 142 141140 139 APPROX. LIMITS OF GRADING APPROX. LIMITS OF GRADING PROPERTY LINE-TYP. LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ L A N D S C A P E \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ L 0 - 1 T R E E P R E S E R V A T I O N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 1 3 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Kevin V. Kroen - LA 53757 260128.00 SRT LJR/KVK KVK 05/26/2026 C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-2 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES (SEE L0-1 FOR DEFINITIONS) TREE SYMBOL LEGEND AND NOTES: EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVED (SEE L0-1 FOR DEFINITIONS) NOTE: EXISTING TREES BEYOND THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY ARE DEPICTED FOR CONTEXT ONLY. TREE PRESERVATION TOTALS ARE BASED SOLELY ON TREES LOCATED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. TREE PROTECTION FENCE SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SIZE DECIDUOUS TREES AC-F 12 ACER FREEMANII `ARMSTRONG`ARMSTRONG MAPLE B&B 2.5" CAL AC-S 6 ACER FREEMANII `SIENNA GLEN`SIENNA GLEN MAPLE B&B 3.5" CAL GY-E 15 GYMNOCLADUS DIOICUS 'ESPRESSO-JFS'ESPRESSO™ KENTUCKY COFFEETREE B&B 3.5" CAL MA-A 12 MALUS X 'ADIRONDACK'ADIRONDACK CRABAPPLE B&B 2.5" CAL MA-S 19 MALUS X `SPRING SNOW`SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE B&B 2.5" CAL QU-B 9 QUERCUS BICOLOR SWAMP WHITE OAK B&B 4.5" CAL QU-I 9 QUERCUS BICOLOR SWAMP WHITE OAK B&B 3.5" CAL QU-K 24 QUERCUS ROBUR X BICOLOR 'NADLER'KINDRED SPIRIT® OAK B&B 2.5" CAL QU-P 9 QUERCUS ROBUR X BICOLOR 'LONG'REGAL PRINCE® OAK B&B 3.5" CAL 115 SUBTOTAL: EVERGREEN TREES JU-V 10 JUNIPERUS VIRGINIANA EASTERN RED CEDAR B&B 6' HGT PI-A 12 PINUS CEMBRA 'ALGONQUIN PILLAR'ALGONQUIN PILLAR SWISS STONE PINE B&B 10' HGT PI-D 10 PICEA GLAUCA `DENSATA`BLACK HILLS SPRUCE B&B 6' HGT PI-G 9 PICEA GLAUCA `DENSATA`BLACK HILLS SPRUCE B&B 12' HGT 41 SUBTOTAL: PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL CODE BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME GROUND COVERS RM-01 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 1 2 1/2" GRAY TRAP ROCK RM-02 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 2 3/4" GRAY TRAP ROCK RM-03 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 3 DECORATIVE RIP RAP RM-04 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 4 3/8" PEA GRAVEL SM-01 STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST - BWSR 33-261 FILTRATION BASIN MIX TS-01 TURF SOD BLUEGRASS BLEND SOD LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ L A N D S C A P E \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ L 1 - 1 L A N D S C A P E P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 1 3 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Kevin V. Kroen - LA 53757 260128.00 SRT LJR/KVK KVK 05/26/2026 C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCHEDULE L1-1 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. GENERAL NOTES: CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT SITE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID. INSPECT SITE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF WORK. VERIFY LAYOUT AND ANY DIMENSIONS SHOWN AND BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ANY DISCREPANCIES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DESIGN AND / OR INTENT OF THE PROJECT'S LAYOUT. ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE WORK OR MATERIALS SUPPLIED. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING ROADS, CURBS / GUTTERS, TRAILS, TREES, LAWNS AND SITE ELEMENTS DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. ANY DAMAGE TO SAME SHALL BE REPAIRED AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALIGNMENT AND LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GRADE UTILITIES. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY PROTECTION FOR THE UTILITIES BEFORE CONSTRUCTION / MATERIAL INSTALLATION BEGINS. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY GENERAL CONTRACTOR OF ANY CONCERNS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF PLANTINGS. EXISTING CONTOURS, TRAILS, VEGETATION, CURB / GUTTER AND OTHER EXISTING ELEMENTS BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY OTHERS. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ANY AND ALL DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF SAME. THE ALIGNMENT AND GRADES OF THE PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS AND / OR ROADWAYS ARE SUBJECT TO FIELD ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO LOCALIZED TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS AND TO MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL AND GRADING. ANY CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT MUST BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. IRRIGATION NOTES: VERIFY EXISTING / PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM LAYOUT AND CONFIRM COMPLETE LIMITS OF IRRIGATION PRIOR TO SUPPLYING SHOP DRAWINGS. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AN IRRIGATION LAYOUT PLAN AND SPECIFICATION AS A PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK WHEN BIDDING. THESE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ORDER AND / OR INSTALLATION. IT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE THAT ALL SODDED / SEEDED AND PLANTED AREAS ARE IRRIGATED PROPERLY, INCLUDING THOSE AREAS DIRECTLY AROUND AND ABUTTING BUILDING FOUNDATION. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH AN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS AND TO PLANT MATERIAL GROWTH REQUIREMENTS. IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS NOT TO SPRINKLE ACROSS PAVEMENT NOR SHALL THE SYSTEM SPRINKLE THE BUILDING. THE SYSTEM SHALL INCORPORATE A RAIN SENSOR INTO IRRIGATION SYSTEM. PLANTINGS OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF IRRIGATION ARE TO BE WATERED REGULARLY UNTIL PLANTING / SOD / SEED HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. GENERAL NOTES COORDINATE THE PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING INSTALLATION WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON SITE. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. ALL PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER PLANTING DETAILS. REMOVE ALL FLAGGING AND LABELS FROM PLANTS. IF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS CONCERNED OR PERCEIVES ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE PLANT SELECTIONS, SOIL CONDITIONS OR ANY OTHER SITE CONDITION WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PLANT ESTABLISHMENT, SURVIVAL OR GUARANTEE, THE CONTRACTOR MUST BRING THESE DEFICIENCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PROCUREMENT AND / OR INSTALLATION. PROTECT ALL EXISTING TREES ON SITE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN. IF EXISTING TREES ARE DAMAGED IN ANY MANNER, ABOVE OR BELOW GROUND IN THE ROOT SYSTEM, AN ASPHALTIC TREE PRUNING PAINT SHOULD BE APPLIED IMMEDIATELY AFTER WOUNDING. SOIL & GROUNDCOVER ALL PLANTING AREAS RECEIVING PLANTED GROUND COVER, PERENNIALS, ANNUALS, AND/OR VINES SHALL RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF 24" DEPTH OF PLANTING SOIL (MNDOT 3877 - 2B OR EQUAL). WHERE SOD / SEED ABUTS PAVED SURFACES, FINISHED GRADE OF SOD / SEED SHALL BE HELD 1" BELOW SURFACE ELEVATION OF TRAIL, SLAB, CURB, ETC. SEED ALL AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING OTHER THAN THOSE AREAS NOTED TO RECEIVE SOD. SEED SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MULCHED AS PER MNDOT SPECS. SOD ALL DESIGNATED AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING. SOD SHALL BE LAID PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND SHALL HAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR IN DRAINAGE SWALES, THE SOD SHALL BE STAKED TO THE GROUND. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT SOIL AND COMPACTION CONDITIONS ARE ADEQUATE TO ALLOW FOR PROPER DRAINAGE AT AND AROUND THE BUILDING SITE. PLANTINGS INFO ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL SHRUBS SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 5 CANES AT THE SPECIFIED MINIMUM SHRUB HEIGHT OR WIDTH. ORNAMENTAL TREES SHALL HAVE NO V CROTCHES AND SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 3' ABOVE ROOT BALL. STREET AND BOULEVARD TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 5' ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. ANY CONIFEROUS TREE PREVIOUSLY PRUNED FOR CHRISTMAS TREE SALES SHALL NOT BE USED. ALL CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL BE FULL FORM, NATURAL TO THE SPECIES, WITHOUT PRUNING. PRIOR TO PLANTING, FIELD VERIFY THAT THE ROOT COLLAR / ROOT FLAIR IS LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE BALLED & BURLAP TREE. IF THIS IS NOT THE CASE, SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED DOWN TO THE ROOT COLLAR / ROOT FLAIR. WHEN THE BALLED & BURLAP TREE IS PLANTED, THE ROOT COLLAR / ROOT FLAIR SHALL BE EVEN OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. ALL PROPOSED PLANTS SHALL BE LOCATED AND STAKED AS SHOWN ON PLAN. ADJUSTMENTS IN LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLANT MATERIALS MAY BE NEEDED IN FIELD. SHOULD AN ADJUSTMENT BE ADVISED, THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST BE NOTIFIED. PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER PLANT SCHEDULE IF DISCREPANCIES IN QUANTITIES EXIST. SPECIFICATIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. NO PLANT MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVAL IS REQUESTED OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF A BID AND / OR QUOTATION. WRAPPING MATERIAL SHALL BE CORRUGATED PVC PIPING 1" GREATER IN CALIPER THAN THE TREE BEING PROTECTED OR QUALITY, HEAVY, WATERPROOF CREPE PAPER MANUFACTURED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES PLANTED IN THE FALL PRIOR TO 12-1 AND REMOVE ALL WRAPPING AFTER 5-1. FERTILIZER ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE FERTILIZED UPON INSTALLATION WITH A 27-3-3 SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER MIXED IN WITH THE PLANTING SOIL PER THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. PLANTS MAY BE TREATED FOR SUMMER AND FALL INSTALLATION WITH AN APPLICATION OF GRANULAR 27-3-3 AT 6 OZ PER 2.5" CALIPER PER TREE AND 3 OZ PER SHRUB WITH AN ADDITIONAL APPLICATION OF 27-3-3 THE FOLLOWING SPRING IN THE TREE SAUCER. EDGING FOR PLANTING BEDS BLACK METAL EDGER TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, AND ANNUALS WHERE BED MEETS SOD / SEED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. PLANTING BED PREPARATION ALL ANNUAL AND PERENNIAL PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 3" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD WITH NO WEED BARRIER AND ROCK MULCH WITH WEED BARRIER. ALL SHRUB BED MASSINGS TO RECEIVE 3" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD WITH NO WEED BARRIER AND ROCK MULCH WITH WEED BARRIER. ALL TREES NOT IN PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 4" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH RING WITH NO MULCH IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK. SPREAD GRANULAR PRE EMERGENT HERBICIDE (PREEN OR EQUAL) PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER ALL MULCHED AREAS. MAINTENANCE STRIPS TO HAVE EDGER AND MULCH AS SPECIFIED / INDICATED ON DRAWING OR IN SPECIFICATION. INSPECTION AND WARRANTY CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION OF ALL LANDSCAPE AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ON-GOING MAINTENANCE OF ALL NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UNTIL TIME OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO OWNER ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A MAINTENANCE PROGRAM INCLUDING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO, PRUNING, FERTILIZATION AND DISEASE / PEST CONTROL. CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE NEW PLANT MATERIAL THROUGH TWO (2) CALENDAR YEAR FROM THE DATE OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. WARRANTY (TWO (2) FULL GROWING SEASON) FOR LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SHALL BEGIN ON THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF PLANTING OF ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. NO PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE CONSIDERED. TIMING OF INSTALLATION UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE THE APPROPRIATE DATES FOR SPRING PLANT MATERIAL INSTALLATION AND SEED / SOD PLACEMENT IS FROM THE TIME GROUND HAS THAWED TO JUNE 15. FALL SODDING IS GENERALLY ACCEPTABLE FROM AUGUST 15 - NOVEMBER 1. FALL SEEDING FROM AUGUST 15 - SEPTEMBER 15; DORMANT SEEDING IN THE FALL SHALL NOT OCCUR PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 1. FALL CONIFEROUS PLANTING MAY OCCUR FROM AUGUST 15 - OCTOBER 1 AND DECIDUOUS PLANTING FROM THE FIRST FROST UNTIL NOVEMBER 15. PLANTING OUTSIDE THESE DATES IS NOT RECOMMENDED. ANY ADJUSTMENT MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. TREES ARE NOT TO BE PRUNED, REMOVED OR TRANSPLANTED BETWEEN APRIL 15 AND JULY 1. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF THESE DATES ARE UNAVOIDABLE. LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: TREE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS: MITIGATION RATE. SIGNIFICANT LIVE TREES LOST OR REASONABLY ANTICIPATED TO BE LOST AS A RESULT OF BUILDING, CONSTRUCTION, OR GRADING IMMEDIATELY OR IN THE FUTURE, SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER BY PLANTING THAT NUMBER OF CALIPER INCHES OF TREES ("REPLACEMENT TREES") DETERMINED AT A RATE OF 1:2 OR ONE INCH REPLACED FOR EVERY TWO INCHES LOST. THE TREES REQUIRED TO BE REPLACED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION SHALL BE IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER TREES REQUIRED TO BE PLANTED PURSUANT TO ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THE CODE. ON SITE SIGNIFICANT TREES (IN CALIPER INCHES):1,403 CALIPER IN. ON SITE SIGNIFICANT TREES LOST (IN CALIPER INCHES):1,113 CALIPER IN. ON SITE SIGNIFICANT TREES KEPT (IN CALIPER INCHES):290 CALIPER IN. AMOUNT OF MITIGATION REQUIRED (IN CALIPER INCHES):486.35 CALIPER IN. AMOUNT OF MITIGATION PROPOSED (IN CALIPER INCHES):487.5 CALIPER IN. LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: CALIPER INCHES. THE MINIMUM CALIPER INCHES REQUIRED PER BUILDING SITE SHALL RELATE TO THE GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL FLOORS OF A BUILDING AND THE BUILDING HEIGHT. A SINGLE STORY BUILDING IN EXCESS OF THIRTY (30) FEET IN HEIGHT SHALL BE CONSIDERED A TWO-STORY BUILDING FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETERMINING GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE. MINIMUM TOTAL CALIPER INCHES = GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL FLOORS OF BUILDING / 320. BUILDING HEIGHT IN STORIES:PERCENTAGE OF TREES OF VARIOUS CALIPER INCHES: 2.0" - 3.0" 3.5" - 4.0" 4.5" - 6.0" 1-2 50 % 30 % 20 % 3-4 50 % 30 % 20 % 5 AND OVER 30 % 50 % 20 % GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL FLOORS:198,094 SF CALIPER INCHES REQUIRED (619 - 290 CALIPER IN. KEPT):329.0 CALIPER IN. 2.0" - 3.0" TREES PROVIDED:217.5 CALIPER IN. 3.5" - 4.0" TREES PROVIDED:184.5 CALIPER IN. 4.5" - 6.0" TREES PROVIDED:85.5 CALIPER IN. TREES ALONG STREET FRONTAGE. A MINIMUM OF ONE TREE SHALL BE PROVIDED ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR EVERY FIFTY (50) FEET OF PUBLIC STREET FRONTAGE. 586.6' ALONG HARRIET AVE AND 445.7' ALONG LEXINGTON AVE N. TOTAL STREET FRONTAGE:1,032.3' TOTAL STREET TREES REQUIRED:21 TREES TOTAL STREET TREES PROVIDED:30 TREES PERENNIALS AND SHRUBBERIES. AT LEAST TEN (10) PERCENT OF THE TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA SHALL BE COVERED WITH PERENNIALS AND/OR SHRUBBERY AND BE PLANTED WITHIN THE PERIMETER OF PRIVATE PARKING, BUILDING, AND DRIVEWAY AREAS. TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA:87,324.60 SF TOTAL PLANTING AREA REQUIRED:8,732.46 SF / 10% TOTAL PLANTING AREA PROVIDED:9,888.63 SF / 11.3% PLANTING ISLANDS. PLANTING ISLANDS SHALL BE REQUIRED TO VISUALLY BREAK UP EXPANSES OF HARD-SURFACE PARKING AREAS, TO PROVIDE SAFE AND EFFICIENT TRAFFIC MOVEMENT, AND TO DEFINE ROWS OF PARKING. PLANTING ISLANDS SHALL OCCUPY AT LEAST TEN (10) PERCENT OF THE PARKING AREA. PLANTING ISLANDS SHALL BE EDGED WITH CONCRETE CURBS. PARKING LOT PLANTING ISLANDS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 150 SQUARE FEET IN AREA, BE OF APPROPRIATE WIDTH AND LENGTH, AND INCLUDE AT LEAST ONE TREE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ORDINANCE. TOTAL PARKING AREA:59,482.94 SF PLANTING ISLAND AREA REQUIRED (59,482.94 SF / 10):5,948.30 SF / 10% PLANTING ISLAND AREA PROVIDED:6,974.05 SF / 11.7% PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=947.25 GFE=936.25 (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) NO PARKING NO PA R K I N G NO PA R K I N G FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10                                      9 4 5 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 6 940 937938939941942943 9 4 5 9 4 1 9 4 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1 936 936 937 938 935 940 936937938939 941 935 932 933 934 936 937 938 934 936 937 938 93 6 93 6 937 938 947 94 6 946 9 4 6 946 93 5 9 3 3 93 3 93 493 6 93 7 93 4 935 940 934 936 937 938 939 934 930 931 932 933 9 3 0 9 3 5 9 3 1 9 3 2 9 3 3 9 3 4 9 3 6 9 3 7 9 3 4 93 0 93 5 92 9 93 1 93 2 93 3 93 4 936 937 93 4 941 93 6 94 2 9 4 3 9 4 4 9 4 0 9 3 9 94 1 FILTRATION BASIN 1P NWL=DRY HWL=934.10     FILTRATION BASIN 2P NWL=DRY HWL=932.73      5 QU-B 2 QU-B 2 QU-B 1 MA-S 3 PI-D 3 PI-D 5 MA-A 7 MA-A 3 PI-A 3 PI-A 5 JU-V 4 MA-S 5 AC-F 3 PI-G 3 PI-G 3 PI-G 3 QU-I 3 QU-I 3 QU-I 3 JU-V 3 MA-S 5 MA-S 3 PI-A 1 GY-E 2 GY-E 1 GY-E 1 GY-E 1 GY-E 1 GY-E 1 GY-E 2 GY-E 6 QU-P 1 GY-E 4 AC-F 1 GY-E 3 QU-P 1 AC-F 1 AC-F 1 AC-F 3 PI-A 6 QU-K 6 QU-K 6 QU-K 6 QU-K 2 PI-D 1 JU-V 2 AC-S 1 PI-D 1 PI-D 2 MA-S 1 AC-S 1 JU-V 1 GY-E 1 GY-E 1 AC-S 1 AC-S 1 GY-E 4 MA-S 1 AC-S AMENITY AREA TOT LOT SPORTS COURTS (BY OTHERS) DOG RUN PATIO RM-01 RM-02 RM-03 RM-03 RM-02 RM-02 RM-01 SM-01 SM-01 SM-01 TS-01 TS-01 TS-01 TS-01 TS-01 TS-01 TS-01 LIMITS OF IRRIGATION (TYP.) LIMITS OF IRRIGATION (TYP.) LIMITS OF IRRIGATION (TYP.) LANDSCAPE EDGING (TYP.) LANDSCAPE EDGING (TYP.) APPROX. LIMITS OF GRADING APPROX. LIMITS OF GRADING PROPERTY LINE, TYP. RETAINING WALL, SEE CIVIL CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT SIZE DECIDUOUS TREES AC-F ACER FREEMANII `ARMSTRONG` ARMSTRONG MAPLE B&B 2.5" CAL AC-S ACER FREEMANII `SIENNA GLEN` SIENNA GLEN MAPLE B&B 3.5" CAL GY-E GYMNOCLADUS DIOICUS 'ESPRESSO-JFS' ESPRESSO™ KENTUCKY COFFEETREE B&B 3.5" CAL MA-A MALUS X 'ADIRONDACK' ADIRONDACK CRABAPPLE B&B 2.5" CAL MA-S MALUS X `SPRING SNOW` SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE B&B 2.5" CAL QU-B QUERCUS BICOLOR SWAMP WHITE OAK B&B 4.5" CAL QU-I QUERCUS BICOLOR SWAMP WHITE OAK B&B 3.5" CAL QU-K QUERCUS ROBUR X BICOLOR 'NADLER' KINDRED SPIRIT® OAK B&B 2.5" CAL QU-P QUERCUS ROBUR X BICOLOR 'LONG' REGAL PRINCE® OAK B&B 3.5" CAL EVERGREEN TREES JU-V JUNIPERUS VIRGINIANA EASTERN RED CEDAR B&B 6' HGT PI-A PINUS CEMBRA 'ALGONQUIN PILLAR' ALGONQUIN PILLAR SWISS STONE PINE B&B 10' HGT PI-D PICEA GLAUCA `DENSATA` BLACK HILLS SPRUCE B&B 6' HGT PI-G PICEA GLAUCA `DENSATA` BLACK HILLS SPRUCE B&B 12' HGT PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME GROUND COVERS RM-01 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 1 2 1/2" GRAY TRAP ROCK RM-02 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 2 3/4" GRAY TRAP ROCK RM-03 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 3 DECORATIVE RIP RAP RM-04 ROCK MULCH-TYPE 4 3/8" PEA GRAVEL SM-01 STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST - BWSR 33-261 FILTRATION BASIN MIX TS-01 TURF SOD BLUEGRASS BLEND SOD GROUND COVER SCHEDULE LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ L A N D S C A P E \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ L 1 - 1 L A N D S C A P E P L A N Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 1 3 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Kevin V. Kroen - LA 53757 260128.00 SRT LJR/KVK KVK 05/26/2026 C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION N SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 LANDSCAPE PLAN L2-1 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ L A N D S C A P E \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ L 8 - 1 L A N D S C A P E D E T A I L S Pl o t t e d : 0 5 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 6 1 2 : 1 4 P M CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com 3499 LEXINGTON AVE. N APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N, ARDEN HILLS, MN 55126 OWNER NAME OWNER ADDRESS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Kevin V. Kroen - LA 53757 260128.00 SRT LJR/KVK KVK 05/26/2026 C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C2-2 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN C2-3 TURNING MOVEMENTS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 - C8-4 CIVIL DETAILS L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 05/01/2026 PUD SUBMISSION SWPPP PRELIM I N A R Y NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS FROM AN ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY LOUCKS, DATED 04/11/2026. L1-1 LANDSCAPE NOTES & SCH. L0-2 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L0-1 TREE INVENTORY C1-3 GENERAL NOTES 05/27/2026 PUD SUBMISSION LANDSCAPE DETAILS L8-1 2x ROOT BALL WIDTH SET PLANT ON UNDISTRUBED NATIVE SOIL SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING EDGE CONDITION VARIES WOOD STAKE BACKFILL WITH IN SITU TOPSOIL MULCH - 4" DEEP. NO MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK - SEE NOTES OR SPECS. ROOT FLARE EVEN WITH OR JUST ABOVE GRADE SAFETY FLAGGING - ONE PER WIRE TREE WRAP TO FIRST BRANCH 16"X2" POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE STRAP NOTES: 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGH THE WARRANTY PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUT NOT REQUIRED. ANY STAKING MUST CONFORM WITH PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN A.N.A. GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD PRACTICES. 2. PRUNE DAMAGED AND CROSSING BRANCHES AFTER PLANTING IS COMPLETE. 3. CUT BACK WIRE BASKET. 4. WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL IN 8-12" LIFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. 5. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE EXISTS. DETAIL - DECIDUOUS TREE 3/4" = 1'-0" CUT ROPES AND EXPOSE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP BALL. REMOVE NON-BIODEGRADABLE MATERIAL. LOUCKS PROJ-260128-01 1 2 x ROOT BALL WIDTH NOTES: 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGH THE WARRANTY PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUT NOT REQUIRED. ANY STAKING MUST CONFORM WITH PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN A.N.A. GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD PRACTICES. 2. PRUNE ANY DAMAGED BRANCHES AFTER PLANTING IS COMPLETE. 3. WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL IN 8-12" LIFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. 4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE EXISTS. DETAIL - CONIFEROUS TREE 3/4" = 1'-0" SET PLANT ON UNDISTRUBED NATIVE SOIL SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING EDGE CONDITION VARIES WOOD STAKE BACKFILL WITH IN SITU TOPSOIL MULCH - 4" DEEP. NO MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK - SEE NOTES OR SPECS. SAFETY FLAGGING - ONE PER WIRE 16"X2" POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE STRAP CUT ROPES AND EXPOSE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP BALL. REMOVE NON-BIODEGRADABLE MATERIAL. LOUCKS2 PROJ-260128-02 NOTES: LOOSEN ROOTS OF ALL CONTAINERIZED PLANTS. SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING BU I L D I N G W A L L ( T Y P ) EDGE VARIES - REFER TO PLAN EDGING MATERIAL - SEE NOTES OR SPEC. LANDSCAPE FABRIC - SEE NOTES OR SPEC. MULCH - 3" DEPTH - SEE NOTES OR SPEC. PLANTING SOIL - SEE NOTES OR SPEC. SHRUBS TO BE PLACED SO THAT TOP OF CONTAINER SITS FLUSH WITH PROPOSED GRADE DETAIL - SHRUB PLANTING 1" = 1'-0" REFER TO SCHEDULE 18" MIN. PREPARE BED A MIN. 4" DEEPER THAN ROOT BALL LOUCKS PROJ-260128-04 3 VARIES SEE SCHEDULE FOR SPACING NOTE: LOOSEN ROOTS OF PLANT MATERIAL PRIOR TO PLANTING BU I L D I N G W A L L ( T Y P ) PLANTING SOIL - SEE NOTES EDGE VARIES - REFER TO PLAN EDGING MATERIAL - SEE NOTES MULCH - 3" MIN. DEPTH - SEE NOTES PLANTING - PERENNIAL 1" = 1'-0" LOUCKS PROJ-260128-03 4 DERO - ROLLING RACK 3/8" = 1'-0" NOTES: MODEL: RR2H (38" ) COLOR: SUBMIT STANDARD POWDER COAT COLORS FOR OWNER APPROVAL FINISH: MATTE POWDER COAT DERO - ROLLING RACK BIKE RACK OR EQUAL 36 " LOUCKS10 PROJ-260128-05 HOLD FINISHED GRADE 1/2" BELOW EDGER- SEE PLAN FOR EDGE CONDITION TURF- SEE PLANTING PLAN PLANTING PLAN - SEE SCHEDULE ED-01 - METAL EDGER WITH STAKE ED-01 - LANDSCAPE EDGER TYP. ̀ 1 1/2" = 1'-0" LOUCKS PROJ-260128-10 5 NOTES: VARIES - SEE PLAN 5' - 0 " 4' - 0 " 3 3/4" 2" 3. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY UTILITY LOCATIONS AND FIELD ALTER POST LOCATIONS AS NEEDED.10" 2. COLOR TO BE BLACK 'NO MAR' POLYESTER FINISH 1. CONFIRM POST SIZES WITH MANUFACTURER'S WIND LOADING CHARTS 1 3/4" FORERUNNER RAIL 1" X 14 GA. SQUARE PICKET CONFIRM POST SIZE WITH MNFR. 1 3/4" FORERUNNER RAIL EXTEND CONCRETE FOOTING TO BELOW FROST DEPTH FE-01 - DECORATIVE FENCE 3/8" = 1'-0" LOUCKS6 PROJ-260128-11 ROCK MULCH AT 4" MIN. DEPTH; EXPOSE NO FABRIC ; SEE SCHEDULE FOR COLOR WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC. OVERLAP 6" MINIMUM; SECURE IN PLACE WITH POLY FABRIC STAPLES PREPARED SUBGRADE LM-02 - ROCK MULCH 1 1/2" = 1'-0" LOUCKS. PROJ-260128-09 CONCRETE CURB ADD CONTROL JOINTS EVERY 48" MIN. TWO #4 REBAR CONTINUOUS EXISTING GROUND OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE 12" 4" DRAIN TILE W/ CLEAN DRAINAGE AGGREGATE GEO-TEXTILE FABRIC COMPACTED CLASS V BASE MATERIAL ORNAMENTAL FENCE (SURFACE MOUNT) SEE DETAIL GRAVEL DOG RUN SURFACE CONCRETE CURB # DOG RUN 1/2" = 1'-0" LOUCKS PROJ-260128-13 8 MAINTENANCE STRIP 24" NTS ROCK MULCH AT 4" MIN. DEPTH; EXPOSE NO FABRIC ; SEE SCHEDULE FOR COLOR WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC. OVERLAP 6" MINIMUM; SECURE IN PLACE WITH POLY FABRIC STAPLES ED-XX; SEE PLAN 2'-0" TYP EDGE OF BUILDING PLANTING CONDITION PER PLAN LOUCKS PROJ-260128-14 40465 STMH 931.84 40466 STMH 927.14 36 18 18 29 18 18 7 7 1313 2 CA DD f il es pr epar ed by t he Co ns ul tan t f or th is pr oje ct ar e instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion o f t h i s p r o j e ct b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a pp r o va l by t h e Con su lt ant . W it h the C onsul ta nt 's appr ova l, othe rs ma y be p e r m i t ted to ob tain co p ies o f t h e C AD D d r a win g f i l e s f o r inf ormation and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD f iles shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100 Plymouth 55441 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Pl o t t e d : 04 / 1 1 / 2 0 2 6 5 : 2 2 P M W: \ 2 0 2 6 \ 2 6 0 1 2 8 \ C A D D D A T A \ S U R V E Y \ _ d w g S h e e t F i l e s \ S 2 6 0 1 2 8 - A L T A OUCKSL CADD QUALIFICATION QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS ARDEN HILLS APARTMENTS 3499 LEXINGTON AVENUE N ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 55126 ROERS COMPANIES 2 CARLSON PARKWAY N SUITE 400 PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 N SCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY 1 OF 1 (Per Schedule A of the herein referenced Title Commitment) The North 445.66 feet of the East 586.60 feet of the South 600.5 feet of the North 1472.5 feet of the East 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 34, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, in Ramsey County, Minnesota. Torrens Property, Certificate No. 323978. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED (Per Schedule B, Part II of the herein referenced Title Commitment) The property depicted on this survey and the easements of record shown hereon are the same as the property and the easements described in the Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, File No. ORTE751424, effective date March 2, 2026. The numbers below correspond to those in the title commitment. #1 & 3-9 do not require comment. 2.Any discrepancies, conflicts, easements, boundary line disputes, encroachments or protrusions, or overlapping of improvements which would be disclosed by an inspection and accurate survey of the premises. Easement for drainage and utilities per Document No. 2062553, and rights of the public, in that portion thereof taken for highway per Certificate of Title No. 323978, are shown hereon the east side of the site. TITLE COMMITMENT EXCEPTIONS (The following items refer to Table A optional survey responsibilities and specifications) 1.Monuments placed (or a reference monument or witness to the corner) at all major corners of the boundary of the property, unless already marked or referenced by existing monuments or witnesses to the corner are shown hereon. The relationship to the surface of the ground of monuments, shown hereon, found or placed, is flush with the ground unless otherwise noted. 2.The address, as disclosed in documents provided to the surveyor, obtained by the surveyor, or observed while conducting the fieldwork is 3499 Lexington Avenue North, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55126. 3.This property is contained in Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) per Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 27123C0020G, Community Panel No. 2703750020G, effective date of June 4, 2010. 4.The Gross land area is 261,425 +/- square feet or 6.00 +/- acres. The Right of Way land area is 14,707 +/- square feet or 0.34 +/- acres. The Net land area is 246,718 +/- square feet or 5.66 +/- acres. 6.(a) Any zoning classification, setback requirements, height and floor space area restrictions, and parking requirements, shown hereon, was researched to the best of our ability and is open to interpretation. Per the City of Arden Hills Zoning Map and City Code, on 04/06/26, information for the subject property is as follows: Zone R-3 Townhouse and Low Density Multiple Dwelling District Setbacks: Front 40 feet, Side 10 feet, Rear (Principle) 30 feet, Rear (Accessory) 10 feet; Height: thirty five (35) feet; Floor Area Ratio: Lot coverage shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of lot area. 7.(a) Exterior dimensions of all buildings are shown at ground level. 8.Substantial features observed in the process of conducting fieldwork, are shown hereon. 9.Striping of clearly identifiable parking spaces on surface parking areas and lots are shown hereon. The number and type of clearly identifiable parking stalls on this site are as follows: 179 Regular + 10 Disabled = 189 Total Parking Stalls. 11.(a) We have shown underground utilities on and/or serving the surveyed property per Gopher State One-Call Ticket Nos. 260760751 & 260760766. The following utilities and municipalities were notified: ARVIG (218)346-8174 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS (651)792-7850 COMCAST (812)483-7923 CITY OF SHOREVIEW (651)490-4661 CENTURYLINK (800)778-9140 FORGED FIBER (800)778-9140 MCI (800)624-9675 XCEL ENERGY (651)229-2427 CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS (800)778-9140 ZAYO BANDWIDTH (800)961-6500 i.Utility operators do not consistently respond to locate requests through the Gopher State One Call service for surveying purposes such as this. Those utility operators that do respond, often will not locate utilities from their main line to the customer's structure or facility. They consider those utilities “private” installations that are outside their jurisdiction. These “private” utilities on the surveyed property or adjoining properties, may not be located since most operators will not mark such "private" utilities. A private utility locator may be contacted to investigate these utilities further, if requested by the client. ii.Maps provided by those notified above, either along with a field location or in lieu of such a location, are very often inaccurate or inconclusive. EXTREME CAUTION MUST BE EXERCISED BEFORE AN EXCAVATION TAKES PLACE ON OR NEAR THIS SITE. BEFORE DIGGING, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO NOTIFY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE AT 811 or (651) 454-0002. ALTA/NSPS OPTIONAL TABLE A NOTES SURVEY REPORT 1.The Surveyor was not provided utility easement documents for the subject property except for those shown on the Survey. 2.The bearings for this survey are based on the Ramsey County Coordinate System NAD 83 (1986 Adjust). 3.Originating Benchmark: MnDOT Bridge wing wall named "6216 A" located in Arden Hills, in the southeast wing wall of railroad bridge number 62003 over Trunk Highway 51, 0.2 mile north along Trunk Highway 51 (Hamline Avenue) from the junction of Trunk Highway 51 and County Road E West, 29.0 feet east of northbound Trunk Highway 51, 25.5 feet south of a railroad. Elevation = 930.54 feet (NGVD29) Site Benchmark: Top nut of hydrant located south of the site. Elevation = 934.65 feet (NGVD29) 4.Tree diameters shown hereon are measured at breast height in inches. 5.Snow and ice conditions during winter months may obscure otherwise visible evidence of on site improvements and/or utilities. To Roers Acquisitions LLC; Catholic United Financial; and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company: This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2026 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1 - 4, 6(a), 7(a), 8, 9 and 11(a) of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on 03/31/26. Date of Plat or Map: 04/11/26 ___________________________________________________ Matthew R. Arnold, PLS Minnesota License No. 54100 marnold@loucksinc.com CERTIFICATION 04/11/26 SURVEY ISSUED License No. Date I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of VICINITY MAP Field Crew 54100 Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Minnesota. Matthew Arnold - PLS 260128 MRA SLS MRA CMS, SRK 04/11/26 SITE PARKING STALL COUNT DISABLED PARKING STALL MAPLE ASH 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATIONSIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE EXISTING BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC ELECTRIC METER GAS METER CONIFEROUS TREE PINE DECIDUOUS TREE GUY WIRE 1 SCHEDULE B II ITEM ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER HAND HOLE ROOF DRAIN FOUND 1/2 INCH OPEN IRON MONUMENT UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE SET 1/2 INCH X 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT, MARKED "LS 54100" MAPPED WATERMAIN PAVERS RIP-RAP MAPPED UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE BENCH WILLOW SPRUCE LINDEN BOXELDER MULBERRY BIRCH ELM MISC FRUIT ARBORVITAE OAK WATER LINEFLAG POLE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT LOCUST CEDAR 2 2 SETBACK LINE FOUND STONE FOUND RAMSEY COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT 2 YARD LIGHT CIVIL ENGINEERING | LAND SURVEYING | LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 12755 Highway 55, Suite R100, Plymouth, MN 55441 | 763.424.5505 Stormwater Management Plan 3499 Lexington Avenue North Apartments Arden Hills, MN Prepared by Loucks May 27, 2026 Loucks Project No. 260128.00 Attachment F DRAFT REPORT www.transportationcollaborative.com To: Nick Asta, Developer Roers Companies From: Matt Pacyna, PE, Principal Transportation Collaborative & Consultants, LLC Date: June 26, 2026 Subject: 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study; Arden Hills, MN INTRODUCTION TC2 completed a traffic study for the proposed residential development at 3499 Lexington Avenue in the City of Arden Hills. The subject site, shown in Figure 1, is generally in the northwest quadrant of the Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) intersection. The main objectives of the study are to identify existing traffic operations within the study area, evaluate potential impacts of the proposed development, and recommend improvements, if necessary, to ensure safe and efficient operations for all users. The following study assumptions, methodology, and findings are offered for consideration. Figure 1 Subject Site Subject Site Pi n e T r e e D r Harriet Ave CR E Cannon Ave Le x i n g t o n A v e ( C R 5 1 ) Ri c h m o n d A v e Sn e l l i n g A v e ( H w y 5 1 ) Attachment G 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study June 26, 2026 Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing conditions were reviewed within the study area to establish current traffic conditions to help determine impacts associated with the proposed development. The evaluation of existing conditions included collecting traffic volumes, observing transportation characteristics, reviewing crash history, and analyzing intersection capacity, which are described in the following sections. Traffic Volumes Vehicular intersection turning movement counts were collected at the following locations on Thursday, June 4, 2026 from 7 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m.; note that a 13-hour count (6 a.m. to 7 p.m.) was collected at the Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) intersection to help identify if the intersection meets any traffic signal warrants, which is discussed later in this report. • County Road E and Pine Tree Drive • Harriet Avenue and West Site Access • Harriet Avenue and Benton Way East / East Site Access • Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) The peak hours represent 7:45 to 8:45 a.m. and 4:15 to 5:15 p.m. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were provided by MnDOT or estimated based on the data collected. Transportation Characteristics Observations were conducted within the study area to identify various transportation characteristics such as roadway geometry, traffic controls, speed limits, and multimodal facilities. A general overview of key roadways within the study area is as follows: • Lexington Avenue (CR 51) – a 3-lane minor arterial with a center two-way left-turn lane near Harriet Avenue. There is multi-use trail along the east side of the corridor and sidewalk along the west side from about 450 feet north of Harriet Avenue to the north. The speed limit is 40-mph. • County Road E – a 5-lane minor arterial with a center two-way left-turn lane near Pine Tree Drive. There is sidewalk along both sides of the road, and the speed limit is 35-mph. • Harriet Avenue / Pine Tree Drive – a 2-lane minor collector that includes an additional northbound lane within the Pine Tree Drive segment. There is sidewalk along the west side of the roadway from CR E to about 500 feet to the south. The speed limit is 25-mph. All other study roadways are 2-lane local facilities. The County Road E and Pine Tree Drive intersection is signalized, while all other study intersections have side-street stop control. Existing geometrics, traffic controls, and volumes in the study area are shown in Figure 2. Crash History Five (5) years of crash history were reviewed from 2021 through 2025 using MnDOT’s Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (MnCMAT), which identified a total of two (2) crashes that occurred at the study intersections. One crash occurred at the County Road E / Pine Tree Drive intersection and the other at the Lexington Avenue (CR 51) / Harriet Avenue intersection. Neither crash involved a pedestrian / bicyclist or resulted in a fatality or serious injury. Therefore, based on this review there does not appear to be any safety issues from a crash frequency or severity perspective within the study area. 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study Figure 2Existing Conditions Legend AM Peak Hour VolumePM Peak Hour VolumeEstimated Weekday ADT VolumeStop SignTraffic Signal XXX(XXX)X,XXX N 4 1 ( 1 4 5 ) 1 7 ( 6 9 ) 436 (827)191 (104) 475 (835)74 (53) 3 , 6 0 0 1,025 1 2 , 8 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 14,50015,900 875 7 (1)28 (61) 10 (2)28 (43) 0 ( 6 ) 0 ( 1 4 ) 9 (16)1 (0)24 (57) 21 (29)6 (7)8 (4) 26 ( 3 1 ) 35 1 ( 5 5 1 ) 12 ( 9 ) 1 0 ( 1 8 ) 3 2 5 ( 6 6 0 ) 3 7 ( 3 2 ) 1 (1)26 (67)1 (7) 1 (1)37 (41)4 (14) 0 ( 3 ) 0 ( 0 ) 7 ( 5 ) 1 ( 1 ) 0 ( 0 ) 1 ( 1 ) CR E / Lake Johanna Blvd CR 5 1 / L e x i n g t o n A v e Benton W a y Harriet Ave 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study June 26, 2026 Page 4 Intersection Capacity Intersection capacity was evaluated using Synchro / SimTraffic Software (version 11), which uses methods outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. The software is used to develop calibrated models that simulate observed traffic operations, account for peaking characteristics, and identify key metrics such as intersection Level of Service (LOS) and queues. These models incorporate collected traffic, pedestrian, and bicyclist volumes, traffic controls, heavy commercial vehicle activity (i.e., buses and trucks), and driver behavior factors. Level of Service (LOS) quantifies how an intersection is operating. Intersections are graded from LOS A to LOS F, which corresponds to the average delay per vehicle values shown. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation, while LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. Overall intersection LOS A though LOS D is considered acceptable in the study area. Existing signal timing was provided by Ramsey County. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate for the level of service of the side-street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection with side- street stop control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the overall intersection level of service, which takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the intersection and the capability of the intersection to support the volumes. Second, it is important to consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, most delay is attributed to the side-street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic volumes to experience high-levels of delay (i.e., poor levels of service) on the side-street approaches, but an acceptable overall intersection level of service during peak hour conditions. For side-street stop intersections, the overall intersection level of service is shown followed by the worst-approach level of service and delay. The existing intersection capacity analysis results, summarized in Table 1, indicate that all study intersections and approaches operate at an acceptable LOS B or better during the typical weekday peak hours; no significant queuing was observed. Note that eastbound queues along Harriet Avenue at Lexington Avenue (CR 51) range from approximately 45 to 60 feet (i.e., 2 to 3 vehicles) during the peak hours; these queues do not impact the east site access or Benton Way East intersection operations. Thus, there are no significant existing operational issues from an intersection capacity perspective. Table 1 Existing Intersection Capacity Intersection Traffic Control Level of Service (delay in seconds) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour CR E and Pine Tree Drive Signal A (4) A (7) Harriet Avenue and West Site Access SSS A / A (1) A / A (4) Harriet Avenue and Benton Way East / East Site Access SSS A / A (4) A / A (5) Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) SSS A / A (7) A / B (12) SSS – Side-Street-Stop (overall intersection level of service is shown followed by the worst-approach level of service and delay) Level of Service Average Delay / Vehicles Unsignalized Signalized A < 10 seconds < 10 seconds B 10 to 15 seconds 10 to 20 seconds C 15 to 25 seconds 20 to 35 seconds D 25 to 35 seconds 35 to 55 seconds E 35 to 50 seconds 55 to 80 seconds F > 50 seconds > 80 seconds 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study June 26, 2026 Page 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development, shown in Figure 3, is in the northwest quadrant of the Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) intersection. The project is a 168-unit market-rate multifamily residential development, which would replace the existing 30,000 square foot Catholic United Financial office building. A total of 300 parking spaces are planned through a combination of garage (148 spaces) and surface lot (152 spaces) areas. Access to the site is planned to continue via the two existing driveways along Harriet Avenue, which are located about 150 feet and 500 feet west of Lexington Avenue (CR 51). Construction was assumed to be completed by the end of 2028. Figure 3 Proposed Development Site Plan 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study June 26, 2026 Page 6 TRAFFIC FORECASTS Traffic forecasts were developed for year 2029 build conditions, which represents one year after opening. The traffic forecasts account for general background growth and trip generation from the proposed development. The following information summarizes the traffic forecast development process. Background Growth To account for general background growth in the study area, a one-half (0.5) percent annual growth rate was applied to the existing traffic volumes to develop year 2029 background traffic forecasts. Although daily traffic volumes have been stable or decreasing over the last 10+ years, the growth rate was applied to provide a more conservative assessment. Proposed Development Trip Generation A trip generation estimate for the proposed development was created using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition and includes trips for typical weekday a.m. / p.m. peak hours, as well as daily. The proposed development, shown in Table 2, is estimated to generate 64 a.m. peak hour (15 in / 49 out), 64 p.m. peak hour (41 in / 23 out), and 750 daily (375 in / 375 out) trips. No reductions were included for trips via walking, biking, or transit to provide a more conservative analysis. The proposed development trip generation was compared to the existing observed site trip generation, as well as the existing office building potential trip generation if it were fully occupied using the ITE methodology. When compared to the actual counts collected at the existing office building, the proposed development would represent an additional car to / from the site about every one (1) to two (2) minutes; the proposed development would generate a similar amount of total peak hour trips when compared to a fully occupied office building. This information is provided for informational purposes only. Table 2 Trip Generation Summary Land Use Type (ITE Code) Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out In Out Existing Office Building - Actual Counts 30,000 SF 19 2 5 22 164 Existing Office Building - Potential (710) 30,000 SF 47 7 10 51 394 Proposed Development Multifamily Housing Mid-Rise (221) 168 units 15 49 41 23 750 Change from Existing - Actual Counts ( - 4) + 47 + 36 + 1 + 586 Change from Existing - Potential ( - 32) + 42 + 31 ( - 28) + 356 Site generated trips, which are illustrated in Figure 4, were distributed to area roadways based on the global directional distribution shown, which was developed using a combination of existing travel patterns and engineering judgment. The resultant year 2029 build condition traffic forecasts, which includes the removal of the existing office traffic, are illustrated in Figure 5. Note that a future no build condition was not reviewed given the relatively short timeframe between existing and year 2029, as well as the minimal background growth anticipated. 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study Figure 4Site Generated Trips 1 5 ( 7 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 (0)4 (12) 0 (0)0 (0) +50 + 2 5 0 + 2 2 5 +0+225 2 (6)2 (6) 5 (14)8 (4) 7 ( 3 ) 1 7 ( 8 ) 15 (7)2 (1)17 (8) 0 (0)1 (2)0 (0) 6 ( 1 5 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 ( 0 ) 4 ( 1 2 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 ( 0 ) 2 (6)17 (8)0 (0) 6 (15)5 (14)0 (0) 0 ( 0 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 ( 0 ) 8 ( 4 ) 0 ( 0 ) 1 7 ( 8 ) Legend AM Peak Hour Site TripsPM Peak Hour Site TripsADT Site TripsStop SignTraffic SignalDirectional Distribution XXX(XXX)+XXX N 30% 30% 35% 5% + 2 2 5 +225 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study Figure 5Year 2029 Build Conditions Legend AM Peak Hour VolumePM Peak Hour VolumeEstimated Weekday ADT VolumeStop SignTraffic Signal XXX(XXX)X,XXX N 5 6 ( 1 4 9 ) 1 7 ( 6 8 ) 443 (839)190 (116) 482 (848)75 (54) 1,100 1 3 , 4 0 0 1 3 , 5 0 0 14,80016,550 2 (6)29 (67) 5 (14)35 (47) 7 ( 3 ) 1 7 ( 8 ) 24 (20)3 (1)40 (54) 21 (29)6 (9)8 (4) 25 ( 4 5 ) 35 6 ( 5 5 9 ) 12 ( 9 ) 11 ( 2 9 ) 3 3 0 ( 6 7 0 ) 3 8 ( 3 2 ) 2 (6)43 (62)1 (7) 6 (15)32 (54)4 (14) 0 ( 3 ) 0 ( 0 ) 7 ( 5 ) 8 ( 4 ) 0 ( 0 ) 1 7 ( 8 ) CR E / Lake Johanna Blvd CR 5 1 / L e x i n g t o n A v e Benton W a y 4 , 0 0 0 1,225 Harriet Ave 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study June 26, 2026 Page 9 YEAR 2029 CONDITIONS To understand impacts associated with the proposed development, a future intersection capacity analysis was completed for year 2029 build conditions. Results of the future capacity analysis, shown in Table 3, illustrate that all study intersections and approaches are expected to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS B or better during the typical weekday peak hours. The change in delay for any intersection or approach is expected to range from one (1) to three (3) seconds, while peak queues are not expected to change by more than one (1) vehicle within the area. Thus, there are no significant operational issues from an intersection capacity perspective anticipated with the addition of the proposed development. Table 3 Year 2029 Build Condition Intersection Capacity Intersection Traffic Control Level of Service (delay in seconds) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour CR E and Pine Tree Drive Signal A (4) A (7) Harriet Avenue and West Site Access SSS A / A (4) A / A (4) Harriet Avenue and Benton Way East / East Site Access SSS A / A (4) A / A (5) Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) SSS A / A (7) A / B (13) SSS – Side-Street-Stop (overall intersection level of service is shown followed by the worst-approach level of service and delay) Although not needed from an intersection capacity analysis perspective, a preliminary traffic signal warrant analysis was completed for the Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) intersection to understand if future signalization could be considered. Based on this review, traffic volumes do not meet the threshold to warrant signalization nor are there any safety related issues at this time. Therefore, traffic volumes, operations, and crash history should continue to be monitored to determine if / when an alternative traffic control may be needed at this location. SITE PLAN CONSIDERATIONS A review of the proposed site plan does not indicate any major issues. However, the following items are offered for further consideration between the City and / or project team. • Locate signage and landscaping to avoid creating any sight distance issues. • Review truck maneuverability to limit potential internal circulation conflicts. • Align the east site access across from Benton Way East to eliminate the offset intersections and reduce the risk of any queues along Harriet Avenue from impacting driveway operations. • Preserve the right-of-way and / or provide a sidewalk along Lexington Avenue (CR 51) and Harriet Avenue within the site limits to improve multimodal connectivity and access in the area. 3499 Lexington Avenue Development Traffic Study June 26, 2026 Page 10 CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are offered for consideration. 1) There does not appear to be any safety issues from a crash frequency or severity perspective within the study area. 2) All study intersections and approaches operate at an acceptable LOS B or better during the typical weekday peak hours and there are no significant existing operational issues from an intersection capacity perspective. 3) The project is a 168-unit market-rate multifamily residential development, which would replace the existing 30,000 square foot Catholic United Financial office building. Construction was assumed to be completed by the end of 2028. 4) Traffic forecasts were developed for year 2029 build conditions, which represents one year after opening; the traffic forecasts account for a 0.5% annual background growth and trip generation from the proposed development. a. The proposed development is estimated to generate 64 a.m. peak hour (15 in / 49 out), 64 p.m. peak hour (41 in / 23 out), and 750 daily (375 in / 375 out) trips. 5) Under year 2029 build conditions, all study intersections and approaches are expected to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS B or better during the typical weekday peak hours. 6) There are no significant operational issues from an intersection capacity perspective anticipated with the addition of the proposed development. 7) Traffic volumes at the Harriet Avenue and Lexington Avenue (CR 51) intersection do not meet the threshold to warrant signalization nor are there any safety related issues at this time to justify a change in traffic control. 8) The following items are offered for further consideration between the City and / or project team. • Locate signage and landscaping to avoid creating any sight distance issues. • Review truck maneuverability to limit potential internal circulation conflicts. • Align the east site access across from Benton Way East to eliminate the offset intersections and reduce the risk of any queues along Harriet Avenue from impacting driveway operations. • Preserve the right-of-way and / or provide a sidewalk along Lexington Avenue (CR 51) and Harriet Avenue within the site limits to improve multimodal connectivity and access in the area. ML A Z G A R A S S O C I A T E S 10 3 4 0 V I K I N G D R . SU I T E 1 5 0 (p ) 9 5 2 - 9 4 3 - 8 0 8 0 ED E N P R A I R I E , M N 5 5 3 4 4 (f ) 9 5 2 - 9 4 3 - 8 0 8 8 ww w . m l a z g a r . c o m Co m m e n t s Da te # Revisions Da t e : 5 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 6 Page M of 1 1. Standard Reflectance of 80/50/20 unless noted otherwise 2. Not a Construction Document, for Design purposes only 3. Standard indoor calc points @ 30" A.F.F. unless noted otherwise 4. Standard outdoor calc points @ Grade unless noted otherwise 5. Egress calc points @ 0" A.F.F. 6. Mlazgar Associates assumes no responsibility for installed light levels due to field conditions, etc. Dr a w n B y : B S RL M A P r o j e c t # : 1 8 7 3 6 9 34 9 9 L E X I N G T O N A V E N ARD E N H I L L S , M N SI T E P H O T O M E T R I C Sc a l e : 1 " = 2 5 ' Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Luminaire Schedule Symbol Qty Label SITE Manufacturer Description Arrangement Lum. Lumens Lum. Watts LLF Illuminance Fc 0.40 10.5 0.0 N.A.N.A. 6 OA PRV-P-PA1A-740-U-T4W Single 4348 30.7 0.900 2 OB PRV-P-PA1C-740-U-T4W Single 9164 72.1 0.900 21 OC BVYW0410LAJUDBK Single 1184 18.31 0.900 1 SP1 PRV-PA2B-740-U-T4W Single 19431 151 0.900 4 SP2 PRV-PA2B-740-U-5WQ Back-Back 20332 151 0.900 1 SP3 PRV-PA2A-740-U-T3 Single 15749 112 0.900 50'-0" 10 ' - 0 " 20'-0" 20 ' - 0 " CO M M O N S 68 UNITS @ 4 STORIES1 LEVEL OF GARAGE BELOW1 POOLTOT LOT PATIO ENTRY TRASH PAD RETENTION 6.1 1 6.1 2 6.1 3 6.2 COURTS DOG RUN 276 SF Stair 276 SF Stair "750'-3 5' - 0 " SP2 MH: 27 SP2 MH: 27 MH: 27 SP2 MH: 27 SP2 OB MH: 10 SP3 MH: 27 MH: 27 SP1 OB MH: 10 OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OA MH: 8 MH: 8 OA OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OA MH: 8 MH: 8 OA MH: 8 OA OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OA MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 MH: 8 OC MH: 8 OC OC MH: 8 OC MH: 8 1.9 1.11.11.11.11.01.01.01.01.00.0 1.5 1.01.91.91.70.80.30.20.10.10.1 0.8 1.2 1.1 0.91.01.01.11.11.11.01.01.01.01.0 1.01.0 1.11.11.11.11.11.11.11.01.00.0 1.0 0.7 0.00.10.10.10.20.20.30.40.5 0.0 0.6 0.00.80.80.80.80.80.80.80.80.8 0.8 0.5 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.60.0 1.2 1.31.41.41.51.51.51.41.41.3 0.8 1.2 1.21.31.31.41.41.41.41.41.31.21.2 1.3 0.9 0.00.00.00.10.10.10.20.20.30.41.2 0.71.2 1.11.21.31.41.41.41.41.31.31.7 0.6 0.0 1.20.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.10.10.10.10.20.30.40.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 2.22.11.92.01.20.50.20.10.10.0 0.0 1.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.8 0.0 1.1 0.60.60.60.60.60.60.70.80.91.00.0 1.10.0 0.50.20.10.10.10.00.00.00.0 0.1 1.1 0.5 0.50.50.50.50.50.50.50.50.5 0.00.5 0.50.40.40.40.40.50.50.60.70.8 4.2 0.5 0.4 0.10.10.10.20.20.20.30.30.30.40.5 0.40.5 0.50.50.50.50.50.50.50.50.5 0.6 0.4 0.0 1.51.40.60.20.10.10.10.00.0 0.6 0.0 1.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.8 0.90.90.90.90.90.90.80.80.80.81.5 0.81.4 0.80.80.80.80.80.70.80.81.00.0 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.60.60.60.60.60.60.60.60.6 0.60.7 0.50.70.70.70.70.60.60.60.60.6 0.0 0.7 0.00.6 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.6 0.0 0.0 0.10.10.10.20.20.30.30.40.40.5 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.2 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.42.11.91.71.71.92.22.22.11.90.0 0.40.0 0.20.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.3 0.9 2.2 2.01.81.71.71.82.02.22.42.6 0.12.5 2.62.01.71.51.61.92.42.22.02.11.3 2.7 2.0 0.40.50.71.01.31.72.02.32.62.62.2 2.22.4 1.81.61.61.71.92.12.32.52.7 3.4 2.4 0.0 0.40.30.20.10.10.00.00.00.0 3.0 0.0 1.80.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 4.2 0.0 2.82.52.22.01.91.92.12.42.70.9 3.91.7 3.32.62.31.91.81.81.91.91.8 0.0 3.1 2.6 0.02.11.91.71.71.82.02.22.53.1 2.83.2 3.42.42.11.91.81.82.02.22.52.8 0.2 3.6 0.23.6 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.12.4 0.1 0.00.30.40.60.81.11.41.82.22.63.3 0.1 1.4 0.91.11.41.51.61.81.81.81.7 0.0 1.5 0.31.41.41.61.71.81.81.91.81.81.7 1.6 0.0 0.5 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.6 0.00.5 0.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.20.21.4 0.00.0 1.60.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.10.0 0.10.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.8 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.41.51.61.71.81.81.81.71.60.0 1.4 1.51.41.92.52.31.82.21.90.70.20.2 1.6 0.4 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.0 0.3 0.00.50.70.91.21.61.82.02.12.22.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.01.7 0.0 0.1 2.01.41.52.02.62.31.82.22.00.7 1.80.2 1.90.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.3 1.8 0.2 1.51.51.61.71.92.12.22.32.21.6 2.0 1.91.61.51.51.71.92.02.12.22.22.1 2.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.1 0.0 0.1 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.0 0.10.0 0.10.10.10.10.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.2 0.10.1 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.10.1 0.00.1 0.00.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.1 0.1 0.1 0.00.1 0.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.10.1 0.00.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.2 0.10.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.3 0.2 0.10.20.20.30.30.30.30.30.30.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.1 0.00.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.3 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.30.0 0.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.2 0.30.30.30.30.30.20.20.20.20.20.1 0.20.1 0.20.30.30.40.40.40.40.40.4 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.30.3 0.0 0.0 0.40.10.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.30.30.30.40.40.50.60.60.60.6 0.30.3 0.30.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.6 0.40.0 0.30.30.30.40.40.40.40.40.40.3 0.4 0.30.40.40.40.40.40.40.30.30.30.3 0.4 0.2 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.1 0.10.1 0.10.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.1 0.10.1 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.1 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.2 0.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.2 0.1 0.2 0.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.2 0.10.2 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.20.2 0.1 0.0 0.20.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.20.30.30.30.30.30.30.30.20.0 0.0 0.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 1.51.51.41.41.31.10.90.73.60.0 0.0 1.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.6 0.0 1.0 0.10.10.10.10.20.31.21.71.51.41.4 1.11.3 1.83.55.54.71.61.31.00.91.00.0 1.3 2.4 1.51.81.71.71.61.31.11.43.0 0.0 3.5 0.21.21.01.21.51.71.81.91.91.8 2.4 7.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.6 0.00.3 0.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.1 0.1 0.1 0.01.11.51.31.11.00.90.91.84.05.7 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.7 0.0 0.0 6.40.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.3 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.70.70.80.91.01.11.11.11.10.0 1.0 0.60.70.60.50.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.0 1.7 1.41.21.51.82.12.42.82.92.60.0 2.0 0.91.61.61.70.10.60.00.00.00.0 1.7 2.3 2.6 0.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.20.22.8 1.74.1 3.02.52.62.01.61.11.11.51.80.0 0.6 1.6 0.10.10.20.30.51.32.22.62.2 0.0 2.0 0.01.21.01.00.92.31.81.51.31.6 3.6 2.4 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.10.20.20.51.22.12.52.12.3 0.0 0.0 1.10.80.70.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.90.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 1.30.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.0 0.5 0.0 2.1 0.0 1.22.53.80.25.52.91.21.01.30.0 1.9 1.52.32.32.22.01.81.51.31.10.90.2 1.6 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.3 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.10.30.40.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.20.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.30.0 0.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.2 0.50.91.21.54.33.10.80.20.20.20.2 0.20.2 0.20.30.30.30.30.30.30.30.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.10.20.20.20.10.00.00.00.0 0.2 0.0 0.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.20.20.20.30.30.30.50.00.60.60.1 0.20.1 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.30.40.50.71.82.31.30.70.2 0.20.1 0.20.10.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.2 0.0 0.1 0.00.2 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.2 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.20.2 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 5.50.0 0.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 4.54.53.61.80.90.50.30.40.40.1 0.54.2 0.60.60.60.60.60.50.50.40.4 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.04.95.52.91.30.50.40.50.60.6 9.20.8 8.70.80.80.80.80.70.60.50.50.4 2.8 0.7 0.1 3.5 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.13.4 0.1 0.00.20.91.21.00.90.80.70.81.43.8 0.1 0.3 2.03.06.63.91.20.80.60.40.3 6.0 0.3 0.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.30.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01.2 0.00.6 0.00.00.00.10.40.60.50.50.40.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.10.10.60.80.70.70.60.50.71.3 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.40.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 2.22.32.32.22.11.91.71.51.52.2 1.7 1.62.02.12.22.22.22.12.02.01.9 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.02.1 0.01.9 0.10.10.10.20.30.40.60.91.32.5 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 2.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 2.0 0.0 5.4 2.72.82.92.92.72.52.32.01.81.90.0 3.60.0 8.75.12.81.30.50.20.10.00.0 0.0 2.5 1.0 0.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.20.30.0 0.6 0.01.41.61.81.92.02.02.01.91.81.7 0.4 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.01.3 0.0 0.0 1.51.94.26.59.96.30.00.00.00.0 1.70.0 2.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 1.90.0 1.41.51.61.71.81.81.91.81.91.6 1.9 1.42.12.32.52.72.72.82.82.62.52.3 1.9 2.1 3.63.12.62.32.01.81.92.12.30.0 2.1 2.71.40.70.40.20.10.10.00.00.0 0.0 2.2 3.4 3.32.82.42.21.91.71.61.71.92.23.5 2.93.0 3.12.62.42.22.01.92.02.12.40.0 2.4 3.8 0.20.30.40.60.81.11.51.92.3 0.0 3.8 0.13.02.52.21.91.71.71.82.02.32.6 2.9 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.00.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 2.30.0 2.7 2.52.62.52.42.32.12.01.92.0 3.2 2.4 1.82.93.03.12.82.62.32.01.81.92.3 2.2 2.4 0.10.10.10.20.30.40.60.91.21.52.3 2.22.1 2.62.62.52.32.01.81.61.61.64.0 1.9 0.1 2.8 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.10.20.30.40.60.81.11.51.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 3.72.01.10.50.20.10.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 4.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 1.4 0.90.80.60.60.60.83.90.60.63.2 0.7 1.62.80.91.01.21.41.61.82.22.5 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.11.1 0.11.3 0.20.30.40.61.42.01.91.81.73.4 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.10.10.10.10.20.20.30.6 0.0 0.0 3.02.62.32.01.93.24.78.80.20.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.10.20.3 0.0 0.0 3.53.93.22.62.21.81.82.43.30.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.45.60.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.70.0 1.90.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.8 0.0 1.40.0 2.11.92.01.91.61.31.00.93.03.2 1.4 0.81.51.72.12.52.93.74.13.42.72.3 1.3 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.30.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 2.4 1.4 1.41.61.82.02.32.62.72.82.90.0 2.60.0 2.22.02.01.70.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 2.8 2.7 0.01.41.51.51.51.61.61.71.92.1 1.32.5 1.22.82.82.72.62.42.22.01.71.4 0.1 2.3 1.7 1.2 0.10.10.10.20.20.30.51.21.61.4 1.7 0.01.71.71.71.61.51.41.31.21.21.2 1.6 2.9 2.32.62.83.03.02.92.62.42.1 1.3 2.3 1.40.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 2.0 0.8 0.0 1.71.61.51.41.31.11.00.90.81.9 0.81.6 0.80.80.90.90.91.01.01.11.30.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.30.61.31.81.61.71.61.61.5 0.21.3 0.11.11.01.01.01.01.01.01.11.11.2 1.4 0.0 1.90.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.10.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.10.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.10.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.10.0 0.00.0 0.01.60.00.00.00.0 10.5 0.0 0.01.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.60.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.02.80.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.00.19.60.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.08.20.10.00.00.2 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.10.1 0.00.0 0.00.02.90.00.00.0 9.4 0.0 1.10.0 0.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 1.4 0.00.00.10.00.00.00.0 0.30.0 2.60.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.00.00.10.10.1 0.0 0.1 0.00.10.10.00.00.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.21.46.00.70.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.00.10.10.10.10.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.10.10.20.40.0 0.0 0.10.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.10.10.20.20.10.10.1 0.10.1 0.10.10.10.10.10.0 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.10.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.20.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.30.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.00.00.10.10.11.2 0.10.8 0.10.10.10.10.10.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.10.10.10.10.2 4.5 0.0 0.00.1 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 1.90.0 0.04.40.30.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 1111 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.50.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.50.50.50.50.50.50.50.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.10.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Attachment H Two Carlson Parkway | Suite 400 | Plymouth, MN 55447 roerscompanies.com Arden Hills – Security Plan The community at 3499 Lexington Avenue North will be secured through a comprehensive, multi- layered security program designed to protect residents, guests, and property at all times. Access to all residential buildings, parking areas, and shared amenity spaces will be managed through a cloud-based key fob access control system, issuing each leaseholder proximity credentials that are programmed to their specific unit and deactivated automatically upon lease expiration — eliminating the need for physical re-keying and ensuring that only authorized individuals can enter controlled areas. The property will also be equipped with a 24-hour digital IP camera surveillance system covering all building entries, parking facilities, pedestrian walkways, and common areas, with high-definition footage retained for a minimum of 30 days and accessible only to authorized management personnel and law enforcement. Complementing these technology-based systems, an on-site property manager will be present during regular business hours and available on call around the clock to respond to resident concerns, coordinate with emergency services, and oversee the day-to-day security of the community — providing a consistent, accountable human presence that reinforces the safety and well-being of all who call this property home. Sincerely, _____________________________ Nick Asta Developer Attachment I Developer summary of comments (June 30, 2026 Neighborhood Meeting) Building Location on Site - neighbors expressed desire for the building to move further east and south because they feel the building is too close to the condos. Buffer to West - neighbors in the condo building requested more buffering (trees and possibly a fence) between the two properties. Walking Trails - neighbors expressed interest in seeing more walking trails on site. Nature & Wildlife - there were questions about the nature preserve, wildlife in the area, potential for "bird safe windows" and potential changes to the adjacent pond. Plantings - there was a comment about the amount of invasive buckthorn on site and a request to remove in favor of native plantings. Snowplow - there were concerns about who plows the snow and where cars go when the plow is in process. Traffic - there were many concerns about the traffic in the area and doubts raised about the validity of the 3rd party traffic study provided. Density - there were many concerns about the density of the project being more than necessary. I plan to address these comments at the planning commission meeting and will try to incorporate as many of them as possible into a future plan. As mentioned yesterday, we will try to have updated drawings by the meeting, but we may need some additional time. Thanks! Nick Asta Developer m: 651.252.7019 nick.asta@roerscompanies.com Attachment J Attachment K From:Bill Guelker To:AH Planning Cc:Jonathan Warner; Jim Carroll; Aaron Van Brunt; Andrew Asp; Maggie Smith; Susie Strodtman; Nina Ritter; Stephen Forestell Subject:Proposed Plan for Apartments on Lexington Date:Monday, June 29, 2026 3:23:51 PM [You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] First of all I would express my frustration with the short notice for a proposal of this magnitude and for the limited information provided. When I applied for an addition to our house it took the city 3 months to approve it. The process was much like the Spanish Inquisition. It was 400 square feet and by the grilling I received you might have thought I was asking to build a 167 unit apartment building. The planning commission and the City Council were very concerned how my 400 square foot addition would impact the neighborhood. There are numerous issues to be considered and hoping the applicant will address them after potential approvals is asking the residents for a huge leap of faith. This is not as simple as approving rezoning and altering the city comprehensive plan. If approved this project would change the entire character of the neighborhood. You would be asking the current 80 or so single family residents to endure massive amounts of traffic coming and going from the facility. Currently Harriet Avenue is used constantly by residents for walking as they pass around Benton Way. The current amount of traffic is manageable for the walkers especially in the evening when the current office is closed. The potential of 167 more cars using the road at all hours will make the use of the road unsafe and unusable for walkers. Currently getting on Lexington from Harriet is already a dangerous endeavor. Adding significantly more traffic at that intersection will be very unsafe. The safety of the Hunters Park development residents should certainly be a major consideration. In order to approve this project the city will have to approve rezoning and alter the master plan both of which were part of the reason many of us chose to live here. To do so must have a significant reason. The simple desire to build a huge complex should not be a reason. Increasing the city’s tax base should not be a reason. How will this proposal improve the lives of the current residents? I would think that would be of primary consideration. Commercial development should be a priority of the city but it should not be done at the expense of the livability of current residents. I strongly encourage the planning commission to deny this proposal. If not denied it should be tabled until we are provided with a comprehensive plan that will include detailed information from which we can form a more educated opinion. Lest you think this is just another “not in my backyard “ concern you should know I was a strong supporter of the new Fire Station. Why? Simply because I felt it was to the overall benefit of the community. A huge apartment complex, not so much. Respectfully Submitted William and Adrienne Guelker 1152 Benton Way, Arden Hills In order to approve this project the city will have to approve rezoning and alter the master plan both of which were part of the reason many of us chose to live here. To do so must have a significant reason. The simple desire to build a huge complex should not be a reason. Increasing the city’s tax base should not be a reason. How will this proposal improve the lives of the current residents? I would think that would be of primary consideration. Commercial development should be a priority of the city but it should not be done at the expense of the livability of current residents. I strongly encourage the planning commission to deny this proposal. If not denied it should be tabled until we are provided with a comprehensive plan that will include detailed information from which we can form a more educated opinion. Lest you think this is just another “not in my backyard “ concern you should know I was a strong supporter of the new Fire Station. Why? Simply because I felt it was to the overall benefit of the community. A huge apartment complex, not so much. Respectfully Submitted William and Adrienne Guelker 1152 Benton Way, Arden Hills Sent from my iPhone On Jun 29, 2026, at 3:36 PM, Maggie Smith wrote: Hot take incoming! I’m sure I’m outnumbered in my opinion, I am even in my own house, and I’m not technically the homeowner in my situation so what say do I have? Well you all let me on the board so I will be speaking my mind I guess! I have a very yes in my back yard mindset, ESPECIALLY when it comes to housing. As a person who is greatly impacted by the lack of housing and therefore the exhorbitant cost of housing in our modern economy I can’t see this as a bad thing given the fact that the area is already home to so many. Unless we want to de-commodify housing altogether, or accept the rising rates of homelessness as inevitable, the only solution forward in the current economic framework we live in is more housing. Would I like to see more traffic direction if they put this in? Yes. Maybe we can even convince them to get us a sidewalk on Harriet to mitigate the traffic/pedestrian issue. We live in a metro area. Yes we are out of the center of the city, but we are very lucky and privileged people to have homes to keep us safe, we should always be in favor of extending that privilege to others, and instead of rejecting it outright, looking for ways to mitigate the situation so our needs can be met along with others. Traffic lights, sidewalks, yield signs, stop signs, these are all ways the city can work with us. But that’s just my one opinion. I’m sure everybody feels their own very strong feelings. Maggie On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 3:23 PM Bill Guelker <> wrote: First of all I would express my frustration with the short notice for a proposal of this magnitude and for the limited information provided. When I applied for an addition to our house it took the city 3 months to approve it. The process was much like the Spanish Inquisition. It was 400 square feet and by the grilling I received you might have thought I was asking to build a 167 unit apartment building. The planning commission and the City Council were very concerned how my 400 square foot addition would impact the neighborhood. There are numerous issues to be considered and hoping the applicant will address them after potential approvals is asking the residents for a huge leap of faith. This is not as simple as approving rezoning and altering the city comprehensive plan. If approved this project would change the entire character of the neighborhood. You would be asking the current 80 or so single family residents to endure massive amounts of traffic coming and going from the facility. Currently Harriet Avenue is used constantly by residents for walking as they pass around Benton Way. The current amount of traffic is manageable for the walkers especially in the evening when the current office is closed. The potential of 167 more cars using the road at all hours will make the use of the road unsafe and unusable for walkers. Currently getting on Lexington from Harriet is already a dangerous endeavor. Adding significantly more traffic at that intersection will be very unsafe. The safety of the Hunters Park development residents should certainly be a major consideration. In order to approve this project the city will have to approve rezoning and alter the master plan both of which were part of the reason many of us chose to live here. To do so must have a significant reason. The simple desire to build a huge complex should not be a reason. Increasing the city’s tax base should not be a reason. How will this proposal improve the lives of the current residents? I would think that would be of primary consideration. Commercial development should be a priority of the city but it should not be done at the expense of the livability of current residents. I strongly encourage the planning commission to deny this proposal. If not denied it should be tabled until we are provided with a comprehensive plan that will include detailed information from which we can form a more educated opinion. Lest you think this is just another “not in my backyard “ concern you should know I was a strong supporter of the new Fire Station. Why? Simply because I felt it was to the overall benefit of the community. A huge apartment complex, not so much. Respectfully Submitted William and Adrienne Guelker 1152 Benton Way, Arden Hills Sent from my iPhone From: To:Jake Reilly Subject:Re: Proposed high density building at 3499 Lexington Ave Date:Wednesday, July 1, 2026 11:16:43 AM Jake- I had a typo- please correct this item: The pond, dog run, and pickle ball court would be in the NORTH EAST corner. Please include that and make changes to your notes. The plan is correctly reflecting it, my notes is what had the typo. Sorry about the typo. Thanks. On Jun 30, 2026, at 9:54 PM, wrote: Jake, It was so nice to meet you today! Here’s a photo of my plan with some of my talking points on a proposed solution that would fit the neighborhood. -Rotate the building 90 degrees clockwise so the building faces the west. The apartment building would be at or near the location of the current building on the property. We know that is buildable land as the current building is there. This creates a set back from Lexington and the storm drainage they need behind the building. They could also continue the sidewalk all the way to Harriet. The developer could ask for a set back variance from Lexington Ave only if needed. One was granted to Goodwill up just up the street. - the parking lot would also rotate and be on the west side of the property. This would allow for a narrow residential buffer of trees and green space adjacent to Hunters Park. - the underground parking could have access through the parking lot or from Harriet. They have multiple access points available in this configuration. Because the lot is sloped on the Lexington side it would disguise the parking structure. - the surface lot entrance would be accessed from Harriet near the westward entrance (by what currently exists). This would move the parking lot entrance farther from the intersection of Harriet and Lexington making it less congested right at the corner. - the pond, pickle ball court, and dog run could remain on the northwest corner as that is a less buildable area of the property. The north east pond (already existing) would be a location for drainage. - the tree installment on Harriet could remain as a buffer to the residents of Benton Way. - the pollinator garden and parking lot storm drainage could move to the south west of the lot which creates a buffer for the two properties that are near the corner of the south west of proposed development. It could be a buffer for Hunters Park. -Fire access would now be available on all sides of the apartment building. Their current plan depends on the commercial property to the north to serve as their fire access. If that commercial would be developed that could be a fire access issue. This creates fire access on their own property. - A residential buffer would be created on the residential sides of the property ( south and west) - I cut and pasted their components and reworked the plan. It is the same footprint size of building the developer proposed. Thank you for looking at this proposal. <image1.jpeg> On Jun 30, 2026, at 6:32 PM, Jake Reilly <JReilly@cityofardenhills.org> wrote: You are brilliant. Would you be so kind as to send me a copy of what you handed to the developer just in case there isn’t one left behind? Thanks! - JBR Please Note: City hall is observing summer hours through Friday, September 4th. Hours are Monday through Thursday from 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM and Friday from 7:30 AM to 11:30 AM. Jake Reilly Book a time to meet with me Mobile: 763-204-0107 Office: (651) 792-7824 jreilly@cityofardenhills.org <image001.jpg> <image002.png> Confidentiality Notice: This email and any files transmitted with it are solely for the use of the intended recipient or entity and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you. From: Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2026 1:31 PM To: Jake Reilly <JReilly@cityofardenhills.org> Cc: Emily Rousseau <ERousseau@cityofardenhills.org> Subject: Re: Proposed high density building at 3499 Lexington Ave Jake, Thanks for reaching out. Yes, please add me to the meeting and to the notice for the planning commission updates. My home faces the current parking lot and 3499 building. I’ve attached a photo for reference because there is a small and narrow buffer between the two properties. You barely know it’s a parking lot and can’t see the building despite the small size of the buffer. The current development plan removes the entire residential buffer on the west side. The new building and my home be would looking directly into each others’ windows. Please insist that a residential buffer be created on the west side of the property by moving the buildings to the east and north side of the property. We would likely support the project with changes to the building location and a residential buffer. <image003.jpg> On Jun 30, 2026, at 12:30 PM, Jake Reilly <JReilly@cityofardenhills.org> wrote: Thank you, Councilmember Rousseau for forwarding Traci Youngs’ comments, Traci, thank you for your thoughtful comments. I look forward to meeting you at this evening’s developer-led meeting. Would you like me to add you to the list of interested parties who have shared comments via email and who will receive a notice from me when the Planning Commission materials are available on our website later this week? -Jake Please Note: City hall is observing summer hours through Friday, September 4th. Hours are Monday through Thursday from 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM and Friday from 7:30 AM to 11:30 AM. Jake Reilly, AICP, EDFP Book a time to meet with me Community Development Director City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 Cell Phone: (763) 204 -0107 Office Phone: (651) 792-7824 jreilly@cityofardenhills.org <image001.png> Confidentiality Notice: This email and any files transmitted with it are solely for the use of the intended recipient or entity and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you. From: Emily Rousseau <ERousseau@cityofardenhills.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2026 12:16 PM To: ; Jake Reilly <JReilly@cityofardenhills.org> Subject: Re: Proposed high density building at 3499 Lexington Ave Thanks Traci, I believe the next step with city involvement will be review and a public hearing at the Planning Commission. Can you also share this with Councilmember Kurt Weber and director Reilly JReilly@cityofardenhills.org? They are the liaison to the planning commission and the staff that would share public comments with the planning commission. I think it's best to share this feedback early in these discussions so it can be considered at multiple levels of the process. Have a nice afternoon, Emily Sincerely, Traci Youngs On Jun 28, 2026, at 5:52 PM, : Hi Emily, Thank you for your reply. I will be at the meeting and would be happy to discuss the residential buffer. Thank you for the opportunity. I certainly understand not having vacant properties and there are quite a few nearby. Rotating the building and putting it in the north east part of the property would be a way to bridge the gap between the developer’s profitability, development for the city of Arden Hills, and a residential buffer for the established property owners in the area. I look forward to seeing you on Tuesday. Thank you! Sincerely, Traci On Jun 28, 2026, at 3:55 PM, Emily Rousseau <ERousseau@cityofardenhills.org> wrote: Hi Traci, Thank you for your email. The developer came to a council meeting earlier this year with a preliminary concept for the location. I did ask staff what other developers had been seeking in this space, and they were all residential, similar or larger than what Roers is currently proposing. I know it's challenging that the market for office space is not the same as it used to be, and it would also be nice for our city to not have vacant properties on Lexington. I appreciate the feedback about a residential buffer zone by rotating the building. Are you and your family able to make it to the meeting on Tuesday to discuss your concerns with the developer? Kind regards, Emily From: Sent: Friday, June 26, 2026 12:59 PM To: *AHCouncil <city.council@cityofardenhills.org> Subject: Fwd: Proposed high density building at 3499 Lexington Ave [Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > Dear Arden Hills City Council Members and Mayor, > > Yesterday I became aware of a proposed multi residential building proposed for the adjacent property at 3499 Lexington Ave. I am opposed to the current plan because it does not allow a residential buffer for my property at 4 Pine Tree Drive. Currently, Roers’s plans are to have a 4 story building 50 feet from my property line. This is unacceptable and not a residential buffer at all. Fifty feet from a four story building with decks and windows facing us is incredibly close. There are no residential properties in the northeast corner of the lot. Rotating the building and locating it in the northeast part of the property provides privacy and a residential buffer for ALL properties: the proposed apartment building, and for all the owners of condos and single family housing off of Pine Tree Drive. The proposed parking lot would then be in the location of the existing parking lot (when rotated and moved) which creates minimal change for the residential areas, basically using the same buffer that already exists. > > This would increase traffic on Harriet Ave. so a turn lane or a light should also be considered by the council for the intersection of Lexington and Harriet. > > The developer is proposing a rezone for high density dwellings. The current zoning already allows for multi-family dwellings at 20 per acre. This developer should have to stay within that current zoning requirement. The city would not allow a high density rezone to pass for the TCAP which is open land. Why would that suddenly be allowed at 3599 Lexington Ave where the area is already adjacent to family owned property? The developer needs to work within the density allowed at 20 units per acre. > > I do not approve of the current plan presented by Roers. I propose the city insist on create a residential buffer by rotating the building and placing it in the northeast corner of the property. I also propose that a right turn lane and possible traffic control light be added to the corner of Lexington and Harriet. I do not support a rezone because the current zoning rules allow for 20 units per acre so the developer needs to work within that established zoning criteria. The city would not change the zoning for open land so it should not be changed for this property either. > > Thank you for reading this email from a concerned adjacent property owner. > > Sincerely, > Traci Youngs > 4 Pine Tree Drive > Arden Hills, MN Guiding Plan for the B2 District Approved by the City Council October, 27 2008 Guiding Plan for the B2 District Citizens Advisory Committee Ted Brausen – Brausen Service Station LoAnn Crepeau -- Resident Leon Hass – Hass Bros. Construction Ed von Holtum – Economic Development Commission / Resident Ron Johnson – Arden Pharmacy / Resident Gregg Larson – Resident Elizabeth Modesette – Resident / Planning Commission David Monson – Resident Christine Pistotnik – Resident Jim Huninghake – Economic Development Commission Rob Boeck – Resident Sheldon Bruce – Resident Dick Eckert – Resident Moose Gianetti – Resident David Sand – Planning Commission / Resident City Planning Commission Clayton Larson, Chair Roberta Thompson, Vice Chair Clayton Zimmerman Elizabeth Modesette Janet Stodola Andy Holewa Daniel Reiff David Sand (Alternate) City Council Stan Harpstead, Mayor David Grant Brenda Holden Fran Holmes Dave McClung City Staff Ron Moorse, City Administrator Noah Simon, Assistant City Administrator James Lehnhoff, AICP, Community Development Director Meagan Beekman, City Planner Kristine Giga, PE, Civil Engineer Consultants McCombs Frank Roos Associates William Weber, AICP, Director James Kalkes, Landscape Architect Spack Consulting Michael Spack, PE, Traffic Engineer Maxfield Research Mary Bujold, Market Analyst Andrew Greene, Market Analyst Hay Dobbs Tom Dobbs, AIA, Urban Designer City of Arden Hills 1245 W. Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112-5743 651-792-7800 www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us 2008 Guiding Plan for the B2 District i Guiding Plan for the B2 District Introduction and Summary ...................................................................................1-1 Current Physical Conditions .................................................................................2-1 District Market Analysis ........................................................................................3-1 Land Use and Public Improvements Plan ............................................................4-1 District Design Guidelines ....................................................................................5-1 Traffic Analysis and Plan ......................................................................................6-1 Implementation Program ......................................................................................7-1 Appendix A: Traffic Study ................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B: Comments from the Community Visioning Meeting ....................... B-1 List of Figures 1 Study Area ................................................................................................................2-2 2 Aerial Photograph of the Study Area .......................................................................2-3 3 Existing Land Use, 2008 ..........................................................................................2-5 4 Land Use Plan, 1998...............................................................................................2-12 5 Zoning Districts, 2008 ............................................................................................2-13 6 Existing Lane and Traffic Control..........................................................................2-19 7 Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic ..............................................................................2-20 8 Existing Daily Traffic Volume ...............................................................................2-20 9 Land Use Plan...........................................................................................................4-5 10 County Road E Streetscape Cross section ................................................................4-9 11 Illustrative Guiding Plan.........................................................................................4-11 List of Tables 1 Average Annual Daily Traffic ................................................................................2-18 2 Existing Level of Service........................................................................................2-19 3 Summary of Housing Demand in Downtown Arden Hills.......................................3-3 4 Demand for Neighborhood Retail Space .................................................................3-4 5 Demand for Specialty Retail Space .........................................................................3-5 6 Retail Uses by Median Size of Store .......................................................................3-7 7 Projected Demand for Office Space .........................................................................3-9 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 1-1 Introduction and Summary In November 2007, the City of Arden Hills approved a moratorium on development and redevelopment in the B2 Zoning District, which only exists in the vicinity of County Road E between Lexington Avenue and Minnesota Highway 51. The purpose of the moratorium was to provide time to create a long-term redevelopment plan for that area. With great assistance from the community and the steering committee, a guiding plan that addresses the complex issues of transportation, land use intensity, appearance, access and long-term viability has been prepared. This plan will be instrumental in advancing a community vision on how to redevelop and enhance the commercial properties north and south of County Road E. To guide the planning process and facilitate the meetings, the City retained McCombs Frank Roos Associates (MFRA) to assist staff in preparing this plan. The MFRA planning team included three sub-consultants: Maxfield Research for the residential and commercial market study, Spack Consulting for the traffic analysis, and Hay Dobbs Architects for illustrations. The steering committee included 15 members of the community, including residents, businesses and property owners. Other landowners from the study area also attended and participated in the committee meetings. The planning process examined existing conditions, created a long-range redevelopment vision and guiding principles, addressed transportation questions, evaluated market potential, reviewed land uses and prepared design guidelines. The plan includes specific recommendations, an implementation strategy and estimates of public costs. Overall, the plan guides the way for the next major step in the evolution of the County Road E corridor to a place with a stronger sense of community center. Notable Findings and Recommendations Guiding Principles These principles will be used by the City of Arden Hills to help guide the evolution of the B2 District including plans for land use, urban design, public facilities and circulation. Elaboration and details will be added as the plan progresses. ƒ Place: Create a visual impression that the B2 District is a distinct, identifiable and special place in Arden Hills. ƒ Land Uses: Allow and encourage a variety of land uses in the district potentially including retail and service businesses, offices, high-density housing, places to eat Introduction and Summary 1-2 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 30 October and drink, industry that has high employment density and attractive buildings, education and indoor recreation. ƒ Intensity and Scale: As redevelopment occurs, generally increase the height of the buildings and amount of each site they cover. ƒ Local: Create a district that serves the needs and desires of residents of Arden Hills. ƒ Quality: Ensure that all private and public improvements are of a high quality in terms of appearance, function and longevity. ƒ Civic: Communicate that the district is “everybody’s neighborhood” and a center of public life in Arden Hills (a distinction perhaps to be shared with the redeveloped TCAAP site) through the use of public plazas or open space, small private spaces usable by the public, improved sidewalks and streetscape. ƒ Movement: Provide for safe and efficient auto movement as land use intensifies but also greatly improve the environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. ƒ Green: Provide year-‘round greenery and color throughout the district through generous landscaping of private sites and the public street edges. Add one or more green gathering spaces in the corridor. Improve the public’s use of the Country Insurance woods, its intended purpose. ƒ Role of the City: Establish the primary role of the City in the district as planning, leadership, zoning and public improvements. Do not rule out the application of municipal financial assistance in land redevelopment. ƒ Continuity: Maintain long-term support for the principles and policies of the Guiding Plan for the B2 District throughout the entire Arden Hills family including elected and appointed officials and staff. ƒ Environmental Conservation and Sustainability: Promote the use of green building practices, sustainability, and energy conservation to reduce the environmental impact of new development and redevelopment. Land Use Plan The land use plan calls for moving beyond several outmoded developments and using land in ways that are more consistent with the important role that this corridor may play in Arden Hills. The plan recommends expanding the number of potential land uses in the district to include multiple-family housing. Refer to Figure 9 on page 4-5. Introduction and Summary 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 1-3 Illustrative Guiding Plan Several of the principles conveyed in this land use plan and the district design guidelines have been expressed in the Illustrative Guiding Plan, Figure 11, on page 4-11. That sketch is meant to illustrate one possible way in which this plan might be realized but is certainly not the only development pattern. The market may propose a wide variety of additional building patterns that are just as desirable (if not more so) and which are also consistent with this plan and the City’s zoning regulations. Urban Design Guidelines A comprehensive set of design guidelines for both private and public improvements will help ensure a high quality of physical improvements. Refer to chapter 5. These and other statements will guide the future design of the study area: ƒ The B2 District will be a place where people can live, work and play. ƒ The district will be a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian-friendly community with a distinct identity. ƒ It will provide sidewalks and places for people to gather and socialize. ƒ Design guidelines will be followed to promote an attractive environment with lasting value. The district is dedicated to the belief that we desire to integrate nature, home, work and leisure. Redesign of County Road E County Road E is proposed to be redesigned as a landscaped boulevard with a central, landscaped median that will focus the left-turn movements, improve traffic safety, greatly enhance appearances and set the tone for private redevelopment. The redesign of the County Road will also introduce a pair of bicycling lanes, a greatly needed addition. The improvements preliminarily planned for transforming County Road E into Lake Johanna Boulevard are listed below and illustrated by the sketch on page 4-7 and Figure 11, Illustrative Guiding Plan, on page 4-11. ƒ A traffic signal system at the future intersection located between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue. ƒ Replacement signals, arms and poles for the existing signal systems at (all optional): - The eastern ramp terminals of Highway 51. - Pine Tree Drive. - Lexington Avenue. ƒ Boulevard trees spaced at an average of 40 feet. ƒ Relocating the electrical boxes to a less visible location or screening where feasible. ƒ A planted median that may include trees along with shrubs, tall grasses and/or annual flowers. ƒ Decorative lighting at the automobile scale (on the existing bases, located 200 feet apart); optional extra: decorative lighting at the pedestrian scale located approximately 50 to 70 feet apart). Introduction and Summary 1-4 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 30 October ƒ Benches and trash receptacles. ƒ A pair of new continuous concrete sidewalks (6 feet wide) and connections to businesses. ƒ Bollards. ƒ Annual flowers (in beds or raised planters), perhaps in partnership with the adjacent businesses. ƒ Seasonal banners on the light poles. ƒ Striped or colored pedestrian crossings. ƒ Bus waiting shelters. ƒ A pedestrian and bicyclist connection over Highway 51, which may be a separate bridge, a new bridge, or an addition to the existing bridge. A detailed engineering and design study is recommended for the public improvements to County Road E to refine the plan and determine feasibility. Traffic Study A detailed traffic study report was prepared. (Refer to Chapter 6 for a summary and Appendix A for the full report.) To provide a safe multi-modal corridor, the following long range improvements are recommended: ƒ Construct a landscaped median on County Road E from Highway 51 to Lexington Avenue to convert the private driveways along County Road E into right-in/right-out accesses. ƒ Consolidate driveways whenever feasible to limit the conflict points along the corridor. ƒ Provide left turn lanes at public street intersections. ƒ Provide on street bicycle lanes. ƒ Provide sidewalks. ƒ Improve the landscaping to provide a human scale to the corridor. ƒ Provide eleven foot wide travel lanes which will reinforce the 35 mph speed limit. ƒ Minimize traffic signs within the corridor whenever feasible. ƒ Extend the bicycle and pedestrian facilities through the County Road E/Hamline Avenue interchange when it is reconstructed. ƒ Reconstruct the corridor using the existing curb and gutter system to minimize the cost. This will also shorten the construction period, lessening the impact on local businesses. County Road E is under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County. Therefore, the City must collaborate with the County to gain approval of these improvements. Left-Turns Only at Signalized Intersections It is important to note that the improvements to County Road E call for building a raised, landscaped median that would eliminate left-turn movements except at the signalized intersections at the Highway 51 ramps, Pine Tree Drive, a planned new intersection between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue, and Lexington Avenue. Additional engineering and review will be needed prior to implementation. Introduction and Summary 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 1-5 Intersection of County Road E, the Holiday Inn Site and the Arden Plaza Driveway After the first round of redevelopment, the driveways on County Road E for the Holiday Inn site and the Arden Plaza site will experience significant delay and queuing in the p.m. peak hour even though the overall intersections will operate within traffic engineering standards. From a traffic engineer’s perspective, this is acceptable as an interim situation because it is not expected to pose a safety problem and little queuing is anticipated on County Road E. Long term, the queuing will impact the vitality of the redevelopments and could lead to safety problems. Therefore, those driveways should be realigned midway between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue to provide a four-legged intersection that could be controlled with a traffic signal. Left turn lanes and shared right/through lanes should be built on the new north and south legs of the intersection to provide adequate egress. The signal should be installed when agreement is reached with the most directly affected land owners and when the traffic volumes at the intersection meet the criteria for installing a traffic signal per the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. When the traffic signal is installed at the new intersection it will operate at LOS B in the 2030 Build p.m. peak hour. This leaves capacity to accommodate significantly more redevelopment as long as the traffic from the redevelopment is focused at the signalized intersection. A process is proposed for coordinating the construction of the median in County Road E (and its restrictions on left turns) with the redevelopment of adjacent properties and new driveway locations. Implementation Program A preliminary cost estimate for a complete package of traffic, streetscape, pedestrian and bicyclist improvements along the new Lake Johanna Boulevard was prepared and totals an estimated $2.0 million, though additional detail and review will be needed. That total includes $0.5 million for a pedestrian and bicyclist connection over Minnesota Highway 51. This cost estimate does not include any required replacement of roads or underlying infrastructure prior to any improvements. Potential funding sources include: ƒ City general funds ƒ Special assessments on benefiting properties ƒ Private sources ƒ Municipal State-Aid funds ƒ Tax increment financing ƒ Tax abatement ƒ Ramsey County funds ƒ Grants. Introduction and Summary 1-6 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 30 October Supplementary Road Name As a supplement to “County Road E,” the local name used on County Road 149 west of Minnesota Highway 51, “Lake Johanna Boulevard” is proposed. This additional name will help identify the road as a local facility with a connection to a nearby natural feature and thereby personalize it. The County Road E name could still be used by residents and businesses where needed. Committee Consensus and Support The citizens advisory committee has been closely involved every step of the way and supports the draft plan. 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-1 Current Physical Conditions Location The B2 District is located in east-central Arden Hills approximately one-half mile south of I-694 and between State Highway 51 on the west and Lexington Avenue (County Highway 51) on the east. Arden Hills is located in the north-central portion of the Twin Cities metropolitan area, roughly equidistant from the two metro centers and within the regional freeway ring. The study area has good access from both regional, subregional and local roads. I-694 provides very good regional access, while Highway 51 and Lexington Avenues provide sub-regional connections; both roads link south to Minnesota Highway 36 in Roseville and I-94 in St. Paul. Lexington Avenue has a full interchange with I-694 but Highway 51 to Hamline Avenue have only partial access, which is scheduled to be removed as part of the preliminary I-694 reconstruction plans. County Road E is not a major east-west roadway for Ramsey County. To the west, it merges into Lake Johanna Boulevard and terminates at Cleveland Avenue on the western side of Arden Hills; to the east, it travels only another two miles and ends near the City of Vadnais Heights. County Road E is also designated as Ramsey County State-Aid Highway 15 between Snelling Avenue to the west and Victoria Street to the east. Connections to the study area from within Arden Hills are provided by Highway 51 and Lexington Avenues, Lake Johanna Boulevard, Snelling Avenue, Lake Valentine Road, County Road E2 and other routes. The study area is just as well linked to the adjacent community of Shoreview as to Arden Hills by virtue of road access and proximity. Lexington Avenue is the common border of the two Cities. Nearby major features include: ƒ A large commercial and industrial area to the north; ƒ Low-density residential neighborhoods to the west, south and east; ƒ Tony Schmidt Regional Park on Lake Johanna to the west and Island Lake County Park to the east; ƒ Bethel University to the immediate northwest and Northwestern College on the south side of Lake Johanna; ƒ Rosedale Shopping Center and related commercial properties approximately 2.5 miles to the southwest via Highway 51; Current Physical Conditions 2-2 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Figure 1 Study Area Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-3 ƒ Figure 2 Aerial Photography Current Physical Conditions 2-4 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October The site of the former Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant approximately two miles to the northwest via Highway 51 and US Highway 10; the development master plan for that 585 acre site includes various types of housing, office buildings, hotel, retail and service commercial buildings, neighborhood parks, a major community park, and a wildlife corridor. The study area is bounded by the Soo Line - Canadian Pacific Railroad tracks on the north, Highway 51 on the west and east, respectively, and Harriet Avenue on the south. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the boundaries of the study area. Current Land Use, 2008 The Vicinity Immediately north of the study area is a corridor owned by the Soo Line - Canadian Pacific Railroad. Between the railroad tracks and I-694 along the east side of Highway 51 is a district of industry and offices; along both sides of the Lexington Avenue frontage are retail commercial areas including a Super Target store on the Shoreview side. Immediately south of the study area is a neighborhood of townhouses and single-family homes. The east side of Lexington Avenue is lined with retail and office buildings. West of Highway 51 is a residential neighborhood. The Study Area The 2008 pattern of land use in the study area is illustrated by Figure 3 and the photos on the subsequent pages. Most of the study area and the majority of the County Road E frontage are occupied by retail and service businesses. There are also districts of offices and industry. The industrial area is somewhat of an extension of the industry north of the railroad tracks. A district of multiple-family housing exists in the southern portion of the study area, providing somewhat of a transition to the residential neighborhood further south. Notable elements of current land use include: ƒ Arden Plaza Shopping Center: a retail, service and office development with access from Lexington Avenue and County Road E. An application was submitted by the owner in 2007 to amend the Planned-Unit Development agreement in order to remove the three office buildings and build a 15,000 square foot pharmacy, a (small) 16,000 square foot retail store and a two-story 14,000 square foot retail and office building (directly east of the Frattalone’s Hardware store). The application was withdrawn before being considered by the City Council. Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-5 Figure 3 Existing Land Use, 2008 Current Physical Conditions 2-6 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October ƒ The Former Holiday Inn property: eight acres of land and an unused 150-room hotel at the corner of County Road E and Lexington Avenue. The building is scheduled to be used as a residence hall for Northwestern College students through the fall of 2011. Also included are a restaurant and two large banquet rooms. ƒ Northpark Corporate Center: four major office buildings with access from both County Road E and Pine Tree Drive. ƒ Carroll’s Furniture: a relatively small but locally owned retail furniture business on the north side of County Road E. ƒ Corporate Express: a major business-to-business office supplies and equipment company. ƒ Three banks along the south side of County Road E: Anchor, Wells Fargo and TCF. ƒ Flaherty’s Arden Bowl: includes 36 bowling lanes and a restaurant; parking is located north of Connelly Avenue. ƒ Pot o’ Gold Bingo: a private operation in an aging, former lumber yard building north of the McDonald’s restaurant along Highway 51 with access from Connelly Avenue. ƒ Hunter’s Park: two large condominium buildings with access from Pine Tree Drive. ƒ Country Financial: a large corporate office building with private open space to the north (including pedestrian paths) and the south (including a wetland). ƒ Catholic Aid Association: an attractive office building located at the intersection of Harriet and Lexington Avenues. Some undeveloped land is included on the northern end of this site. Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-7 Arden Plaza is a retail, service and office development along Lexington Avenue with a secondary access point on County Road E. There are several wetlands in the study area. The one shown here separates the retail portion of Arden Plaza from Lexington Avenue. The former Holiday Inn property occupies 8 acres at the corner of County Road E and Lexington Avenue. The one-story office buildings in the southwest quadrant of County Road E and Lexington Avenue were proposed for redevelopment in 2007. The intersection of County Road E and Lexington operates at a low Level of Service in the PM peak hour. There is typically a landscaped setback between the County Road E curb or sidewalk and the buildings or parking lot of approximately 15 to 30 feet. Current Physical Conditions 2-8 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October There are three banks located along County Road E. Corporate Express is a large office supplies company on the northern end of the study area that generates traffic by heavy trucks. County Road E has four travel lanes and a shared center turn lane. Bicycling along County Road E is difficult and dangerous because there are no striped cycling lanes nor a wide curb lane. Sidewalks exist along only about three-quarters of the County Road E frontage. Crossing intersections and driveways is hazardous because of the many fast-moving autos making turns. Minnesota Highway 51, sometimes known in this vicinity as Hamline Avenue or Snelling Avenue, forms the western boundary of the study area. Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-9 There is no space on the bridge over Minnesota Highway 51 for pedestrians or bicyclists. The easterly exit from the Arden Plaza shopping center operates at Level of Service F during the PM peak hour. The Northpark Corporate Center includes four prominent office buildings. A convenience store with fuel pumps and auto service bays is located along the south side of County Road E at Minnesota Highway 51. Current Physical Conditions 2-10 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October A bingo gaming business is located north of the McDonald’s restaurant along Connelly Avenue in a former industrial building. Four small industrial buildings are located to the east or west of the major Corporate Express building although none is easily visible from County Road E. The Country Financial headquarters office occupies the southwest corner of the study area. A large open space and paths surround the Country Financial office building. The Hunter’s Park condominiums are the housing element in the study area. Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-11 An office building anchors the southeastern corner of the study area. There may be some first-time development potential remaining in the study area. The east side of Lexington Avenue in the City of Shoreview includes a retail-office mixed use building, a convenience gas and good store, and several office buildings. The asphalt path along the western side of Lexington Avenue ends abruptly at the eastern entrance to Arden Plaza. Current Physical Conditions 2-12 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Current Zoning and Land Use Plan Current Zoning Regulations The pattern of zoning districts in the study area as of 2008 is illustrated by Figure 5. The districts are summarized as follows: B-2, General Business District: Allows as Permitted Uses service businesses, clinics, non-profit clubs, fitness clubs, commercial recreation, child day care facilities, financial institutions, hotels, funeral homes, offices, personal service businesses, and retail sales. R-4, Multiple Dwelling District: Allows as Permitted Uses single-family dwellings, two-family dwellings and day care facilities. Allows under the Planned-Unit procedure attached housing up to a density of twelve dwelling units per net acre. Thus, the several industrial businesses north of County Road E are not consistent with the pattern of zoning or with the 1998 Land Use Plan (see below). Land Use Plan, 1998 The City of Arden Hills Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1998) guides most of the study Area for commercial development. High-Density Residential land use is designated for the Hunter’s Park condominium area. Land Use Plan, 2008 The City is in the process of updating the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which can be amended as needed to reflect the results of this Guiding Plan. Figure 4 1998 Land Use Plan Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-13 Figure 5 Zoning Districts, 2008 Current Physical Conditions 2-14 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Major Natural Features As illustrated by Figure 2, Study Area, there are at least four major wetlands, all located south of County Road E, some of which sustain open water. There is also a large, privately owned wooded area that wraps around the Country Financial site in the southwest portion of the study area. Building Design and Conditions Most of the buildings in the study area have been constructed within the past forty years and are generally in very good condition. The oldest buildings include the industrial buildings north of County Road E and the Pot o’ Gold bingo hall (a deteriorated and aged former industrial structure). The newer buildings tend to be south of County Road E. Exterior building architecture varies although most structures have facades of masonry and glass. The overall impression along County road E is a low-rise, low-density suburban environment. Many of the commercial buildings have a landscaped front setback with the parking located to the side or rear, which provides a pleasant appearance for the corridor. Others have parking between the sidewalk and the building with little or no landscaping. The most impressive structure is probably the four-story former Holiday Inn hotel that has been vacant since the fall of 2007. In comparison, the three office buildings immediately south of County Road E from the hotel are one story in height and six-sided. Arden Plaza is a community-scale shopping center located in the southwest corner of Lexington and E that includes the three office buildings mentioned above. The appearance of the center is well maintained but undistinguished. The center is nicely buffered from the adjacent housing and offices by a row of mature conifers. Between Arden Plaza and Lexington Avenue is a landscaped pond, which is attractive but probably hurts the business visibility of the center and restricts auto access. The Northpark Corporate Center consists of a pair of one-story brick office buildings with frontage along County Road E plus two three-story brick office buildings to the south with primary access from Pine Tree Drive. The largest building in the study area is probably the warehouse and offices for Corporate Express, a major vendor of business office supplies, equipment and furniture. Fortunately, only the office element abuts the County Road E frontage; the warehouse and truck court are relatively concealed in the rear. The largest surface parking lot, that of Country Financial, is arranged in an unusual and interesting semi-circular shape focused on a landscaped arrival and turn-around. The approach is via a curving, tree-lined two-lane road, and views are softened by mature woods. Thus, the expanse of parking is not a visual nuisance to the vicinity. Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-15 There is little or no land available for new construction without undergoing redevelopment. Minor opportunities may include the northern end of the Catholic Aid Association office property along Lexington Avenue south of the Arden Plaza shopping center. Redevelopment opportunities may include the former Holiday Inn property, the office component of Arden Plaza, and the Pot o’ Gold bingo property. In 2007, a planned unit development application was presented to the City to remove the office building from Arden Plaza and build a freestanding pharmacy, a freestanding retail building and a mixed-use retail and office building (on the southernmost end of the parking area between the pond and the existing retail center). South of Harriet Avenue is a residential neighborhood of narrow-lot, single-family homes with a distinctive 1970s design. This neighborhood includes two wetlands and backs up to the wooded area owned by Country Financial. Along the east side of Lexington Avenue in Shoreview, there is a mixed-use retail and office building north of County Road E. South of E, there is a convenience store and a series of four attractive office buildings. West of Highway 51, development consists of an attractive, low-density, wooded neighborhood of single-family homes. North of the railroad tracks are large industrial and retail buildings including a Cub Foods grocery. East of Lexington Avenue is a Super Target (goods plus groceries) store. Study Area Identification and Identity The study area lacks a sense of identity, which would be helpful both for business marketing and to build a sense of central place for the Arden Hills community. There are no entrances signs, monuments, landscaping or special lighting at the eastern or western ends to the district announcing arrival or place. Some people have called the study area “downtown,” but that term has not caught on, perhaps because it lacks many of the physical characteristics usually associated with a downtown: a grid of streets, sidewalks lined with buildings, and civic buildings, plaza or parks. Another identity shortcoming is the name of the major road. The county road designation does no evoke warm and local identity. It has been suggested that the Lake Johanna Boulevard moniker be extended from Old Snelling to Lexington Avenue and possibly into Shoreview. Current Physical Conditions 2-16 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Road Pattern The Traffic Analysis and Plan chapter of this document includes a complete and detailed analysis of current and forecast traffic conditions. However, a few global observations are offered below. The basic circulation challenge for the study area is the fact that there are only three ways in or out of the district: the east and west “ends” of Country Road E at the bridge over Highway 51 and at Lexington Avenue and Harriet Avenue at Lexington Avenue. No roads other than Lexington and Highway 51 cross the railroad line to the north, and there is no link to the south through the adjacent neighborhood. The capacity of the Highway 51 connection is adequate for the study area because of its folded diamond interchange design. However, the signalized intersection of E at Lexington Avenue suffers from peak-hour congestion; the overall level of service is D, and east-to-northbound PM peak hour left-turns movement operates at level of service F (the worst rating). Internally, circulation is hampered by the size of the block bounded by Lexington, E, Pine Tree and Harriet. The lack of internal public streets to divide that large block reduces the access options for all land uses. The result is that peak-hour egress at certain driveways (e.g., the northern exit from Arden Plaza) is difficult and hazardous. Also, County Road E is forced to serve the dual and conflicting roles of traffic movement and land access. Ideally, traffic related to Corporate Express would be routed through the industrial area to the north but that is not possible. The warehouse land use and its truck traffic are inconsistent with the nature of the rest of the study area. Street and Right-of-Way Dimensions County Road E consists of four traffic lanes and a shared center turn lane. Public right- of-way and street dimensions were measured (rounded to the whole number) at three points: 1. At the Corporate Express entrance: ROW: 89’ Street: 72’ 2. At Carroll Furniture (just east of Pine Tree Drive): ROW: 83’ Street: 70’ 3. At the eastern median: ROW: 88’ Street: 72’ Thus, County Road E is typically 72 feet from curb to curb in an 83 to 89 foot right-of- way and is divided approximately as: Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-17 Number Element Dimensions 4 12-foot driving lanes 48 2 2-foot gutters 4 1 18-foot shared left-turn lane 18 2 Boulevards 13 to 17 (6.5 to 8.5 each) Current Traffic Conditions The three major roadways within the study area, all designated as minor arterials, are County Road E (Ramsey County State Aid Highway 15), Lexington Avenue (Ramsey County State Aid Highway 51), and Minnesota Trunk Highway 51. The rest of the roadways within the study area are city streets. Existing traffic control, speed limits, and travel lanes are shown on Figure 6 for each study intersection. No roadway improvements are scheduled near the site. Metro Transit route 225, which is a local circular route, travels along County Road E, Lexington Avenue north of the study area, and to Rosedale shopping center. Route 261, a local/express bus, travels along Lexington Avenue through the study area. There are no major bus stops within the study area, but bus service is available during the day time hours. There are intermittent trails and sidewalks for pedestrians through the study area. The sidewalks along County Road E are interrupted by many driveways that serve the local businesses. There are bicyclists who use the corridor both on street and along the trails/sidewalks. The County Road E / Highway 51 interchange provides a significant barrier for pedestrians and bicycles who want to move along the County Road E corridor. The bridge over Highway 51 does not have sidewalks or on street bicycle lanes. Traffic Volumes In commercial / retail areas, such as the County Road E corridor, the p.m. peak hour is typically more congested than the a.m. peak period. For this reason, the analysis in this study focuses on the p.m. peak hour. Figure 7 shows the existing p.m. peak hour turning movement counts for the study area. The data for the street intersections was collected in 2008 and the turning movement count data is contained in fifteen minute intervals in the Appendix. The turning movement volume data for the County Road E / Arden Plaza driveway intersection is from the 2007 Traffic and Parking Study for Proposed Redevelopment of Arden Plaza. No turning movement volumes are shown for the Holiday Inn site because it is currently vacant and will be completely redeveloped. Please note the traffic volumes do not balance between the study intersections because there are driveways and ancillary intersections between them. The historic daily traffic volumes for the area roadways are shown in Table 1. This data was furnished by Mn/DOT. Current Physical Conditions 2-18 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Source: City of San Jose, CA Table 1 Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Year Ve h i c l e s p e r D a y CR E E of Lexington CR E W of Lexington Lexington N of CR E Lexington S of CR E CR E E of Lexington 6,900 6,400 6,700 7,000 7,900 9,100 10,100 10,500 9,400 9,100 CR E W of Lexington 16,000 15,300 15,700 15,500 15,800 15,800 16,300 16,000 16,000 14,700 Lexington N of CR E 15,700 14,500 17,500 17,000 20,000 19,000 24,000 23,000 22,400 22,400 Lexington S of CR E 13,500 11,500 12,500 12,500 12,000 12,000 14,000 13,000 11,800 13,100 1986 1988 1990 1994 1996 1998 2000 2003 2005 2007 Level of Service An intersection capacity analysis was conducted for the existing intersections per the Highway Capacity Manual. Intersections are assigned a “Level of Service” letter grade for the peak hour of traffic based on the number of lanes at the intersection, traffic volumes and traffic control. Level of Service A (LOS A) represents light traffic flow (free flow conditions) while Level of Service F (LOS F) represents heavy traffic flow (over capacity conditions). LOS D is considered acceptable in urban conditions. The photos on the left represent some of the LOS grades (from a signal controlled intersection in San Jose, CA). The LOS results for the existing study hours are shown in Table 2. These are based on the existing traffic control and lane configurations as shown in Figure 6. The existing turning movement volumes from Figure 7 were used in the LOS calculations. The LOS calculations were done using SYNCHROTM software. Ramsey County’s existing timing plans were used in the analyses. The complete LOS calculations are included in Appendix A. LOS F = Unacceptable LOS A LOS C LOS D = Acceptable Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-19 Table 2 Existing Level of Service (LOS) Intersection Existing P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Co Rd E & Highway 51 Ave West Ramp B Co Rd E & Connelly Ave C Co Rd E & Pine Tree Dr B Co Rd E & Holiday Inn Site Dvwy A Co Rd E & Arden Plaza Dvwy A Co Rd E & Lexington Ave D Lexington Ave & Harriet Ave A All of the study intersections operate acceptably at LOS D or better in the existing p.m. weekday peak hour. Figure 6 Existing Lanes and Traffic Control Current Physical Conditions 2-20 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Figure 7 Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 8 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-21 Off-Street Parking Off-street parking is provided for every building in the study area; there is no parking allowed on County Road E. Parking is allowed on Pine Tree Drive and Harriet Avenue but rarely used. All parking areas appear to provide adequate capacity for the land uses that they serve including the more intensive uses such as Arden Plaza, Flaherty’s Arden Bowl and the Northpark Corporate Center. Structured parking in the study area is located under the two major Northpark Corporate Center office buildings. Pedestrian and Bicyclist Circulation Pedestrian and bicyclist circulation in the study area is difficult and hazardous. A concrete sidewalk exists along the south side of County Road E from the Highway 51 off-ramp to Lexington Avenue. On the north side, there is a sidewalk only from the west leg of Connelly to Pine Tree Drive. Walking along County Road E is an intimidating experience because of the high speed traffic. Crossing driveways or Pine Tree Drive is dangerous because of the many turning vehicles. There are no sidewalks along Pine Tree Drive, Harriet, Lexington or Highway 51. There is a walking path in the open space owned by Country Financial. There are no designated pedestrian crossings on County Road E. The only signalized intersections are at the Highway 51 ramps and at the Lexington Avenue intersection. There are no on-street striped bicycling lanes or off-street bicycling paths in the study area. Crossing the Highway 51 bridge is especially hazardous for pedestrians or bicyclists. The bridge deck consists of two auto lanes, no sidewalks and no bicycling lanes. County Road E is five lanes east of the bridge and two lanes west of the bridge. Crossing Lexington Avenue on foot or bicycle is equally intimidating. There are striped pedestrian crossings and walk indicators at the signalized Lexington intersection but no such help at the Arden Plaza driveway nor the Harriet Avenue intersection. Streetscape Improvements Along County Road E there are decorative street lights elevated and spaced to illuminate the road for auto traffic and, secondarily, pedestrian movement. The metal poles and “shoebox” light fixtures are a step up from the most basic equipment and provide a high level of illumination and enhance the sense that this is a special district. There are no trees in any of the public street rights-of-way. Trees along County Road E would help soften and effect of the wide road and add identity and unity to the corridor. There is probably insufficient space between the curb and the right-of-way boundary Current Physical Conditions 2-22 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October along County Road E for trees; that distance is approximately 7 feet or less in most locations, as noted above. Sidewalks are presently located outside the public right-of-way in easements across private property. Any trees near the street are on private land. Lexington Avenue presents an unappealing image as an entrance to Arden Hills and the County Road E study area. It has neither decorative street lights, street trees, continuous sidewalks nor continuous curbing. Highway 51 is located below the surrounding grade near the study area and is lined with mature vegetation that appears to have come up on its own. Current Physical Conditions 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2-23 Summary of Major Physical Planning Issues The following questions should be discussed, debated and resolved during the planning process from the County Road E Plan. 1. Arden Plaza: What should be the extent and nature of redevelopment, if any, on the Arden Plaza shopping center site? Should additional development on that site be limited for the sake of traffic operations at its two driveways? 2. Former Holiday Inn Site: How should the former Holiday Inn property be used in the future? 3. Industry: Is industry considered an appropriate land use along the County Road E corridor? 4. Street Trees: Should the City plant trees along the County Road E right-of-way? Should pedestrian-scale lighting be installed? 5. Lexington Avenue Streetscape: Should the City invest in trees, decorative lighting and better sidewalks along Lexington Avenue? 6. Entrance Monuments: Should district identity signage, lighting and/or landscaping be installed at the Lexington and Highway 51 entrances to the study area? 7. Building Setbacks: Where should future buildings be located relative to the street and sidewalk – set immediately adjacent to the sidewalk, set back a short distance or separated with a parking area? 8. Design Guidelines: Should the City adopt and apply a set of site planning and architectural design guidelines in the corridor? 9. Role of the City: To what extent should the City of Arden Hills be involved in helping to implement changes in the study area? Should the City’s role be limited to planning, zoning and public infrastructure or should it become financially involved in site redevelopment? 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 3-1 District Market Analysis Maxfield Research, Inc., was retained by the City of Arden Hills to conduct market research and analysis of the market potential for an area in Arden Hills considered to be the prime central business district of the city. The scope of this study includes an evaluation of the site; definition of an appropriate draw area (“Market Area”) for general occupancy and seniors housing, retail business and office land uses; an examination of demographic growth trends and characteristics of the Market Area; and an analysis of competitive housing, retail and office developments in the Market Area. Based on the research, demand is projected for general occupancy and senior housing units, retail, and office space in the study area. Based on this analysis, it was found that the study area could support selected housing products and additional commercial retail space. At this time, sufficient demand was not found to support additional office space. The report contained primary and secondary research. Primary research included interviews with realtors, commercial brokers, City Staff and others. All of the market data on existing and pending developments was collected by Maxfield Research, Inc., and is accurate to the best of their knowledge. Secondary data, such as U.S. Census data, is credited to the source and is used as a basis for analysis. Housing Conclusions and Recommendations Over time, a maximum of 778 housing units that could be supported in the General Occupancy and Senior Market Areas from 2008 to 2020. The number of supportable units should be revisited prior to any redevelopment in the study area to determine whether sites that become available for redevelopment would justify accommodating additional housing stock. Total demand by type of housing is summarized in the table below. The table below represents optimal demand for housing in the study area. However, based upon the timing and costs of redeveloping specific sites, the full potential may not be realized. Additionally, these demand figures are based on the assumption that the TCAAP site would move forward with development as planned. If the TCAAP site does not add as many units as planned, the study area could potentially capture a greater proportion of demand for each of the specified product types if appropriate sites were made available to accommodate housing in the study area. District Market Analysis 3-2 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October A summary of demand calculations for general occupancy rental housing and senior housing in the study are described further in the following sections. General Occupancy Demand Sufficient demand was found to support a total of 228 market rate and 183 affordable units of general occupancy rental housing in the study area. It was felt that the study area could support a stand-alone market rate building if an appropriate site becomes available for development. However, a 100 percent affordable building is not recommended as rents would not make project development costs financially feasible. Rather, it is suggested that any general occupancy rental project include a mix of market rate and affordable units in a medium- to high-density building (for example, 80 percent market rate units and 20 percent affordable units) as the market rate rents would help support high land acquisition and development costs. Senior Housing Demand There is sufficient demand to support 389 adult units, 620 ownership units, 340 congregate units, 202 assisted living units, and 185 memory care units. It is recommended that any new construction of senior housing in the study area be done as a combination of senior housing types in the form of a senior campus as the only senior housing types that could support a stand-alone buildings would be independent senior housing. Furthermore, senior housing in the study area could be affected by additional product added at TCAAP or other location in the Market Area. Any future development of senior housing in the study area should revisit Market Area conditions in order to find sufficient demand to support additional product in the Market Area. Condominium and Townhouse Demand Based on findings in the TCAAP study, the study found a total potential demand for about 100 units of condominium housing, all of which would be captured on the TCAAP site. If the estimated potential demand for the 100 condominium units is unmet at the TCAAP site, there would be an opportunity for a redevelopment site in the study area to capture a portion of the unmet demand. Additionally, it is recommended that townhouses be developed in the study area. Any future redevelopment site in the study area would likely be unable to support the higher density required to support an affordable townhouse product in this marketplace. District Market Analysis 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 3-3 Projected Demand for Neighborhood and Specialty Retail Space Table 4 calculates the amount of neighborhood retail space and Table 5 calculates the amount of specialty retail space (gross leasable area in square feet) supportable within the draw area from household growth alone. The figures used for the calculations reflect the amount of money spent on consumer goods and services (from consumer expenditure reports from Claritas, Inc.) and the estimated median sales per square foot for neighborhood retail centers (from Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, Urban Land Institute). Also shown in the table is a calculation for “net leakage.” Net leakage is the amount of consumer spending for convenience goods and services that is likely to be spent outside of the Retail Market Area. This calculation is based on the proportion of consumer expenditures that can be captured by retail space in the area. We estimate that retail space in the Retail Market Area is currently capturing about 80 percent of the total neighborhood retail expenditures and 60 percent of specialty retail expenditures by residents. The net leakage figures in the demand tables are based on the estimated leakage after new space would be added in the Retail Market Area. Based on the goods currently offered in the Retail Market Area, it is estimated that leakage would gradually decrease if new space were added. Percent Estimated Potential Capturable Demand for Units in study area in study area** General Occupancy Rental Housing Market Rate Apartments 20%228 Affordable Apartments 20%183 Total 411 Senior Housing Adult Rental 20%78 Adult Ownership 20%124 Congregate 20%68 Assisted Living 25%51 Memory Care 25%46 Total 367 Total Units 778 Source: Maxfield Research, Inc. * Figures shown are the total number of units that could be supported in the study area. Figures assume that the TCAAP site will be developed as planned. **If TCAAP does not develop as many units as planned, then the study area could potentially capture a greater percentage of the excess demand. 185 1,736 SUMMARY OF HOUSING DEMAND IN THE STUDY AREA* 2008 to 2020 TABLE 3 Demand for Units in Mkt Area 1,140 917 202 340 Total Excess 2,057 389 620 District Market Analysis 3-4 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Table 4 calculates demand for neighborhood retail space in the Retail Market Area. The following bullet points summarize the demand calculations presented in Table 4. ƒ There were approximately 31,600 households in the total Retail Market Area in 2007. Added are the number of employees estimated to work in the Retail Market Area. There are approximately 21,100 non-resident households, or employees, working in the Retail Market Area. ƒ Based on the analysis of consumer expenditure data, it is estimated that consumer expenditures for the types of neighborhood goods and services that could be purchased in the Retail Market Area are $26,452 per household. ƒ Multiplying the consumer expenditure figure by the number of households and employees results in total retail sales of $1.4 billion. However, factoring in leakage of retail dollars spent by Retail Market Area residents to centers outside of the Retail Market Area at 80 percent, the total demand in the Retail Market Area is reduced to $1.1 billion. (Leakage could potentially decline if particular types of retail were added in Arden Hills.) 2007 2012 Market Area Purchasing Power Market Area Households 31,358 32,191 Market Area Employees 2 +21,093 22,477 (times) Annual Neighborhood Household Expenditures x $26,452 $31,660 (equals) Total Market Area Expenditures =$1,387,424,382 $1,730,800,151 (plus) Approx. % Leakage Outside the Market Area1 20% 20% (equals) Leakage Outside of Market Area $277,484,876 $346,160,030 (equals) Total Purchasing Power $1,109,939,506 $1,384,640,121 (divided by) Average sales per Sq. Ft. 3 /$234 $258 (equals) Total Retail Space Demand (Sq. Ft.)= 4,741,508 5,357,389 Retail Demand Potential Retail Space Demand Growth (times) Amount Capturable by the study area x5% - 10% Demand for Additional Neighborhood Retail Space in Arden Hills (in sq. ft.)30,794 - 61,588 2 We estimate that approximately of 1/3 of Market Area employees make purchases in Market Area. 3 From Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, Urban Land Institute. Sources: Claritas; Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, Urban Land Institute; Maxfield Research Inc. 1 This Positive Leakage Factor is the estimated percentage of consumer expenditures spent by Market Area households consuming goods and services outside of the Market Area. 2007 to 2012 615,882 TABLE 4 DEMAND FOR NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL SPACE ARDEN HILLS MARKET AREA 2005 to 2015 District Market Analysis 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 3-5 ƒ Utilizing average sales per square foot from Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers and adjusted to account for location factors by Maxfield Research, it was determined that the Retail Market Area demand was about 4.7 million square feet in 2006, increasing to about 5.4 million square feet in 2012. ƒ No one site can capture 100 percent of the demand as the subject site will compete with other areas in the Retail Market Area for new retail stores over this period. We estimate that the study area would be able capture 5 percent to 10 percent of the neighborhood retail demand, or about 30,800 to 61,600 square feet between 2007 and 2012. ƒ Using the same methodology as above to calculate demand for specialty retail space in Table 5, it was estimated that the study area would be able capture 5 percent to 10 percent of the specialty retail demand, or about 9,300 to 18,500 square feet between 2007 and 2012. ƒ If Arden Plaza remains in its current state, we feel that the study area would capture demand for neighborhood and specialty retail space at the 5 percent levels shown in Tables 2 and 3. However, if Arden Plaza is repositioned or renovated in the future, demand could reach the 10 percent levels as shown in the illustrated demand tables. TABLE 5 DEMAND FOR SPECIALTY RETAIL SPACE ARDEN HILLS MARKET AREA 2007 to 2012 2007 2012 Market Area Purchasing Power Market Area Households 31,358 32,191 Market Area Employees1 +21,093 22,477 (times) Annual Specialty Household Expenditures x $12,658 $14,869 (equals) Total Market Area Expenditures =$663,920,226 $812,863,785 (plus) Approx. % Leakage Outside the Market Area2 40% 40% (equals) Leakage Outside of Market Area $265,568,091 $325,145,514 (equals) Total Purchasing Power $398,352,136 $487,718,271 (divided by) Average sales per Sq. Ft. 3 /$234 $258 (equals) Total Retail Space Demand (Sq. Ft.)=1,701,705 1,887,058 Retail Demand Potential Retail Space Demand Growth (times) Amount Capturable in study area x 5% - 10% Demand for Additional Specialty Retail Space in study area (in sq. ft.)9,268 - 18,535 1 This Positive Leakage Factor is the estimated percentage of consumer 2We estimate that approximately of 1/3 of Market Area employees make purchases in Market Area. 3 From Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, Urban Land Institute. Sources: Claritas; Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, Urban Land Institute; Maxfield Research Inc. 2007 to 2012 185,353 District Market Analysis 3-6 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Appropriate Types of Retail ƒ As seen in our projected demand tables, those retailers attracted to the study area will most likely be neighborhood retailers. Types of retail that would be appropriate for the study area are listed in Table 6 along with the median size (square feet) for each type of store. The store types represent stores with the greatest potential to locate in the study area. It should be noted, however, that the study area is not likely to attract all of these potential retailers. Some retailers may choose not to locate in the study area because of competing stores that may be developed in nearby Retail Market Area shopping centers or storefronts or because similar retailers that already exist in the study area. Retail Lease Rates ƒ Based on the lease rates at new competitive shopping centers in the Market Area and surrounding communities, we find that retail space in the study area should be priced lower than higher-profile sites closer to the commercial district north of the study area and near Rosedale Center. With the right mix of retailers and a reconfiguration of the property, we believe Arden Plaza could increase lease rates to about $17.00 per square foot. ƒ Redevelopment of existing commercial properties such as Arden Plaza may require a public/private partnership. The rents necessary to make redevelopment feasible would be higher than what potential retail and office tenants could or would be willing to pay initially. Public assistance to help reduce the cost of redevelopment to the private sector could be necessary for the commercial portion of the redevelopment to be successful in the next five years. District Market Analysis 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 3-7 Median Median Retail Uses: Sq. Ft.Retail Uses:Sq. Ft. Cards & Gifts 2,400 Arts & Crafts 2,200 Coffee/Tea 1,250 Book Store 4,400 Convenience Market 3,000 Computer/Software 1,250 Deli/Specialty food 1,950 Decorative accessories 1,650 Drugstore/Pharmacy 12,150 Discount Dept Store 12,000-15,000 Dry Cleaner/Laundry 1,450 Eyeglasses-Optician 1,400 Fast Food Restaurant 3,000 Flowers/Plant 1,200 Ice Cream Shop 1,200 Furniture Store 5,000 Liquor/Wine 2,400 Health Club 10,000 Nail Salon 1,050 Hobby 2,500 Photocopy/Fast Print 1,400 Home accessories 2,800 Pizza 1,500 Mailing/Packaging 1,200 Restaurant with liquor 4,000 Pet Shop 2,000 Sandwich Shop 1,250 Photographer 1,200 Sporting Goods 3,090 Picture Framing 1,250 Tailor 900 Radio, Video, Stereo 2,100 Tanning Salon 1,250 Telephone/Telecom 1,020 Unisex hair 1,300 Weight Loss Center 1,300 Sources: Urban Land Institute: Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, 2006 Maxfield Research Inc. *Examples may overlap with existing uses; this table is intended to represent potential retailers (type and size) that could locate in the study area. Neighborhood-Oriented Specialty Retail TABLE 6 EXAMPLES OF POTENTIAL RETAILERS FOR THE STUDY AREA* June 2008 RETAIL USES BY MEDIAN SIZE OF STORE District Market Analysis 3-8 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Projected Demand for Office Space The amount (in square feet) of additional office space supportable in the study area is based on projected office employment growth in the Office Market Area. The demand calculations are shown in Table 7 and are summarized in the following points. ƒ The Office Market Area is projected to add nearly 6,000 total jobs between 2007 and 2015. Of that growth, it is estimated estimate that 30 percent will be office jobs, or 1,776 new office jobs. ƒ Using an industry standard of 200 square feet of office space per employee on average, demand is forecast for 355,131 square feet of office space in the Office Market Area between 2007 and 2015 to accommodate office employment growth. This figure assumes that a variety of office spaces in a variety of locations will be available to meet the needs of prospective tenants. ƒ Of this demand, we estimate that Arden Hills will capture 30 percent or 106,539 square feet of office space. ƒ From that amount, existing competitive space marketing was subtracted along with pending space identified – about 120,076 square feet. From that calculation, demand was estimated for about -13,537 square feet of office in the City of Arden Hills between 2007 and 2015. The negative demand for office space is the result of large amounts of vacant office space located in the Arden Hills Office Market Area. ƒ At this time, our findings suggest that no new office space could be supported in the study area. We estimate negative demand (-2,031 to -2,707 square feet of office space) from 2007 to 2015 in the study area due to existing vacant office space as well as the Office Market Area’s limited capacity to absorb existing product. If the Office Market Area’s vacancy rates decline and the marketplace absorbs existing office space in the future, there is potential for a redevelopment site to potentially capture an office user considering locating in the study area. However, we believe that a minimum of five to seven years will be required to allow for the market to rebound and absorb existing product. ƒ Small technology firms, consulting companies, legal firms, medical offices, small sales firms, and advertising firms are some of the companies that might be interested in locating in the study area. Other companies specializing in medical products or technology may also consider office space in the study area to synergize with similarly focused companies located nearby. District Market Analysis 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 3-9 Demand from Projected Employment Growth Projected increase in employment in the Arden Hills Market Area, 2007 to 2015 new jobs (times) Percentage of projected employment growth that will be office jobs x (equals) Projected increase of office jobs in the Market Area, 2007 to 2015 =new office (times) 200 square feet of office space per employee x sq. ft./emp. (equals) Total Market Area office space demand from growth, 2007 to 2015 = (times) Percent capturable in the study area x (equals) Projected office demand in 2007 to 2015 = (minus) Available and planned competitive leasable office space in 2007*-sq. ft. (equals) Projected demand for small business office space in Market Area =sq. ft. (times) Estimated capture rate in the study area x 15%- 20% (equals) Estimated total new office space supportable in the study area.=-2,031 - -2,707 sq. ft. *Estimated % of Market Area office space that would be competitive with the study area: New Brighton -10%; Roseville-25%; Shoreview-50%; Arden Hills-100% Source: Maxfield Research Inc. TABLE 7 PROJECTED DEMAND FOR OFFICE SPACE ARDEN HILLS MARKET AREA 2007 to 2015 5,919 200 30% 106,539 1,776 355,131 30% 120,076 -13,537 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 4-1 Land Use and Public Improvements Plan Guiding Principles These principles will be used by the City of Arden Hills to help guide the evolution of the B2 District including plans for land use, urban design, public facilities and circulation. Elaboration and details will be added as the plan progresses. 1. Place Create a visual impression that the B2 district is a distinct, identifiable and special place in Arden Hills. 2. Land Uses Allow and encourage a variety of land uses in the district potentially including retail and service businesses, offices, high-density housing, places to eat and drink, industry that has high employment density and attractive buildings, education and indoor recreation. 3. Intensity and Scale As redevelopment occurs, generally increase the height of the buildings and amount of each site they cover. 4. Local Create a district that serves the needs and desires of residents of Arden Hills. 5. Quality Ensure that all private and public improvements are of a high quality in terms of appearance, function and longevity. Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 4-2 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 30 October 6. Civic Communicate that the district is “everybody’s neighborhood” and a center of public life in Arden Hills (a distinction perhaps to be shared with the redeveloped TCAAP site) through the use of public plazas or open space, small private spaces usable by the public, improved sidewalks and streetscape. 7. Movement Provide for safe and efficient auto movement as land use intensifies but also greatly improve the environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. 8. Green Provide year-‘round greenery and color throughout the district through generous landscaping of private sites and the public street edges. Add one or more green gathering spaces in the corridor. Improve the public’s use of the Country Insurance woods, its intended purpose. 9. Role of the City Establish the primary role of the City in the district as planning, leadership, zoning and public improvements. Do not rule out the application of municipal financial assistance in land redevelopment. 10. Continuity Maintain long-term support for the principles and policies of the Guiding Plan for the B2 District throughout the entire Arden Hills family including elected and appointed officials and staff. 11. Environmental Conservation and Sustainability Promote the use of green building practices, sustainability, and energy conservation to reduce the environmental impact of new development and redevelopment. Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 4-3 Land Use and Public Improvements Guidelines for the future use of property in the B2 District are presented by the following text and Figure 9. Arden Plaza Site ƒ Northern Access: Plan to create a new access driveway aligned north-south along the western edge of the Arden Plaza and “TCF Bank” sites to serve both those properties plus the Northpark Corporate Center site. A connection back to Lexington Avenue at the southern edge of the Arden Plaza site is optional and should be studied further. During the course of this planning process, study and recommend future traffic controls for that intersection, including whether the northern access drive should be restricted to right-in, right-out movement. Any new development that occurs before the new road is built should be designed to fit within a long-term guiding plan that makes use of the new access drive. ƒ Eastern Access: Preliminarily determine during this planning process whether the eastern access drive to this site should be restricted to right-in, right-out movement. An east-west driveway between the proposed new access road and Lexington Avenue should divide the site between the commercial area and the residential area. ƒ Land Use: Redevelop the current Arden Plaza property long-term with retail and service businesses on the northern half and either retail businesses, an office building or an apartment building on the southern half. ƒ Access: Work with Ramsey County to install a traffic signal on County Road E approximately 550 feet west of Lexington Avenue along with protected left-turn lanes in a landscaped median. That signal would serve Arden Plaza and the former Holiday Inn site. This would necessitate realigning the northern access driveway for Arden Plaza to the northwestern corner of the “TCF Bank” property, which would require redevelopment of that property. ƒ Gathering Space: Create an attractive civic (but privately owned) gathering space in the northeast corner of the site, potentially including a small pond or other water feature. ƒ Building Orientation: Orient the northern commercial buildings to frame the civic gathering space feature create an attractive and inviting space. These layout options are preliminarily suggested to accomplish this space-making: o An east-west layout of two parallel sets of buildings around a “Main Street” or landscaped median feature leading to the green gathering space in the northeastern corner of the site. o An L-shape with the open side facing northeast; sidewalks and a single row of parking would front the buildings on the sides facing the gathering space; the major parking would be on the opposite sides of the buildings; the buildings Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 4-4 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 30 October would be broken at the point of the L to provide pedestrian movement and visibility. o An L-shape with the open side facing southwest; the buildings would be broken at the point of the L to provide pedestrian movement and visibility. o An east-west orientation of one building (possibly two or more tenant spaces) along County Road E and a north-south orientation of a retail building along Lexington Avenue. ƒ Anchor Business: Redevelop an anchor retail or service building of approximately 15,000 to 25,000 square feet, preferably on the northern edge of the site. Consider adding one or more strong national retailers to increase customers to the site. ƒ Hospitality Businesses: Include in the new commercial area one or more eating and drinking businesses that could take advantage of and animate the outdoor gathering space. Restaurants that do well at lunch are expected to be most successful. ƒ Pedestrian Movement: Provide a pedestrian connection from Arden Plaza to a location near the County Road E and Lexington Avenue intersection. Require the replacement of the pathway along Lexington Avenue and extend the pathway to the south for future connections. Also investigate with the owners of the Northpark Corporate Park the feasibility of creating a pedestrian link from the Arden Plaza site to the central water feature in the Northpark site and the Country Insurance open space. Former Holiday Inn Site ƒ Interim Use: Assume that the current building is demolished after its use as a college residence hall. ƒ Access: Align a new access drive at the new intersection shown on Figure 9, opposite the future access point to the south. ƒ Land Use: Redevelop the site with an intensive combination of office, residential and, possibly, retail or service business land uses. Consider structured parking located along the railroad tracks. Allow housing and housing or offices above retail or service businesses. Seniors’ housing would also be a possibility, depending on market conditions. ƒ Focal Feature: Orient the development around a major landscaped median or other green space. ƒ Building Relationship to the Street: Locate the buildings close to County Road E; parking should be to the north of the buildings. ƒ Corner Gateway Feature: Create a green entry feature near Lexington Avenue. Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 4-5 Figure 9 Land Use Plan Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 4-6 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 30 October Industrial Area ƒ Site Assembly: Seek to redevelop this entire area as a whole when the market allows. The area is defined as including Corporate Express plus the small industrial buildings to the east and west plus the veterinary and furniture business buildings. The site may be redeveloped for a single large user or divided into two, three or four smaller sites. The site could even be assembled, planned and redeveloped in combination with the Pot o’ Gold and Arden Bowl parking properties. ƒ Access: Create an access point at the Pine Tree Drive signalized intersection. ƒ Land Use: Develop the site intensively with any combination of office, high- density residential, service business, employment-based (e.g., research and development), educational or institutional uses. Buildings should be taller than a single story and may be as tall as allowed by the City’s fire department and can be accommodated by the roads. ƒ Circulation: Build east-west movement across the site between the Holiday Inn parcel and Connelly Drive to provide multiple points of access for all properties on the north side of County Road E and to promote movement among the sites (e.g., going to lunch). This circulation may be private lanes among the parking areas. ƒ Building Relationship to the Street: Locate buildings relatively close to County Road E with a short landscaped setback. Parking should not be located along County Road E. ƒ Focal Feature: Orient the development around a major landscaped median or other green space. ƒ Streetscape: Extend the planned streetscape improvements along County Road E. Pot o’ Gold Bingo Site ƒ Land Use: This site should be redeveloped for a single, employment-oriented user that desires some visibility from MN Highway 51 but does not need much visibility from County Road E. Country Financial Open Space ƒ Access to Open Space: Work with Country Financial to make the entrance to these walking paths more visible and welcoming to the public. Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 4-7 Traffic and Streetscape Improvements Various street segments in and near the district should receive differing treatments in plantings, lighting, furniture and banners, as follows: County Road E From the west side of the Minnesota Highway 51 bridge to at least Lexington Avenue, this road should receive the highest level of streetscape improvements. Elements should include: ƒ Boulevard trees spaced at an average of 40 feet. ƒ A planted median that may include trees, shrubs, tall grasses and annual flowers. ƒ Decorative lighting at the automobile scale (on the existing bases, located 200 feet apart, contemporary styling); optional extra: decorative lighting at the pedestrian scale located approximately 50 to 70 feet apart) ƒ Benches and trash receptacles. ƒ A pair of new continuous concrete sidewalks (6 feet wide) with connections to adjacent businesses. ƒ Bollards. ƒ Annual flowers (in beds or raised planters). ƒ Seasonal banners on the light poles. ƒ Striped or colored pedestrian crossings. ƒ Bus waiting shelters. ƒ A traffic signal system at the future intersection located between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue. ƒ Replacement signals, arms and poles for the existing signal systems at (all optional): the eastern ramp terminals of Highway 51, Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue. ƒ Relocating the electrical boxes to a less visible location or screening where feasible. ƒ A pedestrian and bicyclist connection over Highway 51, which may be a separate bridge, a new bridge, or an addition to the existing bridge. Figure 10 Streetscape Cross Section The two “end caps” and the Pine Tree Drive intersection “centerpiece” should be accentuated by color, intensity, lighting and signage. Improvements should include irrigation for the boulevards and the median plus electrical outlets for winter lighting. Light fixtures should have “cut-offs” to concentrate the beam and reduce glare. Ideally, this streetscape improvement should be carried a short distance into Shoreview so as to make a smooth transition with the changing nature of the road and land use as well as to emphasize the intersection as an important landmark or node. Left-Turns only at Signalized Intersections: Importantly, this improvement program calls for building a raised, landscaped median that would eliminate left-turn movements except at the signalized intersections at the Highway 51 ramps, Pine Tree Drive, a planned new intersection between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue, and Lexington Avenue. Additional engineering, traffic study, and review may be needed prior to implementation. Street trees with new buildings brought close to a new Lake Johanna Boulevard should be used to create attractive spaces for pedestrians and a stronger community connection to the corridor. Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 4-9 Add a supplementary name to County Road E in Arden Hills: Lake Johanna Boulevard, which is the local name used on County Road 149 west of Minnesota Highway 51. This additional name will help identify the road as a local facility with a connection to a nearby natural feature and thereby personalize it. The County Road E name could still be used by residents and businesses where needed. Pine Tree Drive and Harriet Avenue The streetscape elements of County Road E should be carried south on Pine Tree Drive to the Hunters Park entrance but at a reduced level. This approach would help unify the district but indicate the secondary nature of Pine Tree Drive. The residential nature of Harriet Avenue should be protected with the addition of street trees and a sidewalk on one side of the street. Lexington Avenue A comprehensive streetscape improvement program should be undertaken for Lexington Avenue from north of I-694 to some point south of the district. Request that Ramsey County install sidewalks, curbing, trees and more attractive lighting along Lexington Avenue from I-694 to some point south of the study area. Cooperation from the City of Shoreview and Ramsey County will be essential. The design objective in this corridor should be tuned to the higher speed and volume of auto traffic, the large parking areas along the road and the large-scale retail business environment. Minnesota Highway 51 and Bridge This state highway already has a degree of landscaping on its valley slopes. Emphasis here should be on announcing access to the County Road E district and the Lake Johanna parks. Ramsey County should be encouraged to rebuild the bridge over Minnesota Highway 51 with accommodations for pedestrians and bicyclists as soon as possible. Alternatively, a separate bridge or an addition to the existing bridge should be built for non-motorized traffic. Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 4-10 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 30 October Illustrative Guiding Plan Several of the principles conveyed in this land use plan and the district design guidelines have been expressed in the Illustrative Guiding Plan, Figure 11, on the next page. That sketch is meant to illustrate one possible way in which this plan might be realized but is certainly not the only development pattern. The market may propose a wide variety of additional building patterns that are just as desirable (if not more so) and which are also consistent with this plan and the City’s zoning regulations. The major ideas illustrated by the Illustrative Guiding Plan are: ƒ Mixture of Land Uses: There should be a mixture of land uses along County Road E including retail and service businesses that serve the local market, high- density housing (general market or seniors, rental or owned), and corporate or professional offices. Some of these activities may be combined on the same site or in the same building. Overall, land would be intensively used. ƒ Redevelopment Opportunities: There are several major redevelopment opportunities available over the next 25 years: the former Holiday Inn site, Arden Plaza and the adjacent “TCF Bank” site, the Pot o’ Gold Bingo property, and the several industrial and commercial properties in the middle of the corridor. ƒ Building Relationship to the Street: Buildings should be located along County Road E with parking to the rear. There should be no parking between future buildings and any public street. ƒ Parking: Parking may be accommodated in well-landscaped surface lots and/or in attractive structures. ƒ Improvements to County Road E: County Road E should be reconstructed to include a landscaped median, boulevard trees, protected left-turn lanes, bicycling lanes and continuous concrete sidewalks. ƒ Traffic Signal: A new traffic signal should be installed between Lexington Avenue and Pine Tree Drive to serve the former Holiday Inn property and the enlarged and redeveloped Arden Plaza site. Shared access between the Arden Plaza site and the adjacent office park to the new traffic signal should be reviewed. ƒ Private Site Landscaping: Each new development should be attractively landscaped. ƒ Entry Feature: There should be entry feature landscaping, lighting and public art at the eastern and western ends of the corridor. ƒ Bicyclist and Pedestrian Connection: A bicyclist and pedestrian bridge should be built over Minnesota Highway 51 or accommodations should be made for non-motorized traffic when the auto bridge is rebuilt. Land Use and Public Improvements Plan 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 4-11 ƒ Civic Focal Point: A public or private green should be created north of County Road E. Figure 11 Illustrative Guiding Plan Refer to Figures 1 or 2 on pages 2-2 and 2-3 to see the pattern of buildings existing in 2008. 30 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 5-1 District Design Guidelines The design guidelines for the B2 District are organized according to the Guiding Principles of this plan. These statements are intended to be a guide for the City, developer, architect and builder that allow flexibility, individuality and creativity. They focus on fundamental site planning and design ideas that address compatibility, visual appeal, lasting value and place-making. They emphasize the relationship to the street, density, heights, façade treatment, circulation, parking and plantings. While some of these design guidelines are discretionary and advisory, some of them may be used to amend the B-2 zoning district to achieve the long term redevelopment vision within this plan. Ideas for streetscape enhancements should be considered when the City prepares a more detailed public improvements plan, though certain improvements could be implemented by the private sector as properties redevelopment. Vision Statement The County Road E / Lake Johanna Boulevard District will be a place where people can live, work and play. The district will be a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian-friendly community with a distinct identity. It will provide sidewalks and places for people to gather and socialize. Design guidelines will be followed to promote an attractive environment with lasting value. The district is dedicated to the belief that we desire to integrate nature, home, work and leisure. District Design Guidelines 5-2 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Planning and Design Principles The following principles are the basis for the design guidelines, reflect the community vision and will be followed through the evolution of the district. 1. Be more urban than suburban in terms of density, building height, parking and façade treatments. 2. Include several types of land uses such as office, housing, retail or service businesses and, possibly, job-intensive light industry. 3. Face residential, office and retail buildings toward the public street to the extent possible. 4. Insist on a high quality of design in buildings and public improvements. 5. For office or residential buildings, strive to locate as much of the parking as possible in structures, under buildings or to the rear of buildings. For commercial sites, strive to locate at least some of the building(s) between the street and the surface parking area. 6. Provide a generous amount of landscaping; pay attention to the details of lighting, signage, materials and fixtures. 7. Encourage walking and bicycling through physical improvements, streetscape and building placement. District Design Guidelines 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 5-3 Place Entrances The eastern and western entrances to the district should be announced by special landscaping, signs, lighting and/or art. Those entrance locations are defined as (west) the immediate vicinity of the eastern Minnesota Highway 51 ramps and (east) the Lexington Avenue intersection with County Road E. Arrival The vicinity of the intersection of County Road E and Pine Tree Drive should be demarcated as the visual center of the district through use of landscaping and lighting. Street Name West of Lexington Avenue, County Road E should receive the supplementary name of Lake Johanna Boulevard, which could be used in addition to the County Road E name. The City of Shoreview should be encouraged to also apply this local moniker to County Road E from Lexington Avenue to Victoria Street. Space Defined To the extent possible, locate future buildings so as to define some spaces in which people feel comfortable walking or sitting. Orient doors and windows toward those spaces. Avoid locating buildings in a field of parking. Whenever feasible, require that windows on the first floor of a building be made of transparent glass. District Design Guidelines 5-4 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Street Improvements County Road E / Lake Johanna Boulevard should be improved as follows to create a sense that this is a special place in Arden Hills: ƒ Convert the shared left-turn lane to a landscaped median with protected left-turn lanes. ƒ Add a row of trees along both sides of the road between the curb and the sidewalk. ƒ Replace the street light poles and light with new equipment. Refer also to the description in Chapter 4, Land Use and Public Improvements, in this guiding plan. Business Signs Business signs should be restrained and in proportion with the wall of the building. Back-lit signs with individual letters are preferred over plastic panels. Freestanding signs along the public street should be monument style rather than pole style. District Design Guidelines 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 5-5 Land Uses Types of Land Use Allow a wide range of land use types throughout the district on each site and, potentially, within each building. On sites bordering County Road E, allowable land use may include corporate or professional office buildings, build-to-suit offices, medical offices, multiple-family housing, lodging, eating and drinking businesses, and retail or service businesses. Multiple-family housing would be medium- to high-density buildings with interior hallways as opposed to townhouses; either rental or owned; general market or seniors. Retail or service businesses should be scaled to serve the local trade area that includes Arden Hills, Shoreview and northern Roseville. On sites presently occupied by industry along the north side of County Road E, redevelopment may include certain industrial operations that have a high density of jobs, no outdoor storage and little or no heavy- truck traffic. Every land use should be of the type that generates property tax revenue. District Design Guidelines 5-6 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Development characteristics that will be used to create a sense of place and interest along the new Lake Johanna Boulevard include mixed use, intensive development, enhanced public spaces framed by buildings, and architectural fenestration. (Please also refer to the Illustrative Guiding Plan sketch on page 4-11, which more clearly indicates the shape, coverage and relationships of the buildings and open space suggested above.) District Design Guidelines 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 5-7 Building Height and Size The B2 District should be visually distinct from the rest of Arden Hills and clearly express that distinction. It should grow to be a visual, social and psychological center of Arden Hills. It should an intensely developed part of the community, and that density should foster increased walking. The way in which buildings relate to the public street is one of the key aspects of creating a sense of place and identity. Building placement and height should serve to enclose and define the edges of County Road E, making it somewhat of an outdoor room. Building Setbacks To support walking and enhance a sense of place, buildings should be set close to the public street rather than being separated from the street by parking. A landscaped space between the sidewalk and the building approximately 20 feet wide would be appropriate. Encourage that at least 50 percent of the largest building on each site occupy the street frontage at the “build-to” line. Coordinate building architecture to try to create active spaces in side yards rather than just parking or service functions. Building Height Most new office, residential or mixed-use buildings are anticipated to be in the height range of two to four stories. Buildings exclusively devoted to retail and service businesses are expected to be one story. Commercial building(s) taller than one story would be desirable on the northern end of Arden Plaza to compensate for the difference in elevation between the road and the site. At a minimum, a raised parapet wall is needed there to shield rooftop equipment from views from the road. A “second story expression” technique (exterior façade only) could also be used. Buildings taller than four stories may be considered northwest of County Road E, where the tallest buildings and greatest intensity of land coverage should be guided. Building height may be limited by the effect of the project on traffic circulation, which will be assessed during the review process. District Design Guidelines 5-8 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Future residential buildings could be three or four stories in height, include parking under the building or in a structure, and be located along the street with space for trees and other landscaping behind the public sidewalk. Building mass should be broken with materials, setbacks, window patterns and balconies. Parking ƒ Parking areas or structures for office or residential buildings that are in close vicinity to County Road E or Lexington Avenue should be located behind (preferably) or beside the building. ƒ Allow parking between buildings to the extent that parking in the side yard accounts for no more than 50 percent of parking on the site. ƒ Sufficient parking should be provided to accommodate the reasonable hourly peak on a given site. Parking should be shared among buildings on a site to reduce the land devoted to parking. Hourly variations among different types of land use should be considered when estimating parking demands. ƒ Provide on-street parking along Pine Tree Drive and Harriet Avenue. Demarcate on-street parking bays with pedestrian “bump-outs” at driveway or street intersections. ƒ Green islands and trees should be incorporated into parking lots to increase their visual appeal. Where feasible, pervious surfaces should be used to reduce stormwater runoff. District Design Guidelines 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 5-9 Retail Building Size The floor area of any individual retail business should not exceed 50,000 square feet. “Big box” retail businesses will not be allowed in this district. Certain service businesses such as a fitness center may exceed that figure. Quality Exterior Building Materials ƒ Buildings should be constructed of materials that are enduring, timeless and well-detailed. ƒ Exterior building materials should be primarily face brick, stone, decorative concrete plank, transparent glass and/or metal (as an accent and trim material). Other high-quality materials that increase the variety and appeal of buildings may be considered as accents. ƒ Metals should have a matte finish and neutral or earth tone colors. Metals that are used for exterior walls should have visible corner moldings and trim. ƒ Undesirable materials include wood except as an accent material, mirrored or tinted glass especially on the first floor, simulated brick or stone, vinyl or aluminum siding, concrete blocks, materials that have no pattern or relief especially when applied to large walls, materials that represent corporate colors or trademarks, brightly colored metal roofing or canopies, pre-cast tilt-up walls, and synthetic awnings particularly when illuminated from the rear. Exterior Building Design ƒ Buildings should be articulated, especially with windows and doors, to reduce their apparent size and create visual interest from the street. Long blank exterior walls should not be allowed. ƒ Building volume should be broken with recesses and projections such as porches, dormers and bays that create shadows and add visual interest. Volume may also be broken with multiple roof and ridge lines perpendicular to one another or offset to avoid single roof lines. ƒ Facades of commercial buildings should be designed to convey the impression of a series of individually-constructed small storefronts. Façade treatment should be carried around all sides. District Design Guidelines 5-10 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October ƒ Approximately 70 percent of the first level façade that includes the major store entrance and/or faces a public street should be transparent (have windows and doors). Windows should be made of transparent glass and recessed at least one inch rather than being flush with the façade. ƒ Awnings or overhangs should be provided at entryways to provide shelter from the sun and rain. ƒ Exterior lighting for parking lots and buildings should not be excessive and should be directed at their intended purposes. ƒ Any multi-level building should distinguish the ground floor level from the upper floors by use of these techniques: an intermediate cornice line, difference in building materials or details, awnings trellis or arcade, special window details, or brick corbels or quoins. A strong base and top for multi-story buildings should be established; middle layers should be simpler. Detail should be an integral part of the architecture rather than a series of applied elements. ƒ Mechanical systems and service areas should be integrated into in the architecture of the buildings. Garbage and recycling containers should be fully enclosed and integrated into the architecture of the buildings. ƒ Business signs should be architecturally compatible with the style, composition, materials, colors and details of the building and should be an integral part of the building. Signs should be incorporated into the facades of the buildings rather than extending past the roof line and should not project more than 12 inches beyond the plane of the façade. Retail business wall signs should be located in a position above the front window that is located consistently among stores. Backlit signs should not be allowed on the street side of new buildings with 100 feet of a public street. Pylon, rooftop and portable changeable message signs should not be used. ƒ Franchise architecture identified with a particular chain will be discouraged unless it is architecturally integrated into the district and approved building materials are used. Drive-up windows may be allowed if conflicts with pedestrian traffic are minimized. ƒ Truck docks and delivery areas should face away from the public street and integrated into the architecture of the building where feasible. ƒ Lighting under a gasoline station canopy should not be directly visible from the street but should be recessed into the canopy or otherwise shielded. District Design Guidelines 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 5-11 Civic Gathering Space ƒ All commercial elements of the B2 District should be considered a public gathering space for the community. Every commercial building should offer opportunities for some degree of gathering. Spaces should be created to encourage interaction and gathering. ƒ In Arden Plaza, there should be an attractive and functional outdoor seating area or two near businesses that offer eating and drinking. ƒ Public art should be used near the district focal point, the Pine Tree Drive intersection, and possibly other locations. Public art may range from vertical, sculptural elements to creative touches integrated with walls or pavements. ƒ Attractive bus waiting shelters should be installed. A public or private “town green” should be created as part of the potential redevelopment north of the new Lake Johanna Boulevard. District Design Guidelines 5-12 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 20 October Movement Bicycling ƒ Work through Ramsey County to rebuild and restripe County Road E to include a pair of striped bicycling lanes plus a landscaped median. ƒ Construct a dedicated bicycle/pedestrian connection over Minnesota Highway 51, which could be part of a rebuilt bridge over Highway 51, an addition to the existing bridge, or a separate bridge. Walking ƒ There should be a six-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along both sides of County Road E; along the east side of Pine Tree Drive and the north side of Harriet Avenue; and along the west side of Pine Tree Drive from County Road E to the entrance to the Country Financial site. ƒ When reasonably feasible, raised concrete walkways should be used to connect perimeter public sidewalks to the front door of each building in the district. ƒ Bump-outs should be installed to help pedestrians cross Pine Tree Drive and Harriet Avenue. ƒ Construct a dedicated bicycle/pedestrian connection over Minnesota Highway 51, which could be part of a rebuilt bridge over Highway 51, an addition to the existing bridge, or a separate bridge. ƒ Drive-up windows should be discouraged because of their impact on pedestrians. However, if they are allowed, they should be located so as to minimize such effects. District Design Guidelines 20 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 5-13 Green Private Spaces A generous amount of plant material should be used on every new development site. Office parking areas should include generous perimeter and internal landscaping. Parking structures should have upgraded façade finishes and be visually softened with plantings. Parking Areas Plantings should be used to soften and shade parking lots and parking structures. Parking and service areas should be visually screened from street views with plantings and architectural treatments. Parking lots islands should be used to distribute large parking fields into separate “outdoor rooms” that have visual relationships to the buildings they serve. Parking lot islands should be planted with trees or include infiltration basins and naturalized plantings. Entry drives should be defined by trees and shrubs. Parking adjacent to street should be screened from views with low hedges or masonry walls. Berms should not be used. Country Financial Woodland The City should work with Country Financial to determine whether a more clear and formal announcement of the availability of its walking paths can be made at Pine Tree Drive. Crepeau Nature Center Connections from the district to the Crepeau Nature Center should be more clearly announced. 21 October Guiding Plan for the B2 District 6-1 Traffic Study Conclusions and Recommendations A traffic impact study was prepared for the Guiding Plan, a full version of which is presented in Appendix A. The following summary conclusions and recommendations are an outcome of that study. County Road E Corridor The roadways and study intersections within the study area currently operate acceptably at Level of Service (LOS) D or better and will continue to operate at LOS D or better through the 2030 Build scenario when the redevelopment is anticipated to be fully occupied. The County Road E corridor has a wide center two way left turn lane down the middle as well as many driveway intersections. This leads to a vehicle dominated corridor that is unfriendly to pedestrians and bicycles. It is envisioned County Road E will operate as a vibrant, multi-modal corridor that will attract pedestrians and bicycles. To provide a safe multi-modal corridor, the following long range improvements are recommended: ƒ Construct a landscaped median on County Road E from Highway 51 to Lexington Avenue to convert the private driveways along County Road E into right-in/right-out accesses. ƒ Driveways should be consolidated whenever feasible to limit the conflict points along the corridor. ƒ Provide left turn lanes at public street intersections. ƒ Provide on street bicycle lanes. ƒ Provide sidewalks along the length of County road E and to the businesses, including a connection to Arden Plaza near to the County Road E and Lexington intersection. ƒ Improve the landscaping to provide a human scale to the corridor. ƒ Provide eleven foot wide travel lanes which will reinforce the 35 mph speed limit. ƒ Minimize traffic signs within the corridor whenever feasible. ƒ Extend the bicycle and pedestrian facilities through the County Road E/Hamline Avenue interchange when it is reconstructed. ƒ Reconstruct the corridor using the existing curb and gutter system to minimize the cost. This will also shorten the construction period, lessening the impact on local businesses. Traffic Plan Summary 6-2 Guiding Plan for the B2 District 21 October County Road E is under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County. The City will need to work collaboratively with the County to gain approval for these recommended improvements. Intersection of County Road E, the Holiday Inn Site and the Arden Plaza Driveway The driveways on County Road E for the Holiday Inn site and the Arden Plaza site will experience significant delay and queuing in the p.m. peak hour even though the overall intersections will operate within traffic engineering standards. This is acceptable as an interim situation because it is not expected to pose a safety problem, little queuing is anticipated on County Road E. Long term, the queuing will impact the vitality of the redevelopments and could lead to safety problems. These driveways should be realigned midway between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue to provide a four legged intersection that could be controlled with a traffic signal. Left turn lanes and shared right/through lanes should be built on the new north and south legs of the intersection to provide adequate egress. The signal should be installed when the traffic volumes at the intersection meet the criteria for installing a traffic signal per the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. When the traffic signal is installed at the new intersection it will operate at LOS B in the 2030 Build p.m. peak hour. This leaves capacity to accommodate significantly more redevelopment as long as the traffic from the redevelopment is focused at the signalized intersection. Short-Term Development Assumptions Used in the Traffic Study Three short-term redevelopment possibilities were identified through the planning process. Although redevelopment may occur outside these areas, the traffic study analyzed the effect of redeveloping the Pot o’ Gold, Holiday Inn and northern Arden Plaza properties. These properties may redevelop differently but the below numbers were used to show the impact if they were redeveloped. Specifically: ƒ The Pot o’ Gold bingo hall was assumed to be replaced with 15,000 square feet of office. ƒ The former Holiday Inn hotel was assumed to be replaced with 95 apartment units and 120,000 square feet of office. ƒ The 46,000 square feet of offices on the northern part of the Arden Plaza site was assumed to be replaced with a 14,000 square foot pharmacy and 5,000 square foot retail space. 7-1 The New Lake Johanna Boulevard 21 October Plan Implementation Program The Guiding Plan for the B2 District will be carried forward through these and other actions. Comprehensive Plan The City Council should approve and accept this plan and then: 1. Adjust the comprehensive plan to reflect Figure 9, Land Use Plan, in the citywide land use plan map. 2. Adopt this plan “by reference” into the comprehensive plan. Zoning Ordinance The City will amend the B-2 zoning district to allow the full range of land uses recommended in the Guiding Plan: retail and services businesses, office buildings and high-density housing as principal land uses. Allow light industry as a conditional use; specify a minimum number of jobs per acre and exterior appearance standards. Require that all applications be submitted and reviewed as planned-unit developments. Expand the map coverage of the B-2 district to include the Hunters Park residential area. Site Plan or Planned-Unit Reviews The City of Arden Hills will review each development application by conferring with each applicant before the application is submitted, by applying the terms of an amended B-2 zoning district and, when appropriate, interpreting this plan when judgment is needed. Traffic and Streetscape Improvements Prepare a specific plan and engineering feasibility study for traffic, landscaping, lighting and pedestrian improvements along both County Road E from the eastern ramp terminals of Highway 51 to and including the Lexington Avenue intersection as described on page 4-7 of chapter 4. Streetscape Improvements Determine during this planning process the most feasible location for additional landscaping and sidewalks, taking into account the limited space in the public right-of- way outside the curbs. Implement the street landscaping plan by obtaining easements from property owners since Plan Implementation Program 7-2 The New Lake Johanna Boulevard 21 October the space for such landscaping will be entirely on private property (the public right-of- way is almost entirely taken by the road). The City could potentially design, fund and install the improvements on easements, though working with private enterprises and non- profit partnerships is encouraged for implementation and long-term maintenance. Estimated Costs and Potential Funding Sources The preliminary cost estimate for the traffic and streetscape improvements is $2.0 million (2008 dollars). Funding sources will be determined by the City Council but could include: ƒ City general funds ƒ Special assessments on benefiting properties ƒ Private sources ƒ Municipal State-Aid funds ƒ Tax increment financing ƒ Tax abatement ƒ Ramsey County funds ƒ Grants The preliminary estimated costs do not include utility or other underground work, which would need to be evaluated during the feasibility study and potentially included with the streetscape improvements. Timing the Median Construction and Access Changes It is important to note that the County Road E improvement plan calls for building a raised, landscaped median that would eliminate left-turn traffic movements except at the signalized intersections at the Highway 51 ramps, Pine Tree Drive, a planned new intersection between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue, and Lexington Avenue. That median would, thus, affect all businesses in the corridor particularly the high- volume retail enterprises and especially Arden Plaza, the largest retail operation in the study area. Creating a new signalized intersection between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue is judged to be essential for the long-term viability of Arden Plaza and the former Holiday Inn site. The City wishes to achieve this improvement while minimizing or totally avoiding adverse effects on those two properties. Coordination of the public improvement with the redevelopment of both of the private properties is essential. Therefore, the City will continuously consult with all affected property owners in the corridor before ordering these improvements with the aim of targeting the ideal year. However, if one property redevelops before the other and the new intersection is judged to be critical to its success, the City Council will take that into consideration. It goes without saying that Ramsey County will be involved in this process since the County has jurisdiction over the road. The City of Shoreview will also be closely Plan Implementation Program 7-3 The New Lake Johanna Boulevard 21 October involved because it is proposed that the streetscape improvements be carried a short distance into that community and the signal system at Lexington may be updated. Supplementary Road Name Add a supplementary name to County Road E in Arden Hills: Lake Johanna Boulevard, which is the local name used on County Road 149 west of Minnesota Highway 51. This name change will help identify the road as a local facility with a connection to a nearby natural feature and thereby personalize it; however, the existing County Road E name could also still be used by residents and businesses as needed. Continuity This plan should be used on a long-term basis for the purpose of amending the zoning ordinance, making public improvements and reviewing development applications. The plan may be reviewed periodically and updated by the Planning Commission and City Council to ensure that it continues to be useful in those tasks. Plan Implementation Program 7-4 The New Lake Johanna Boulevard 21 October Summary of Actions Short-Term ƒ Name: Add the supplementary name of Lake Johanna Boulevard to County Road E. ƒ Zoning: Adjust the text of the B-2 zoning district to match the guidance of the plan, specifically the design guidelines in Chapter 5. ƒ Site Plan Reviews: Use the plan for guidance in site plan or Planned-Unit Development reviews. Consider proposals that would result in the redevelopment of the Arden Plaza office buildings and a more vibrant retail center as long as the resulting traffic is consistent with the assumptions and forecasts for the existing northern driveway as used in the traffic study (Appendix A). ƒ Funding: Begin to seek funding for improvements to County Road E and the construction of the pedestrian and bicyclist connection over Highway 51 from Ramsey County and other sources. ƒ Communications: Continuously consult with property owners along County Road E regarding the timing of their redevelopment plans for the purpose of coordinating the construction of a median and traffic signal on County Road E with their changes. Mid-Term ƒ Road Improvement Plan: Prepare a more detailed streetscape improvement plan and engineering feasibility study for improvements to County Road E. Prepare a financial plan. Involve the City of Shoreview. This step could be moved forward if redevelopment moves faster than anticipated. ƒ Road Reconstruction: Construct the improvements to County Road E, Pine Tree Drive and potentially part of Lexington Avenue. ƒ Maintenance: Regularly replace seasonal flowers at the entrance monuments and decorative banners to the light poles along Lake Johanna Boulevard and Pine Tree Drive. Maintain the driving surfaces (with Ramsey County). ƒ Site Redevelopment: Use the plan as guidance when reviewing applications for land redevelopment. Shift the northern access to Arden Plaza west to a new signalized intersection when a second phase of redevelopment occurs. Longer-Term ƒ Lexington Avenue: Collaborate with the City of Shoreview on a streetscape improvement plan for Lexington Avenue. ƒ Site Redevelopment: Use the plan as guidance when reviewing applications for land redevelopment. Guiding Plan for the B2 District A-1 Appendix A Traffic Impact Study Due to the length of the Traffic Impact Study, a copy may not be included with this printing. A copy is available at City Hall and online at www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us. Guiding Plan for the B2 District B-1 Appendix B Comments from the Community Visioning Meeting 20 May 2008 Strengths ƒ University students use the district ƒ Existing businesses already in place and known, centralized (3) ƒ Variety / Mix of businesses, good shopping (10) ƒ Serves some consumer needs, serves local needs (2) ƒ Nice business district ƒ Lower density of businesses ƒ Small family businesses, local, neighborhood retail, useful, small town feel, no big box stores, unique (22) ƒ Variety of office space and employment opportunities (2) ƒ Historically this was the main business area for Arden Hills ƒ Arden Plaza, hardware store, pharmacy, post office (7) ƒ Convenient banking (2) ƒ Source of good tax income for Arden Hills ƒ Accessibility via arterial streets and from neighborhoods (3) ƒ Retail shops within walking distance of neighborhoods ƒ Easy access to neighborhoods, centrally located (4) ƒ Ease of access for pedestrians, bikers, and autos, manageable traffic (4) ƒ Some pedestrian sidewalks ƒ Decent parking ƒ Possible light-rail future opportunities ƒ Central to other commercial development, large chains on Lexington (2) ƒ Good access from Snelling Avenue and I-694 and Lexington Avenue (9) ƒ Traffic flows well except at rush hour, good amount of traffic (2) ƒ County Road E can support development, four lanes, turn lanes (3) ƒ The area is well defined, has a beginning and end ƒ Large area and can accommodate a variety of uses ƒ Small town layout, residential feel, quite side streets (3) ƒ Area has a pattern of development that can be built upon ƒ Most existing development does not directly conflict with obvious future plans ƒ Strong community feel and quaintness, friendly, meet neighbors (3) ƒ Relatively calm visually ƒ Buildings are setback from street, not right on the street ƒ Stability ƒ Railroad tracks create natural division of land uses ƒ Has redevelopment opportunities and open areas B-2 Guiding Plan for the B2 District ƒ Aged in such a way that it is close to turning over ƒ Two large parcels on prime corner ƒ Little in the area that needs to be preserved ƒ Narrow street and bridge ƒ Banners on light poles ƒ Open green space, landscaping, and mature trees (9) ƒ Quality parks nearby, undeveloped areas, and trails (3) ƒ Close to beach ƒ Need to include environmental concerns and impact in planning future development ƒ Wide street has potential for landscaping or boulevard Weaknesses ƒ Scum on pond, brings mosquitoes ƒ Doesn’t draw strangers to existing businesses ƒ Low Patronage by majority(?) of residents ƒ Retail trending to downscale/vacancies/transient (6) ƒ Ugly Bingo Parlor, bingo traffic (3) ƒ Poor mix of businesses, needs grocery store, needs variety, small businesses (8) ƒ Existing business are struggling (2) ƒ Large existing businesses are unlikely to want to change, or difficult to redevelop compatibly (2) ƒ Lack of good restaurants/dining/neighborhood café/ethnic/healthy (9) ƒ Lack of night time activity ƒ Weak potential for residential/mixed use ƒ Lack of residential housing to make it feel more like a downtown ƒ Rail makes residential uses unattractive ƒ Architecture is blah and uninteresting, no public square, lack of diversity (3) ƒ Not attractive buildings, blank walls, too much asphalt (3) ƒ Setbacks are inconsistent – no real “flow” visually on E2 ƒ Somewhat chaotic visually, lacks obvious plan, especially on north side of E (3) ƒ Needs more continuity architecturally, non-uniform architecture, needs harmony (4) ƒ Arden Plaza needs a new look, better signage, outdated office pods (4) ƒ Lack of community gathering spot, central park (2) ƒ No gateway entrance identification, bad signage (2) ƒ No cultural or art attractions ƒ More Green, trees, etc (2) ƒ Needs decorative lighting (3) ƒ Too many parking lots right on County Road E ƒ No Access to Public Transit (3) ƒ Area is not bicycle and pedestrian friendly, needs more connectivity through City, especially from west, few sidewalks and bike paths (15) ƒ Lack of sidewalk on north side of E (2) ƒ No designated bike trail, better bike access through city (5) ƒ Poor pedestrian/bike access across 51, bad bridge, too narrow, unsafe (14) ƒ Lousy/unsafe access for vehicles, turning onto Lexington is difficult, poor circulation (3) Guiding Plan for the B2 District B-3 ƒ Traffic in and out of Arden Plaza and internal circulation is bad (3) ƒ Heavy traffic, too much, especially during rush hour (8) ƒ Too many access points, curb-cuts (3) ƒ 51 and E is a dangerous intersection (2) ƒ Train that goes every hour on the ½ hour backs up traffic (3) Opportunities ƒ Keep all the property on the tax rolls ƒ Make retail areas more accessible by pedestrian and bike traffic, from all directions, safe crossings (8) ƒ Promote ease of access for pedestrians, bikes, and autos (2) ƒ Prominent bike paths, sidewalks or walking paths on both sides of street (5) ƒ Circulator bus for area ƒ No more than 2-3 curb cuts into business sections, put a frontage road to limit access points, particularly Mr. Movies and TCF (3) ƒ Alter Curb cuts to more “street-like” elevation (not up over sidewalks) ƒ Better street circulation ƒ Four-lane Bridge, with pedestrian walkway and bike lane (8) ƒ Better turn lanes or roundabout (3) ƒ Add right hand turn lane from northbound Snelling/Hamline to east bound Co Rd. E ƒ Two lanes each way on Lex. South of E ƒ Right turn lane from eastbound Co Rd. E to southbound Lex. ƒ Two left turn lanes from eastbound Co Rd. E to northbound Lex ƒ Right turn lane from southbound Lex to westbound Co. Rd. E ƒ Circulation road behind Flaherty’s and Corp Express so buildings can be closer to E. ƒ Lower speed limits ƒ Traffic hub with mass transit to major metro access; hub to include retail and service shops to support those utilizing mass transit ƒ Plan with Shoreview for a transit hub/depot with structured parking on NE corner of Co Road E and Lexington. ƒ Keep traffic down ƒ No trucks ƒ Limit traffic congestion ƒ Extend Connelly Ave across railroad track to connect with Grey Fox Road ƒ Parking behind stores (3) ƒ Parking structure up against the railroad to preserve the Co. Rd. E frontage ƒ On-Street parking (3) ƒ Some residential mixed in with retail ƒ Encourage and support businesses that citizens want as part of their “neighborhood” (2) ƒ Neighborhood businesses on north side of the street ƒ Viability of Grand Avenue ƒ Retail Office Supply ƒ Variety of service stores and retail (3) ƒ Nice upper end shops ƒ Home improvement retail ƒ Anchor store such as Costco (no Walmart) (2) ƒ Post Office B-4 Guiding Plan for the B2 District ƒ Small Businesses/restaurants, Unique restaurants, inexpensive, ethnic, Small specialty shops: bakery, coffee, book store, Asian take-out, clothing, gifts, drugstore, toy store, green products store, ice cream, shoe repair, cleaners (7) ƒ Small scale neighborhood commercial with a common architectural theme ƒ Food: Co-op, farmers market, interesting restaurants, real restaurants, sit-down, neighborhood bar/café – but not a chain, more wine selection (6) ƒ A Sweet Tomatoes Restaurant ƒ Trader Joe’s (2) ƒ Someplace to have real ice cream cones – not soft serve ƒ Keep pharmacy and Ace Hardware ƒ No big box retail (3) ƒ Replace Bingo Hall with dining or motel or housing ƒ Close down bingo hall ƒ Farmers market in Arden Plaza parking lot ƒ Remove octagon buildings and replace with not “cutsie” small businesses visible from all sides (no Walgreens, CVS, or Bigbox) ƒ Holiday in as conference center/community center (3) ƒ Holiday Inn converted to senior housing project within current building ƒ Mixed use on Holiday Inn site (residential above community/retail/office/services) (2) ƒ Mixed-use, including residential (3) ƒ Should have a multi-use zone so that residential could be mixed with the retail ƒ Consider needs of local corporations; Boston Scientific, Land-o-Lakes, Deluxe, etc. ƒ Put library where bingo hall is and have food and gathering place ƒ Move City hall to Arden Plaza/general area (2) ƒ Ramsey County library portal ƒ Consider public purpose for Arden Plaza – library? ƒ Some kind of community plaza where people can gather – town square ƒ Community Park ƒ A focus place where people can eat and gather, public meeting areas or room in old holiday inn hotel ƒ Community bulletin board ƒ Divided roadway with landscaping ƒ Wide boulevards for pedestrian walkways, landscaping (8) ƒ Multi-use sidewalk north of Co Road E and west of Lexington Avenue and safe crossing areas to cross Lexington ƒ Walks and trails should compliment the existing trail system ƒ Uniform trees and street lights (2) ƒ Pedestrian friendly square, fountain, occasional street vendors (2) ƒ Good landscaping, pleasant surroundings, outdoor patios, water ƒ Signs along Snelling for Northwestern College ƒ Improve park and hockey rink size/access ƒ Change name of County Road E to…community choice ƒ Continued small town feel, Arden Hills community identity (3) ƒ People friendly amenities ƒ Low Building profile, no building taller than 3 stories (2) ƒ Outdoor art ƒ Large setbacks ƒ Buildings that architecturally flow together, that do not “age”, blend with environemnt (7) ƒ Quality architecture, not franchise architecture Guiding Plan for the B2 District B-5 ƒ Gateway signage ƒ Work together with Shoreview to improve the corner aesthetically; trees, sidewalk, landscaping, use of retail space ƒ Mix of business and landscaping ƒ Maintain trees and green spaces (5) ƒ Utilize wind mill structures around community ƒ Plan for green or LEED design in all housing types Page 1 of 5 AGENDA ITEM – 3C MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2026 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jake Reilly, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case #26-017 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Ryan Companies Request: Zoning Code Amendments – Chapter 13, Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code for Definitions and Building Site Development Requirements Commission Should Consider Ryan Companies is proposing ordinance language to amend Chapter 13 within Section 1380, TCAAP Redevelopment Code, Subsection 4.0 – Definitions and Subsection 6.0 Building and Site Development Standards to modify language pertaining to clear height and loading docks in Rice Creek Commons. Ordinance language would be added to clarify the definition of “clear height” and revise related standards to reflect modern commercial/industrial operational needs. The proposed amendments to City Zoning Code Chapter 13 are within the following Section: • Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code, o Subsection 4 – Definitions: Clear Height o Subsection 6.1 (e) (i) Loading Dock Standards Background TCAAP Joint Development Authority In November 2012, the City Council approved a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with Ramsey County which establishes a partnership between the City of Arden Hills and Ramsey County with the goal of the remediation and redevelopment of the 427-acre Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) site. Under the JPA, the City and County created a Joint Development Authority (JDA) that is the joint governing entity of the TCAAP site as allowed by the Joint Powers Act and MN State Laws. The JDA is the authority responsible for, but not limited to, environmental remediation, elimination of blight, infrastructure construction and financing, comprehensive planning and zoning, and economic development and redevelopment. The JDA Board is comprised of two County Commissioners, two City Councilmembers, and an additional non-elected City appointee as the Chair. Page 2 of 5 Between 2013 – 2016, the city facilitated the process of developing the Master Plan for the TCAAP site, which as noted above was the responsibility of the city under the JPA. Planning elements of the Master Plan included defining the public engagement process, land use, circulation and movement, utilities, environmental remediation, parks and open space, implementation plan, and a regulatory plan. In 2016, the City adopted the TRC, Section 1380 of the zoning code which includes the regulating plan, land use table, design standards, and other regulations related to land development that are specific to the TCAAP site. Through the JPA in the event the JDA believes the TCAAP Master Plan should be amended that shall be referred to the City and County for review. The city maintains the responsibility for processing TRC and Comprehensive Plan Amendments. As part of a TRC Amendment, the City will request confirmation of approval by Ramsey County. Ryan Companies and “Outlot A” In 2024 Ryan Companies entered into a purchase agreement with Ramsey County for the portion of Rice Creek Commons known as “Outlot A.” Outlot A is designated as CC – Campus Commercial in the TRC. Campus Commercial is described in the TRC as “facilitat[ing] a building format that allows multiple, single tenant buildings or campuses within the northern “Thumb” site of the Plan Area. The goal is to allow for an individual plan approach for each campus or building, based on user preferences within a range of requirements. In 2025 Ryan Companies received required approvals from the JDA, City, and County to construct an office and manufacturing facility on the north side of Outlot A, off of Rice Creek Parkway. That facility was completed in 2026 and is occupied by Micro Control Company. Ryan Companies is working toward completion of the campus-style development with additional commercial/industrial users. Based on the experience working with architects and engineers for the existing light-industrial manufacturing use, Ryan Companies is requesting changes to the TRC in response to current Twin Cities industrial real estate market data and design constraints associated with the existing code language and design requirements for mezzanine office configurations and the structural and internal functional needs of today’s light-industrial manufacturing facilities. Overview of Ordinance Amendments The proposed ordinance amendment is included for Planning Commission review as Attachment D. The draft language provides a revised definition of clear height and for a greater maximum clear height in facilities that include a loading dock. Amendments to Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code, are only applicable to projects associated with the Rice Creek Commons area of Arden Hills. Section 4.0 - Definitions Current Language Clear Height is defined as, “The distance from the top of the finished floor to the bottom of the finished ceiling in portions of commercial buildings used for warehousing or manufacturing.” The Applicant states that the experience developing the Micro Control Company site identified internal inconsistencies in the TRC associated with maximum building height, clear height, and the definition of clear height. Page 3 of 5 Proposed Language The Applicant proposes to amend the definition of clear height to respond to the market standard for industrial users, specifically those described by the Applicant as “advanced tech.” Users of this nature include industries prominent in the Twin Cities metropolitan area including in Arden Hills such as Boston Scientific, Ecolab, Micro Control, 3M and others. The proposed definition is, “The distance from the top of the finished floor to the lowest point of the lowest structural steel member in portions of commercial buildings used for warehousing or manufacturing.” In the submitted narrative, the Applicant states that the amended language is the result of lessons learned during Phase 1 development of Outlot A, current Twin Cities industrial real estate market data, and design constraints associated with mezzanine office configurations. Section 6.1 (e) (i) Loading Dock Standards Current Language The existing text identifies a maximum clear height of 24 feet: (e) Loading Dock Standards: i. Facilities that include a loading dock shall have a maximum clear height of twenty-four feet (24’) as measured from the surface of the ground floor to the lowest point on the ceiling. ii. No more than one loading dock shall be allowed per 10,000 square feet of building area. iii. Cross docks, where loading docks are situated along two (2) walls of the same building, shall not be permitted. iv. Loading docks shall be located in the side or rear yard and shall be screened from view of the public right-of-way. Proposed Language Facilities that include a loading dock shall have a maximum clear height of thirty-two feet (32’) as measured from the top of finished floor to the lowest point of the lowest structural steel member. The Applicant describes these two changes as being necessary to address the fact that the TRC as adopted has internal conflicts where the maximum building height is 15 stories and the maximum clear height for buildings with a loading dock is 24 feet, yet any building that is 15 stories tall requires a loading dock. Similarly, the code identifies two different definitions for clear height, one in 4.0 Definition as the top of the finished floor to the bottom of the finished ceiling and in 6.1 where the clear height maximum is established and clear height is described as being measured from the surface of the ground floor to the lowest point on the ceiling. These conflicts in the code therefore inadvertently limit the usefulness of buildings for the proposed uses identified in the TRC for Campus Commercial. The amendments as proposed, according to the Applicant, are simpler and clearer and will allow for flexibility for a potential tenant pool. The Applicant’s materials described a 28-foot to 32-foot clear height as the market standard for the desired industrial uses. Staff is aware that one potential reason for establishing the 24-foot clear height is to minimize the likelihood of undesirable industrial uses such as strict warehouse/packing/picking operations. Other provisions in the TRC offer additional parameters to minimize those types of project proposers’ interest in the site, both for Outlot A and for the “California Parcel.” Some of the other code provisions that limit the likelihood of those uses include a limitation on the number of loading dock bays per wall/façade and a limitation on the size/percentage of warehousing uses overall. Page 4 of 5 Notice A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on June 26, 2026. The city has not yet received any public comments regarding this case. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: General Findings: 1. The Applicant is proposing to amend ordinance language in Chapter 13 – Zoning Code Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code. 2. The proposed ordinance amendment aligns the definition and description of Clear Height with industry standards. 3. The Applicant states that the proposed ordinance language will address current industrial real estate market data and remove design constraints associated with mezzanine office configurations. 4. The proposed ordinance amendment would allow for a maximum clear height of 32 feet for facilities that include a loading dock. 5. The Applicant states that loading dock door dimensions and configurations will continue to follow standard industry dimensions. 6. The Applicant states that the proposed ordinance language does not impact design standards established in the TRC. 7. The proposed ordinance amendments are generally in the public interest and in keeping with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 8. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. Options and motion language • Recommend Approval: Move to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-017 as presented (or as modified by Planning Commission) for Zoning Code Amendments to Chapter 13 in Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language to modify language pertaining to clear height and loading docks in Rice Creek Commons as described in the July 8, 2026 Planning Commission staff report. • Recommend Denial: Move to recommend denial of Planning Case 26-017 as presented for Zoning Code Amendments to Chapter 13 in Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language pertaining to clear height and loading docks in Rice Creek Commons: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. • Table: Move to table Planning Case 26-017 as presented for Zoning Code Amendments to Chapter 13 in Section 1380 – TCAAP Redevelopment Code of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language to modify language pertaining to clear height and loading docks in Rice Creek Commons: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Page 5 of 5 Budget Impact N/A Attachments Attachment A: Land Use Application Attachment B: Applicant Narrative Attachment C: Applicant Memo Outlot A Lessons Learned Attachment D: Draft Language – Section 1380 – Subsection 4.0 Definitions and Subsection 6.1 Building and Site Development Standards – General to All Zoning Districts Page 1 of 3 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Telephone (651) 792-7800 Fax (651) 634-5137 www.cityofardenhills.org For Office Use Only Planning Case No. 26- Submittal Date Application Completed Date Accepted by Receipt Number Council Decision Council Decision Date 2026 LAND USE APPLICATION Applicant Information Applicant: Address: Telephone No.: Other: Fax No.: Email Address: Property Information Property Owner: Owner Address: Owner Telephone No. Other: Address of Property Involved: Legal Description: Property ID No.: Type of Use: Zone: Property Acreage: Type of Request  Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Fee: $600 + Escrow: $2,500)  Conditional Use or Interim Use Permit/CUP or IUP Amendment (Fee: $500 + Escrow: $1,500)  Preliminary Plat (Fee: $600 + Escrow: $2,500)  Final Plat (Fee: $400 + Escrow: $1,500)  Concept Plan Review (Fee: $400 + Escrow: $1,500)  Master Planned Unit Development or Master Special Development Plan (Fee: $600 + Escrow: $2,500)  Final Planned Unit Development or Final Special Development Plan (Fee: $400 + Escrow: $2,000)  Planned Unit Development Amendment or Special Development Plan Amendment (Fee: $400 + Escrow: $1,500)  Site Plan Review (Fee: $600 + Escrow: $1,500)  Rezoning or Rice Creek Commons Regulating Plan Amendment (Fee: $500 + Escrow: $1,500)  Zoning Code or TCAAP Redevelopment Code Amendment (Fee: $500 + Escrow: $2,000)  City Code Amendment (Fee: $500 + Escrow: $2,000)  Lot Split/Minor Subdivision (R-1 and R-2 Districts Only) (Fee: $400 + Escrow: $1,500)  Variance or Permitted Adjustment (Fee: $400 + Escrow: $1,500)  Vacation of Easement or Right-of-Way (Fee: $200 + Escrow: $1,000)  Appeal of Administrative Decision (Fee: $200 + Escrow: $1,500)  Land Use Requests – Not Already Specified (Fee: $150 + Escrow: $1,000) Ryan Companies US, Inc, Eddy Wolf 533 South Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 612-492-4000 eddy.wolf@ryancompanies.com X Page 2 of 3 Brief Description of Request (please also include a typed, detailed letter explaining the project): Filing & Information Requirements The City requests that you make a pre-application meeting with the Community Development Director to discuss the application process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the Community Development Director or Planning Commission, a certified survey of the property is required for all applications. A checklist with additional application requirements can be found at www.cityofardenhills.org/landuseapplications. Complete/Incomplete Applications Under Minnesota Statute, Chapter 15.99, cities have 15 business days to review all plans and application materials to ensure they satisfy City requirements. During the 15 day review period, planning staff will provide written comments on the application and may request plan revisions. If the application is determined to be complete, Minnesota State Statute then requires the City to approve or deny the application within 60 days, up to 120 days. If not complete, the City may require plan revisions and/or additional information before the application is scheduled for Planning Commission review and/or City Council action. Project will not be scheduled for any meeting until the application submittal is found to be complete by the Community Development Director. Payment of Fees and Escrows The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before a land use application can be deemed complete, all required fees and escrows must be paid to the City. The applicant is responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application. Each separate land use request shall be charged a separate administrative fee and escrow even if submitted on the same application. Costs expended in reviewing and processing an application will be charged against the cash escrow and credited to the City. Charges to the escrow may include planning and engineering staff time, City Attorney and consulting fees, and mailing costs. If, at any time, a required cash escrow is depleted to less than 20 percent of its original amount, the applicant shall deposit additional funds in the cash escrow account as determined by the City. The City may withhold final action on a land use application, withhold building permits, and/or rescind prior action until all fees have been paid. Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon successful implementation of an approved plan. The escrow may be reduced or increased by the Community Development Director on a project by project basis. Notice of Meeting Attendance In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the next available agenda. *IMPORTANT* • Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Contact RCWD directly at 763-398-3070 for additional information. • The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that may be required upon approval of a land use application. • All applications will be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs associated with filing, reviewing, and processing of application in the form of an escrow to the City. Request to amend TCAAP Redevelopment Code sections 4.0 Definitions (Clear Height) and 6.1(e)(i) Loading Dock Standards. Please see attached documentation for additional information/details. Page 3 of 3 Meeting Schedule Planning Commission meetings are typically held on the first Wednesday after the first Monday of each month at 6:30 PM, though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City Council meetings are held typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated. The schedules below are for reference purposes only. Project will not be scheduled for any meeting until the application submittal is found to be complete by the Community Development Director. 2026 Planning Commission and City Council Schedule (*subject to change) TENTATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE* (Generally held on the first Wednesday after the first Monday at 6:30 p.m.) TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE* (Generally held on the fourth Monday at 7:00 p.m.) DEADLINE FOR LAND USE APPLICATION SUBMISSION (1st day of the preceding month) January 7 February 9 December 1 (2025) February 4 March 9 January 2 March 4 April 13 February 2 April 8 April 27 March 2 May 6 May 26* April 1 June 3 June 22 May 1 July 8 July 27 June 1 August 5 August 24 July 1 September 9 September 28 August 3 October 7 October 26 September 1 November 4 November 23 October 1 December 9 January 11 (2027) November 2 Acknowledgement and Signature I hereby apply for the above consideration and declare that the information and materials submitted with this application are complete and accurate per city code and ordinance requirements. I fully understand that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application. __________________________________________________ ________________ Property Owner Signature (Required) Date ________________________________________________ ________________ Applicant Signature (If different than the property owner) Date Please contact the Community Development Director at 651-792-7800 if you have any questions regarding this application. Additional copies of this application form are available on the City’s website: www.cityofardenhills.org/landuseapplications 6/22/26 June 23, 2026 TRC Text Amendment Request Ryan Companies is requesting the following two text amendments to the TCAAP Redevelopment Code, adopted by the City Council of Arden Hills on July 13, 2015, as amended by Ordinance Nos. 2016-11, 2016-12, 2023-006, 2024-001, and 2024-002 (the "TRC"). 1. Section 4.0 – Definitions CURRENT TEXT: PROPOSED AMENDED TEXT: The distance from the top of finished floor to the lowest point of the lowest structural steel member in portions of commercial buildings used for warehousing or manufacturing. 2. Section 6.1 (e) (i) Loading Dock Standards CURRENT TEXT: PROPOSED AMENDED TEXT: Facilities that include a loading dock shall have a maximum clear height of thirty-two feet (32’) as measured from the top of finished floor to the lowest point of the lowest structural steel member. ADDITIONAL NOTES: A. This text amendment is the result of lessons learned during Phase 1 development of Outlot A, current Twin Cities industrial real estate market data, and design constraints associated with mezzanine office configurations. i. Reference Item #2 of the “Outlot A Lessons Learned” memo from Ryan Companies dated May 7, 2025, regarding maximum building height considerations. ii. Reference Cushman & Wakefield’s Market Data Brief outlining clear height standards within the Twin Cities industrial market, particularly as they relate to mezzanine office users. iii. Reference Ryan A+E’s building cross-section diagram, which illustrates key architectural and MEP coordination constraints affecting building design and functionality. B. All design standards currently established in the TRC will remain in full effect and unchanged. C. Any potential adjustments are limited to precast panel height and functional clear height only. D. Loading dock door dimensions and configurations will continue to follow standard industry dimensions and are not proposed to be modified. E. Ryan Companies is not proposing any text amendments beyond the two items identified above. Chapter 13 within Section 1380, TCAAP Redevelopment Code, Subsection 4.0 – Definitions 4.0 Definitions Many terms used in this document are defined in the AHC, Chapters 1 and 13. Definitions are only included here if not defined in the AHC, or if the definition for this document differs from the AHC. In case of a conflict between the definitions under this Section and the AHC, Chapters 1 and 13, the definitions in this section shall supersede. C D Clear Height The distance from the top of the finished floor to the lowest point of the lowest structural steel member bottom of the finished ceiling in portions of commercial buildings used for warehousing or manufacturing. Chapter 13 within Section 1380, TCAAP Redevelopment Code, Subsection 6.0 - Building and Site Development Standards 6.1 General to All Zoning Districts (e) Loading Dock Standards: i. Facilities that include a loading dock shall have a maximum clear height of thirty-two twenty-four feet (2432’) as measured from the top of finished floor to the lowest point of the lowest structural steel member.the surface of the ground floor to the lowest point on the ceiling. ii. No more than one loading dock shall be allowed per 10,000 square feet of building area. iii. Cross docks, where loading docks are situated along two (2) walls of the same building, shall not be permitted. Page 1 of 3 AGENDA ITEM – 3D MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2026 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jake Reilly, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case #26-018 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 13 – Zoning Code Section 1320.16 Requirements for Affordable Housing (Public Hearing Required) Commission Should Consider The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to City Zoning Code Chapter 13 within Section 1320.16 Requirements for Affordable Housing to clarify where Section 1320.16 applies. These amendments are considered a housekeeping amendment to provide clarity. The Planning Commission should review and consider the proposed ordinance amendment. During the discussion the Commission should also consider any public hearing testimony related to the ordinance. Background On April 27, 2026 the Arden Hills City Council, upon recommendation by the Planning Commission, adopted Ordinance 2026-007 amending Chapter 13, Zoning Code to add Section 1320.16 – Requirements for Affordable Housing to identify when and how affordable units may be required to be included in new housing developments and in rehabilitation of existing housing units, including regulatory incentives and provisions for enforcement.. As stated in staff reports and in meetings, those affordable housing provisions were not intended to be applied to the TRC. Upon further review, the City Attorney recommends that language memorializing that intent be added to for clarity. A draft ordinance is included as Attachment A. The attorney recommends the following amendments to Subd. 5. Applicability. Subd. 5. Applicability. A. This ordinance applies to the following development types as follows: Page 2 of 3 1. New multifamily residential developments creating 20 or more dwelling units. 2. Mixed-use developments with a residential component of 20 or more dwelling units. 3. Substantial rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing buildings containing 20 or more dwelling units. 4. Conversion of non-residential buildings to residential use creating 20 or more dwelling units. 5. Those developed on property purchased from the City of Arden Hills unless a waiver is approved by the Arden Hills City Council. 6. The development must comply with this inclusionary housing ordinance as amended and approved by the city council as of the date the development enters into a development agreement with the city. 7. Properties within the TCAAP development Plan Area, as defined in the TRC, are exempt from this ordinance. Notice A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on June 26, 2026. The city has not yet received any public comments regarding this case. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission has an advisory role regarding proposed ordinance changes. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to amend ordinance language to clarify the applicability of Ordinance 2026-007 to the TRC. 2. The proposed ordinance will include amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code, Section 1320.16. 3. The City Council approved Ordinance 2026-007 amending Chapter 13 Zoning Code on April 27, 2026. 4. As stated in the record, the intent and purpose of said ordinance is to provide a requirement for affordable housing in new residential developments in areas of Arden Hills not regulated by the provisions of the TRC. 5. The proposed ordinance amendment is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 6. There is an adopted comprehensive plan policy and goal to require affordable housing at Rice Creek Commons: a. The City of Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan (2019) Land Use Chapter states, “Future development of TCAAP shall be subject to a term sheet for development to be known as Rice Creek Commons in order to meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan with a requirement that 20% of housing units in the development must be affordable at 60% of Area Median Income or less.” b. The Comprehensive Plan guides 15.9 acres at Rice Creek Commons at sufficient density to accommodate at least 373 units of housing affordable to those with incomes at or below 80% AMI. 7. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. Page 3 of 3 Options and motion language • Recommend Approval: Move to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-017 as presented (or as modified by Planning Commission) for Zoning Code Amendments to Chapter 13 – Zoning Code, Section 1320.16 of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language to provide clarity regarding affordable housing development at Rice Creek Commons as discussed in the July 8, 2026 Report to the Planning Commission. • Recommend Denial: Move to recommend denial of Planning Case 26-017 as presented for Zoning Code Amendments of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code, Section 1320.16 of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language to allow to provide clarity regarding affordable housing development at Rice Creek Commons: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. • Table: Move to table Planning Case 26-017 as presented for Zoning Code Amendments to of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code, Section 1320.16 of the Arden Hills City Code to modify language to provide clarity regarding affordable housing development at Rice Creek Commons: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Budget Impact N/A Attachments Attachment A: Draft Ordinance Amendment ORDINANCE NO. 2026-0XX CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13, SECTION 1320, SUBSECTION 1320.16 OF THE ARDEN HILLS CITY CODE CONCERNING REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 13 – Zoning, Section 1320 – District Provisions, Subsection 1320.16 – Requirements for Affordable Housing, is hereby amended by adding the below underlined language and removing the struck language. Subd. 5. Applicability. A. This ordinance applies to the following development types as follows: 1. New multifamily residential developments creating 20 or more dwelling units. 2. Mixed-use developments with a residential component of 20 or more dwelling units. 3. Substantial rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing buildings containing 20 or more dwelling units. 4. Conversion of non-residential buildings to residential use creating 20 or more dwelling units. 5. Those developed on property purchased from the City of Arden Hills unless a waiver is approved by the Arden Hills City Council. 6. The development must comply with this inclusionary housing ordinance as amended and approved by the city council as of the date the development enters into a development agreement with the city. 7. Properties within the TCAAP development Plan Area, as defined in the TRC, are exempt from this ordinance. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. PASSED and ADOPTED this __th day of [Month], 2026, by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By _______________________________ David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Julie Hanson, City Clerk Page 1 of 1 AGENDA ITEM – 4A MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2026 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jake Reilly, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Accessory Dwelling Units Draft Ordinance Update Requested Action A verbal update will be provided at the Planning Commission meeting, along with an updated draft. The Planning Commission will formally review an updated draft at a later meeting.