Loading...
7.b 1 Site plan and variance from rear setback for retaining wall Scandia Elementary School444 Cedar Street, Suite 1500 Saint Paul, MN 55101 (651) 292-4400 (651) 292-0083 Fax www.tkda.com MEMORANDUM To: Scandia City Council Reference: Scandia Elementary School request for Site Plan Review (Major Project) and Variance Neil Soltis, Administrator Copies To: Brenda Eklund, Clerk Marc DuBois, KOMA, Project Architect Larry Martini, Forest Lake Area Schools, Owner From: Sherri Buss RLA AICP, City Planner Proj. No.: 16322.013 Date: July 12, 2017 Routing: SUBJECT: Scandia Elementary School Request for a Site Plan Review for a Major Project for expansion and improvements to the building and site and site drainage improvements and request for a Variance for replacement of Nonconforming Structures MEETING DATE: July 18, 2017 LOCATION: 14351 Scandia Trial North APPLICANTS: Marc DuBois, Project Architect, KOMA 6115 Cahill Avenue Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota 55076 OWNERS: Larry Martini, Director of Business Services Forest Lake Area Schools ZONING: Village Mixed Use B (VMU B) Zoning District 60-DAY PERIOD: August 20, 2017 ITEMS REVIEWED: Application, Plans and submittals received June 20, 2017 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review to allow expansion and renovation of the Scandia Elementary School and the construction of related site and drainage improvements. The subject property is located in the Village Mixed Use B (VMU B) Zoning District, and includes 12.9 acres. The proposed expansion plans also require a Variance to permit replacement of nonconforming retaining walls. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 2 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council BACKGROUND: Scandia Elementary School was constructed in 1970. City staff could not find the New Scandia Township records of the original CUP granted at that time, and do not know if the original CUP included a condition that required a CUP amendment for any subsequent expansions or changes in use. The Township approved a CUP amendment in 1999 to permit a school and septic system expansion, and the amended CUP referenced the original CUP, but did not include a copy of the original permit or conditions. At the time of the original CUP, the use required a CUP in the R-1 zoning district, but school uses are now allowed uses in the VMU B District. The City Attorney determined that based on this change, the proposed project requires a Site Plan Review rather than an amended CUP. The project requires a Site Plan Review for a Major Project rather than a Minor Project because it requires a variance and it is subject to the Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines. The project requires a variance for replacement of nonconforming retaining walls. The walls were located within the required rear set back, and were recently removed by the School District to prepare for the expected construction. The proposed project elements include the addition of a new mechanical room on the east side of the building, new windows and exterior wall improvements on the older portions of the building, and site and drainage improvements including replacement of existing retaining walls, extension of an existing roadway around the building, new storm sewer pipes, and a new infiltration basin. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A MAJOR PROJECT CRITERIA FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A MAJOR PROJECT The City’s Development Code identifies the criteria that should be considered in evaluating the effects of the proposed site plan. The Code indicates that the criteria that the City shall consider include at least the following:  Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.  Compliance with the Provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The project is located in the VMU B Zoning District, and the Zoning Ordinance requires that projects in the Village Mixed Use Districts comply with the Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines. The sections that follow evaluate the proposed request based on the Development Code’s criteria. DETAILED EVALUATION OF THE SITE PLAN: Comprehensive Plan The VMU B Zoning District was established to provide a growth area for the village center, and to provide for a mix of uses that contribute to the character of the community. The Comprehensive Plan and Development Code state that the primary uses in the Village Mixed Use area will include commercial, office, retail, public and private institutions, civic buildings, light industrial uses, parks and recreation. The Comprehensive Plan encourages new development and redevelopment within the Village Mixed Use Areas. The expansion of the commercial use and the proposed improvements are consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 3 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council Lot Size and Frontage The minimum lot size in the VMU B District is 2.5 acres and the minimum frontage is 160 feet. The Scandia Elementary parcel includes 12.9 acres, with frontage of approximately 380 feet on Scandia Trail North (State Trunk Highway 97). The site meets the lot size and frontage requirements. Setbacks The VMU District structure minimum setback requirements are:  Front yard: 40 feet, or 150 feet from the center line or 75 feet from the right-of-way of arterial roadways such as T.H. 97  Side yard: 20 feet  Rear yard of 50 feet. The existing structures on the site and proposed expansion meet the front and side yard setbacks. There were two existing retaining walls to the south of the school building that were located within the required rear yard setback and the walls were therefore nonconforming structures. The location of the walls is shown on the Topographic Survey. School District staff recently removed the walls to prepare for construction of the expansion, which includes new retaining walls in the same location. The removal and replacement of the nonconforming structures requires a variance to comply with Section 13.0 of the Development Code that states, “A lawful nonconforming structure which is removed, destroyed or altered by any means to the extent that the cost of repair or replacement would exceed 50% of the appraised value of the original structure shall not be replaced except in conformity with this Development Code. If a replacement structure cannot be placed on the lot meeting all current standards, the variance procedure must be followed.” The variance analysis and findings follow the findings for the CUP in this staff report. The City Engineer’s comments and proposed conditions related to the retaining walls include the following:  If the existing retaining wall was removed for replacement on the south side of the site, the construction limits/scope should be shown on the plans. Accessory Structures No new accessory structures are proposed for the expansion. Lot Coverage The maximum allowable lot coverage is 65% in the VMU B District. The proposed building expansion and site improvements would result in impervious coverage of 34.7% on the parcel (shown on the Site Plan, sheet C-3). The lot coverage meets the ordinance requirement.. Building Height The maximum building height permitted in the VMU B District is 45 feet. The height of the building with the proposed expansion will be 23’4”, the same height as the existing building. The proposed height meets the ordinance requirement. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 4 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council Access and Traffic The property has an existing driveway access to Scandia Trail North. No change in access is proposed for the expansion project. The Planner sent the application to MnDOT, the City Engineer, and Fire Chief for any comments on access and traffic based on the proposed expansion. MnDOT’s comment was the following: “MnDOT has reviewed these plans and does not have any comments or concerns at this time. If there are any changes please let us know.” The City Engineer’s comments related to vehicle and pedestrian access issues are included in a letter dated June 27, 2017 and included the following:  Additional concrete removals should be identified on the plans to allow pedestrian ramp reconstruction to provide adequate ADA access to the door accesses and meet ADA requirements.  Locations of pedestrian ramps meeting ADA compliance should be identified on the plans for reconstruction.  I was unable to review the grades within the new parking lot and 12-foot bituminous pathway. These are private improvements and I assumed coordination on final slopes and grades have been discussed among the team members. However, if the 12-foot bituminous pathway is used for pedestrian use, it should meet ADA requirements including cross-slope.  The Fire Department shall review and approve the plans. Wastewater Treatment The Planner sent a copy of the application to Washington County’s Health Department for review and comment. Pete Ganzel of the Health Department provided the following comments:  It appears that there are no modifications inside the building that would trigg er a change of the septic system or its operation. All the outside work is taking place east of the system components and will have no impact.  The County will be getting this system in our operating permit program within the next round of renewals in November. You could have this as a requirement: that they apply for an operating permit with the County, but you could actually issue the CUP/or approve the Zoning request before they obtain the permit. The Planner included a condition requiring that the School District shall apply for a septic system operating permit from Washington County. Environmental Regulations and Exterior Storage Requirements The Development Code requires that all hazardous materials be handled safely and obtain any required permits. The site plan approval conditions require that if any hazardous materials will be used in the maintenance area, their use, disposal and storage shall meet the Code requirements and obtain all required permits. The Development Code requires that all waste materials, refuse or garbage be kept in an enclosed building or properly contained in a closed container except on days of collection. The site plan approval includes a Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 5 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council condition that all waste, refuse, and garbage shall be stored in a manner that meets the Development Code requirements. The City Engineer included the following condition related to the City’s Environmental Regulations:  All construction work shall be completed within City-approved work hours. Lighting The Development Code, Chapter 2, Section 3.9 includes the City’s lighting standards. Luminaires must cut light off at an angle of 90 degrees or less. Lights attached to a building may not exceed the height of the building. The proposed building expansion requires submission and approval of a lighting plan if new or replacement lighting is included in the proposed project. The proposed lighting for the building expansion is not shown on the plans. The Engineer’s comments noted that the demolition plans proposed removal of lights within the parking lot area, and he commented that a lighting plan should be submitted for review. The Planner has included a condition that the applicant shall provide a Lighting Plan for City review and approval that shows all proposed new or replacement lighting on the site. The Lighting Plan shall meet the Development Code standards and must be approved by the City prior to approval of the Building Permit. Land Alteration and Grading and Stormwater Management Land alteration and grading activities must meet the requirements of Section 3.6 and Stormwater Management facilities must meet the requirements of Section 3.7 of Chapter 2 of the Development Code. The applicant must obtain required grading and erosion control permits from the City and Watershed District for these activities. The project may also require a MnDOT permit for stormwater drainage to MnDOT’s right-of-way. The Planner sent the applicant’s grading plan to the City Engineer, Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District (CMSCWD), and MnDOT for comment for review and comment. Jim Shaver, the CMSCWD Administrator, provided the following comment: “This project requires a District permit and we are currently reviewing the application. It appears that the applicant will be able to mitigate any increase in impervious surface through the implementation of best management practices required under District rules. Our District Engineer is requesting conditional approval of the Permit at our Board meeting on July 12.” The City Engineer’s comments and recommended conditions related to stormwater management included the following:  Bituminous removal limits at the driveway entrance from Highway 97 to allow for the new proposed storm sewer should be added to the plans.  Several areas of potential vehicle traffic over the proposed plastic storm sewer and inlets will have less than 1 foot of cover upon completion. I recommend using concrete pipe in these areas or reviewing opportunities to increase cover depth.  The High Water Level/100-year elevation should be labeled on the proposed pond.  Biofiltration basin should include a cross-section detail of proposed improvements to show material depths, piping, drain tile, etc., as related to the improvement.  Detail of the “OCS” should be provide within the construction plans.  The applicant shall submit stormwater calculations for City review. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 6 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council  All site work shall be in compliance with the Watershed District requirements. The site is located within the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District (CMSCWD), but drains to Comfort Lake- Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD). The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits, including but not limited to NPDES permits, prior to construction.  A MnDOT review process should be anticipated as proposed work is to occur within their right-of- way along with new storm sewer installation.  Temporary restoration may be required to contain any erosion. Site restoration shall be completed as soon as possible.  All improvements will be privately owned and maintained. Parking and Loading Chapter 2, Section 3.10 of the Development Code regulates parking. The Code requires the following:  Elementary schools require 3 parking spaces per classroom.  Parking areas must have driveway access and not directly from a public street, and must provide fire access lanes.  Lighting in the parking lot must meet the Lighting requirements of the Development Code.  Parking areas with 4 or more spaces must be striped, and must have concrete curbs and gutters if required by the City Engineer. Curbs must be at least 10 feet from the property line.  Parking for loading areas and maneuvering may not block parking stalls, access drives, or fire lines.  Parking dimensions must meet the ordinance requirement. The plans show that the school building includes 19 classrooms, and no additional classrooms are proposed with the expansion of the building. . The use requires 57 parking spaces. The existing site includes over 80 standard parking spaces and additional spaces for bus parking. The design of the parking areas and spaces complies with the Code requirements. The site meets the ordinance requirements for parking facilities. The City Engineer’s comments included the following recommended condition, which the Planner included in the proposed conditions for approval:  If the new bituminous area east of the school will include vehicle parking, a striping plan should be submitted to the City for review. Landscaping and Screening The Demolition Plan (Sheet C2) identifies the trees that the applicant plans to protect, and a few trees that are planned for removal for the expansion. The Scandia Development Code, Chapter 2, Section 3.12 does not require a landscaping plan for the modification or expansion of institutional buildings. The existing plantings on the site meet the requirements for Landscaping for this use. The grading plan indicates that the grading to the south of the building will remain approximately the same as the situation, and that there will be no impact to the existing screening on the site. The Planning Commission should review that portion of the site during the site visit, and may discuss whether screening will be impacted by the project and any replacement trees should be considered. The ordinance does not require screening of institutional uses from adjacent uses. The Planner included the following condition for approval of the Site Plan and Variance: Existing screening on the site will be maintained as the project is implemented, including replacement of the retaining walls. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 7 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council Signage No additional signage is proposed. New or modified signage would need to meet the Development Code standards. Building Type and Materials and Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines Section 3.14 of the Development Code includes the standards for building design and materials. The standards include the following:  Buildings shall maintain a high standard of architectural and aesthetic compatibility with surrounding properties so that they do not adversely impact those properties.  Except for agricultural buildings, no galvanized or unfinished steel, unfinished aluminum, or unpainted concrete block is permitted in any district for walls or roofs.  Exterior finishes shall consist of brick, natural stone, decorative concrete block or professionally- designed pre-cast concrete units, wood, vinyl steel, or other forms of lap siding, stucco, and architectural metal panels for roofing and accents only.  The architectural design and materials for the exterior alterations of institutional buildings shall comply with the Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines. o The Design review will occur concurrently with building or zoning application reviews. o The Planning Commission shall provide recommendations to the City Council on projects that are referred to it that are subject to Design review. The City Council has the final authority to interpret the Guidelines. Sheet A2-C that includes the elevations and 3-D views of the building includes information about the proposed materials. The proposed materials include custom brick that will be blended to match the existing building and an architectural stone veneer in a color similar to the brick. The materials also include vertical metal paneling and metal roofing materials in a color similar to the stone veneer. The applicants included the vertical metal paneling in the project plans to screen the air conditioning equipment that will be added with this project. The proposed materials meet the requirements of Section 3.14 of the Development Code. Scandia’s Architectural Design Guidelines The Design Guidelines include the following items that apply to the proposed building expansion (numbers are not in the Design Guidelines, they were added for ease of discussion): 1. Facades of large buildings should be visually broken into bays to avoid the appearance of large, blank walls by changes in the height or plane of the façade; changes in materials, color, texture, or pattern; and the addition of columns, pilasters, and windows. 2. Buildings should be designed with a definable base, middle, and top. 3. One story buildings should be designed to simulate a 2-story or 1-1/2 story appearance. 4. Rooflines and roof materials should reflect those of existing historic buildings. Acceptable roof materials include asphalt shingles, tile, metal that mimics tile, and cedar shakes. Other materials will be considered if appropriate to the architectural style of the building. 5. A variety of historic design elements are encouraged. 6. Inappropriate design elements include trademark architecture, glass curtain walls, expansive blank walls, and mansard roofs. 7. Original details and materials that contribute to the historic significance of the building should be preserved when possible. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 8 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council 8. Construction materials should be similar to those used historically, and may include brick in colors used in Scandia’s historic architecture, fiber-cement lap siding, wood lap siding, Scandinavian-style logs, wood board-and-baton siding, natural or cast stone. Other materials appropriate to the building’s architecture may be considered by the City. 9. Inappropriate materials include concrete masonry units, large-size brick, Aluminum, vinyl or steel siding or panel systems, exposed aggregate panels, exterior insulating finish systems, glass curtain wall systems, plastic, composite plywood siding, clear finished wood, veneer siding, glazed brick, synthetic veneers, unpainted metal or chrome, precast concrete, other materials not consistent with the historic character of the district. 10. Colors should be compatible with nearby buildings and the colors used in the historic commercial buildings in the village, and colors should be limited to 3. 11. Windows and doors on historic buildings should be of appropriate historic design. 12. One monument sign is permitted that reflects the building design. The proposed design meets many of the Design Guideline requirements, and is generally consistent with the materials and design of the original structure build in 1970. Issues for Planning Commission discussion include:  #1: Most of the building meets the requirement for the façade to be visually broken by elements such as color, texture and windows. The proposed mechanical addition does not include windows, but has line and texture elements that break up the façade. Does this meet the Design Guideline #1 above?  #2: The horizontal elements of the building, change in materials under the windows, and change in materials at the roof level create a definable base, middle, and top.  #3: The building is a one-story building. The new roof increases the height of the structure.  #4: Does the metal roof material meet the Design Guideline #4? While it is not included in the list of historic materials, the City could find it acceptable to the architectural style of the building. The purpose of the metal panels is to screen the air conditioning equipment that will be added with the project.  #5: The building includes elements typical for a 1970 school building design. Does it need to incorporate historic design elements, or would these be in conflict with the building history?  #6 and #7: The design does not include the inappropriate elements cited in #6. It does preserve some of the original details of the building design as required by #7.  #8 and #9: Does the building material meet the requirement of items #8 and #9, or if not, should the City find it acceptable as a material appropriate to the building’s architecture?  #10: The design of the addition and renovation appears to comply with requirements to be consistent with the existing building design and materials and colors.  #11: The window design may be considered appropriate to the architecture of the original building— does this meet requirement #11?  #12: The conditions require that any new signage meet the requirements of the Development Code and Design Guidelines. The Planning Commission should discuss the building plans and exhibits, review the Design Guidelines, and determine if the proposed building design is consistent the Design Guidelines, if the City can find some elements of the design acceptable with the architectural style of the building, or if it will recommend some changes in the building design and materials to meet the guidelines. The Commission shall make its recommendations regarding consistency with the Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines to the City Council. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 9 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council EVALUATION OF THE SITE DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA The Planner finds the following based on the evaluation of the Site Plan:  The Site Plan will be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s goals and policies for the VMU B District.  The Site Plan shall be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. With the proposed conditions, the Site Plan will be consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. VARIANCE REQUEST EVALUATION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST The applicant is requesting a variance for the removal of the existing retaining walls on the site and replacement in the same location. The wall location was nonconforming because it did not meet the required setback from the rear property line. The Nonconformities section of the Development Code requires that the applicant obtain a variance for replacement in a location that does not meet the dimensional standards of the Code. The elements of the Development Code that are used to evaluate a variance request such as consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and standards in the Development Code are discussed in detail in the evaluation of the Site Plan in the previous section. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES AND FINDINGS Chapter 1, Section 6.0 of the Development Code includes the criteria and required process for considering variance requests. Variances may only be granted when the terms of the variance are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the development code. The other variance criteria in the Development Code include: 1. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Development Code. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. 5. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 6. The required variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. 7. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 10 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council Applicant’s Rationale for the Variance The applicant stated that the variance is needed in order to replace the original retaining walls on the site because they were in poor condition and beginning to fall forward. The applicant is proposing to replace the walls for safety. The site plan proposes that the walls be replaced in the same location where they do not meet the rear setback requirement due to the location of the existing building at the required setback, need to manage grades and erosion between the building and property boundary, and need to minimize new grading and potential impacts to the trees and screening near the property boundary. Variance Request and Findings The following bullets include the Planner’s findings related to the request for a variance. Each of the criteria is shown in italics:  Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and general purposes and intent of the official control. The proposed use and site plan are in general harmony with the Comprehensive Plan policies for the VMU B District. The Comprehensive Plan includes policies to protect steep slopes and existing vegetation, and to manage drainage and erosion to avoid impacts to surrounding properties and natural resources. The proposed replacement of the retaining walls in the original location is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.  The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner under the conditions allowed by official control(s). Schools are allowed uses in the VMU B District, and it is therefore a reasonable use on the parcel.  The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner, and are unique to the property. The practical difficulties are unique to the property, and include the deteriorated conditions of the old retaining walls that created safety issues, location of the existing structures and slopes, and the location of the existing trees. The location of the building and walls in relationship to the property boundaries were consistent with City standards at the time the original site plan was approved, and therefore the practical difficulties were not caused by the owner.  The variance would not alter the essential character of the area. Granting the variance will preserve the character of the area, preserve the screening along the southern property boundary, and avoid potential negative impacts to the site and surrounding properties.  Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties are not related to economic conditions alone, but are caused by the deteriorated conditions of the original retaining walls, and the location of existing structures, grades, and vegetation which require that the walls be replaced in the current location. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 11 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council  The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed expansion and improvements will not impair the supply of light or air to adjacent properties or increase congestion, endanger the public, or substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood.  The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. The requested variance to permit the replacement of the original retaining walls in the same location is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty.  Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The variance is not related to a need for direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The Planner finds that the proposed variance meets the ordinance criteria to grant the variance. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Commission held a public hearing for the Site Plan approval and Variance request at its meeting on July 11. One resident spoke at the h earing, noting that there are existing drainage issues on the site and asked if those would be addressed with the project. The City Administrator reviewed the drainage plan and proposed bioretention basin which are designed to improve drainage on the property. The resident stated that he had no other concerns, and the school has been a good neighbor. The Planning Commission discussed the request and evaluated the proposed design based on the Development Code criteria and the Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines. They noted that the proposed design is consistent with the design of the building, and stated that it would not be appropriate to add elements to try to make it look more “historic.” The Commission concluded that the proposed project meets the requirements of the City’s Development Code, is consistent with the Design Guidelines, and meets the criteria for granting the variance for replacement of the retaining walls. The Commission recommended that the City Council approve the request with the conditions proposed by City staff. ACTION REQUESTED FOR THE SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE: The City Council can take the following actions for this request: 1. Approve the Site plan and Variance. 2. Approve the Site Plan and Variance with conditions. 3. Deny the request for approval of the Site Plan and Variance with findings. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 12 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council 4. Table the request. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Site Plan and Variance to permit the expansion of the Scandia Elementary School, including the related building, site and drainage improvements, and replacement of the original retaining walls at the same location as the previous walls on the site at 14351 Scandia Trail North. The Commission recommends the following conditions: 1. The implementation of the project shall be generally consistent with the Site Plans and materials submitted to the City on June 20, 2017. 2. The project shall comply with all local, state, and federal permits and requirements. 3. The applicants shall submit a final, revised site plan and supporting materials that address the City Engineer’s comments and Development Code requirements, including the following: a. The revised site plan shall identify the construction limits and plans for replacing the retaining walls. b. The applicant shall identify the additional concrete removals on the plans to allow pedestrian ramp reconstruction to provide adequate ADDA access to the door accesses and meet ADA requirements. c. The plans shall identify the locations of pedestrian ramps meeting ADA compliance. d. If the 12-foot bituminous pathway will be used by pedestrians, it shall meet ADA requirements, including cross-slope. e. Bituminous removal limits at the driveway entrance form Highway 97 to allow for the new proposed storm sewer and shall be added to the plans. f. The areas of potential vehicle traffic over the proposed plastic storm sewer and inlets shall use concrete pipe or increase the cover depth above the 1-foot depth shown on the plans. g. The plans shall show the High Water Level/100-year elevation on the proposed pond. h. The plans for the biofiltration basin shall include a cross-section detail of the proposed improvements to show material depths, piping, drain tile, etc., as related to the improvement. i. The detail of the OCS shall be provided with the construction plans. j. The applicant shall submit stormwater calculations for City review. k. The City’s Fire Chief shall review and approve the revised plans. 4. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the proposed expansion. 5. The School District shall apply for and obtain a septic system operating permit from Washington County. 6. Any hazardous materials that will be used in the maintenance area shall meet Federal, State, and Local requirements for use, disposal and storage. 7. All waste, refuse, and garbage on the site shall be stored in a manner that meets the Development Code requirements. Scandia Elementary Site Plan Review/Variance Page 13 July 18, 2017 Scandia City Council 8. The applicant shall submit a Lighting plan for City approval, and all new and replacement lighting shall meet the requirements of the Development Code. 9. Existing screening on the site will be maintained as the project is implemented, including replacement of the retaining walls. 10. Any new signage shall comply with the City’s Development Code requirements. 11. The applicant shall obtain the required permits for stormwater management, including City permits, an NPDES permit, and all required Watershed District permit(s), and shall adhere to all conditions of the permit(s). 12. The applicant shall obtain any required MnDOT permits for the project. 13. The City may require temporary restoration to contain erosion during construction. The applicant shall complete site restoration as soon as possible. 14. If the new bituminous area east of the school will include vehicle parking, the applicant shall submit a striping plan for City review and approval. 15. All construction work shall be completed within City-approved work hours. 16. All new or modified signage shall obtain required permits and meet Development Code standards. 17. All improvements shall be privately owned and maintained. 18. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrow costs related to the application.