AGENDA Rogers Planning Commission April 6, 2026 - 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. APPROVE AGENDA Commission members may add items to the agenda for discussion purposes or staff direction only. The Commission will not normally take official action on items added to the agenda. 3. CONSENT AGENDA These items are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed elsewhere on the agenda. 3.1 Motion to Approve: • Meeting Minutes from February 2nd, 2025; and • Meeting Minutes from March 3rd, 2026 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.1 Consider Approval of Preliminary Plat for Northview Preserve 2nd Addition 4.2 Consider Amendments to Zoning Code Section 125-42 Variances 4.3 Consider Amendments to Sec. 125-54, 125-55, and 125-84 Related to Accessory Structures and Fences 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.1 Review a Concept Plan by Oasis Group, inc. for a Senior Residential Living Facility at 13020 Hawkins Drive 5.2 Review and Consideration of the Main Street Master Plan 5.3 Consideration of Amendments to City Code Chapter 22-XIV Licensing Procedures and Regulations Related to Cannabis Businesses 6. CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORTS Page 1 of 140 6.1 Past Planning Commission Items Report 7. ADJOURN Page 2 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 3.1 COMMISSION Subject: Motion to Approve: • Meeting Minutes from February 2nd, 2025; and • Meeting Minutes from March 3rd, 2026 Prepared By: Alec Henderson, City Planner Overview / Background / Analysis Motion to Approve: • Meeting Minutes from February 2nd, 2025; and • Meeting Minutes from March 3rd, 2026 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approving the minutes attached. Financial Impact: NA Source Fund: NA Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. 2-3-2025 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes B. 3-2-2026 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 140 City of Rogers Planning Commission Meeting Minutes February 3, 2025 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rogers was called to order by Chair Carlson on Monday, February 3, 2025, at 7:00 PM at Rogers Community Room, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN, 55374 and online in theTeams application. Commissioners present: Brett Carlson, Clark Lohr, Peter Mullin, Seth Stiebinger, Aaron Sattersten, Adam Hunt, Sarah Larson Commissioners absent: Staff present: Brett Angell, Community Development Director; and Eric Burtness, Economic Development Specialist. Council Liason: Amy Enga 2. APPROVE AGENDA Commission Member Lohr moved, Commission Member Mullin seconded a motion to Approve Agenda. Motion carried 7-0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.1 Consideration of a Variance Request at 11520 Park Drive Related to a Garage Addition Brett Angell summarized the item. The city received a variance request by the owner of 11520 Park Drive to exceed the maximum permitted accessory structure size in the R1 (Rural Residential) district. On the 5.63-acre wooded parcel, City Code limits detached accessory structures to 1,900 square feet; the applicant proposes a new 3,200-square- foot detached garage addition, resulting in approximately 4,760 square feet of total accessory structure area, 2,860 square feet above the code limit. The applicant cites practical difficulties related to the location of the septic system and drain field, which limit expansion of the attached garage, and states the structure would reduce outdoor storage of recreational equipment, be screened by existing trees, and remain consistent with neighborhood character. The report outlines the statutory and local variance criteria, including harmony with the Comprehensive Plan, existence of non-economic practical difficulties, and preservation of neighborhood character, and recommends that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council, while also inviting feedback on whether accessory structure size standards warrant broader code review. Page 4 of 140 The applicant cited the following practical difficulties: • The location of the existing septic system and drain field prevents expansion of the attached garage, which has no size limitation • The addition would allow recreational equipment (boat, fish house, camper, ATVs, snowmobiles) currently stored outdoors to be moved indoors, reducing exterior clutter and improving security • The structure would be screened by existing trees and have minimal visual impact on surrounding properties • Nearby properties have accessory structures of similar or larger size Chair Carlson opened the public hearing at approximately 7:05 PM. No members of the public spoke in favor or against the request. The hearing was closed. Following the public hearing, the Commission discussed the request and made the following findings in support of approval: • The location of the septic system and drain field presents a genuine practical difficulty unique to the property • The existing tree coverage supports minimal visual impact, and the applicant expressed a desire to preserve trees rather than clear them for an attached structure • The character and sizing of the proposed structure is consistent with surrounding rural residential properties The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the variance request and additionally recommended that staff and the Commission evaluate existing accessory building size standards in the rural residential district more broadly. 4.2 Consideration of a Site Plan and Variance Request for the Rogers Tech Center Development (Church Ave and County Rd 81) Brett Angell summarized the item. The city has received Site Plan and Variance request for improvements to an existing commercial property related to Rogers Tech Center development, including building and site modifications that do not fully conform to zoning standards. The proposal involves site redevelopment elements such as building expansion and/or exterior improvements, parking and circulation adjustments, and associated stormwater and landscaping updates. Because aspects of the plan do not meet specific dimensional or design requirements of the applicable zoning district, the applicant is seeking a variance, requiring findings related to practical difficulties related to wetlands, consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and preservation of neighborhood character. Staff reviews the request against zoning compliance, Page 5 of 140engineering, stormwater, landscaping, and access standards, and recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and forward a recommendation to the City Council, with approval conditioned on addressing engineering comments, compliance with applicable code provisions, and execution of required agreements or securities. Key site plan elements included: • 31 parking spaces (including one ADA stall), satisfying code requirements for industrial use • Access from Church Avenue only; no direct access to County Road 81 • On-site stormwater treatment via a bio-infiltration basin and pretreatment forebay, designed to capture and filter the first 1.1 inches of runoff in compliance with Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission (ECWMC) requirements • Landscaping including six overstory trees, five evergreen trees, and 97 shrubs and perennials concentrated along the north and east sides of the property • Modern industrial architecture with metal paneling and concrete masonry • A shared on-site trash enclosure In addition to site plan approval, the applicant requested a variance to reduce the required 50-foot front yard setback along County Road 81 to 10 feet from the property line. Due to an adjacent 31-foot highway right-of-way easement, the effective setback from the roadway curb would be approximately 41 feet. The variance was necessitated by the combination of the property's irregular shape, adjacent wetlands, stormwater management infrastructure requirements, and the existing highway easement, which collectively limit the buildable area of the site. Chair Carlson opened the public hearing at approximately 7:30 PM. The Commission asked clarifying questions related to anticipated tenants and the setback situation. The hearing was closed. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of both the site plan and the variance request, finding that the practical difficulties were genuine, not economic in nature, and attributable to site constraints not created by the applicant. 5. NEW BUSINESS 6. OTHER BUSINESS 6.1 Planning Commission Upcoming Meetings and Consideration Items Staff noted upcoming Planning Commission meetings and future agenda items for the Commission's awareness. Page 6 of 1407. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:00 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Alec Henderson, City Planner Page 7 of 140 City of Rogers Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 2, 2026 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rogers was called to order by Chair Lohr on Monday, March 2, 2026, at 7:00 PM at Rogers Community Room, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN, 55374 and online in the Teams application. Commissioners present: Clark Lohr, Peter Mullin, Aaron Sattersten, Adam Hunt, Sarah Larson, Sean McDermid, Patrick Ruppe Commissioners absent: Nick Auman Staff present: Brett Angell, Community Development Director; Alec Henderson, City Planner; Council Liason: Amy Enga 2. APPROVE AGENDA Commission Member Lohr moved, Commission Member Mullin seconded a motion to approve the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Commission Member Lohr moved, Commission Member Mullin seconded a motion to approve the consent agenda which include three items (Minutes from 1/6/2025, 4/7/2025, 2/2/2026). Motion carried 7-0. 3.1 Approve Minutes from January 6, 2025 3.2 Approve Minutes from April 7, 2025 3.3 Approve Minutes from February 2, 2026 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.1 Consideration of a Site Plan and Variance Request for Trailers Plus at 19520 County Road 81 Brett Angell summarized the request. The subject property at 19520 County Road 81 is a 2.4-acre site zoned General Industrial (GI). The property contains an existing 3,500 square foot building. The applicant, Trailers Plus, proposes to use the site for retail sales of recreational trailers. Surrounding properties are industrial or service businesses Page 8 of 140in character. Proposed Improvements include: • Addition of impervious surfaces around the existing building for trailer display and circulation. • Continuation of existing access on County Road 81. • Installation of a security fence and gate. • Perimeter landscaping; existing billboard to be removed in the future. Variance Request includes: The applicant requested a variance to reduce the Highway 94 corridor setback from 30 feet to 10 feet (a reduction of 20 feet). The stated practical difficulties supporting the variance include the triangular configuration of the lot, the existing building placement and fixed footprint, wetlands on the northwest side of the property limiting alternate locations, and circulation requirements for semi-truck trailer deliveries. Chair Lohr opened the hearing at 7:07 PM. Applicant/Representative Comments: Zach Weber and Tracey Hill appeared on behalf of Trailers Plus. • The site is intended as a retail operation with 80–100 retail units on site, ranging in size from small utility trailers to larger models. • Trailers would be arranged in an aesthetically pleasing manner with sufficient spacing to shift inventory as needed. • Delivery of trailers by semi-truck requires circulation either clockwise or counterclockwise around the site. • The applicant indicated the entrance width would be increased. • The variance would allow approximately 1.5 to 2 acres of usable parking/display area. Wetlands on the northwest side prevent shifting parking toward County Road 81. • No final site parking/layout drawing was available at the time of the hearing. • The gap in trailer placement near the billboard was intentional to preserve billboard visibility. Commission Member Mullin moved, Commission Member Hunt seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. Commission Discussion: • McDermid asked about setback distances for other sites along the Highway 94 corridor; staff noted distances vary by property age and some improvements exist closer to the right-of-way. Page 9 of 140 • Enga requested clarification on the purpose of corridor setback standards and why deeper setbacks are required. • Lohr expressed concern that the request appeared to be primarily driven by a desire for additional impervious surface; Angell confirmed landscaping is proposed and noted site circulation constraints. • Lohr asked about curb requirements; staff confirmed code requires curb. • Lohr noted that without a final parking layout it is difficult to assess how much setback encroachment is truly needed. Lohr raised the concept of limiting the encroachment to areas south of the billboard (150 feet from a reference point, then reverting to code setback). • Mullin asked the applicant to consider whether a variance between 10 and 30 feet — rather than the full 30-to-10 reduction — would be workable. • Ruppe asked whether the variance was primarily to allow additional trailer storage. • Hunt and Larson indicated they did not share concerns about the request as presented. • Mullin and Lohr expressed some concern about the need north of the billboard but not south. • McDermid noted that after visiting the site, he no longer had concerns. Commission Member Larson moved, Commission Member Mullin seconded a motion to to recommend approval of the site plan and variance request as proposed, with the added condition that curb be installed along the perimeter of impervious surface. Motion carried 7-0. 4.2 Consideration of a Variance Request for Pylon Sign at 20045 Co. Rd. 81 (Malmborg's Garden Center) Commission Member Mullin moved, Commission Member Hunt seconded a motion to recommend approval of the variance request, allowing the new pylon sign to maintain the existing 20-foot height and incorporate the EMC. Motion carried 7-0.Alec Henderson summarized the request. Malmborg’s Garden Center requested a variance to replace and upgrade their existing pylon sign. The current sign exceeds the code height limit of 12 feet at an existing height of 20 feet. The proposed new sign would maintain the existing 20-foot height and include an electronic message center (EMC). The variance is supported by practical difficulties including visibility obstructions created by vegetation and a drainage ditch along County Road 81. Chair Lohr opened the public hearing at 7:58 PM Commission Member Lohr moved, Commission Member Mullin seconded a motion to closing the hearing at 7:59 PM. Motion carried 7-0. Commission Discussion: Lohr, Mullin, and Hunt characterized this as a straightforward and well-presented request. The practical difficulties were considered self-evident given the site conditions. Page 10 of 140Commission Member Mullin moved, Commission Member Hunt seconded a motion to recommend approval of the variance request, allowing the new pylon sign to maintain the existing 20-foot height and incorporate the EMC. Motion carried 7-0. 5. NEW BUSINESS 6. CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORTS 6.1 Past Planning Commission Report Updates were provided regarding the accessory buildings and fence code amendments previously reviewed by the City Council. Minor adjustments were requested for the outbuilding code, and fences changes were generally supported. This will be back on the table for final recommendation by Commission and action by City Council. 7. ADJOURN Commission Member Lohr moved, Commission Member Ruppe seconded a motion to adjourn at 8:04 PM. Motion carried 7-0. Respectfully Submitted, Alec Henderson, City Planner Page 11 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 4.1 COMMISSION Subject: Consider Approval of Preliminary Plat for Northview Preserve 2nd Addition Prepared By: Alec Henderson, City Planner Overview / Background / Analysis Summergate Development has submitted a Preliminary Plat application for Northview Preserve 2nd Addition, requesting City review and approval for a proposed residential subdivision on the south side of Territorial Road (CSAH 116), immediately west of the approved Northview Preserve plat. The subject property is located at 22885 Territorial Rd (PID 22-120-23-33-0004), comprising approximately 4.74 gross acres. At the time of the original Northview Preserve concept review and preliminary plat approval, the Planning Commission recommended exploring how adjacent properties might develop, including the area now under consideration for this 2nd Addition. The proposed 2nd Addition extends the Northview Preserve neighborhood to the west with a consistent development pattern, connecting to the existing subdivision via Holden Way. The plan proposes a by-right R2, Single Family development consisting of 10 single- family lots, a public street extension, and stormwater management improvements including a filtration basin. The proposed development is consistent with the current R2 zoning and proposes no deviations to lot sizes or setbacks. The development takes access from the existing Holden Way stub in Northview Preserve and proposes a new local street (Street A) extending to Territorial Road. Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat with conditions. A public hearing was published in the paper and mailed to nearby properties. Primary Issues to Consider 1. Land Use and Zoning Compliance 2. Site Development Plans Analysis of Primary Issues 1. Land Use and Zoning The development area is guided as Low Density Residential and zoned Single- Family Residential (R2). Land guided as Low Density Residential has a net density range of 2.0 to 5.0 units per net acre. The proposed unit count of 10 units on 4.74 gross acres (4.08 net acres) would create a Page 12 of 140gross density of approximately 2.11 units per acre and a net density of approximately 2.45 units per acre. The proposed density is within the guided range and consistent with the zoned use. The density is also comparable to the adjacent Northview Preserve development (2.40 units per gross acre). Single-family homes are the only permitted residential dwelling type in the R2 district. The proposed development consists entirely of single-family homes. The following table summarizes the lot standard compliance: Standard R2 Required Proposed Compliant? Minimum Lot Area 10,000 sf 10,757 sf (min) Yes Average Lot Area — 13,196 sf — Lot Width at Setback 65 ft min 70 ft (std) Yes Lot Depth 125 ft min 125 ft (std) Yes Front Setback 25 ft 25 ft Yes Rear Setback 20 ft 20 ft Yes Rear (to Territorial Rd) 50 ft 50 ft Yes Side Setback (Interior) 10 ft 10 ft Yes Side Setback (Corner) 25 ft 25 ft Yes The project aligns with the comprehensive plan. The subdivision is consistent with the Low-Density Residential land use designation, addresses continued demand for single- family homes in the city, and provides stormwater management facilities. The development extends the street network and utilities from the adjacent Northview Preserve plat as was anticipated at the time of the original approval. Northview Preserve 2nd Addition is compliant with the existing zoning and existing land use plan/comprehensive plan. 2. Site Development Plans The proposed development plans’ approvals are contingent on meeting the engineering standards of the City of Rogers and stormwater management review by Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission. These are typical of residential subdivision approvals at this stage as the Preliminary Plat plans are preliminary drawings of the development. Final Construction Plans are submitted with Final Plat applications and are subject to further review by the City Engineer and must be consistent with the Preliminary Plans. At this stage, there are no major issues with zoning or subdivision compliance that would prevent conditional approval of the Preliminary Plat. Engineering comments and revisions are generally minor and can be handled through final construction plans with the final plat. Landscaping and Tree Preservation Tree preservation plans and landscaping plans have been submitted. The tree inventory identifies 39 trees on-site with a total of 451 significant caliper inches. The plan proposes removing 30 trees and saving 9 trees (4 of which are off-site). The proposed tree removals are consistent with City Code requirements and are necessary to accommodate required improvements. The proposed landscape plan includes 18 Page 13 of 140overstory deciduous street trees, 16 evergreen trees, and 10 deciduous yard trees to be planted by the home builder, for a total of 44 new trees. The landscape plan conforms to code and proposes a variety of species of adequate size meeting Table 27 planting size requirements (2.5-inch caliper deciduous, 6-foot height evergreen). Native seeding is proposed for stormwater management areas using MnDOT Southern Tallgrass Roadside and Wet Ditch seed mixes. Access and Transportation The development connects to the existing Northview Preserve subdivision via Holden Way, which was stubbed to the west boundary at the time of the original plat for this purpose. A new local street (Street A) extends from Holden Way north to Territorial Road, providing a second access point to the broader neighborhood. The Territorial Road access will be subject to review, approval, and permitting by Hennepin County. The removals plan notes coordination with the CSAH 159 Territorial Road Improvement Plans dated 9/22/25 for removals and relocations within the county right-of-way. The internal street is proposed as a 32-foot back-of-curb to back-of-curb section within a 60- foot right-of-way, consistent with the Northview Preserve street standards. Utilities The developer proposes to construct sanitary sewer and water utilities throughout the development, connecting to the existing infrastructure stubs in the Northview Preserve plat. Sanitary sewer connects to existing manholes in Holden Way. Water main connections include removal and salvage of the existing hydrant and auxiliary valve, with a new connection to the existing watermain with gate valve. The existing septic system on the property will be removed as part of site development. Grading and Stormwater Plans have been submitted to the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission and will be subject to review and approval by ECWMC. The grading plan proposes a filtration basin (Pond 10) in Outlot A at the north end of the site for stormwater treatment and rate control. Storm sewer connects to the existing system in Northview Preserve. The lot tabulation indicates 1 slab-on-grade lot and 9 rambler-style lots. Erosion control measures include silt fence, rock construction entrances, erosion control blanket, and post-grading silt fence consistent with NPDES permit requirements. Fire Review No outstanding comments currently remain for fire department review. Updated plans will still require review and approval by the Fire Marshal. Revised Civil Plans shall be consistent with Departments’ Review. Note: Northview Preserve 3rd Addition (Replat) The Developer is also proposing a replat of Lot 5, Block 1 and Lots 1 and 2, Block 6 of the original Northview Preserve, to be recorded as Northview Preserve 3rd Addition. The replat reconfigures three lots and the Bluebird Way road stub, shifting the right-of- way slightly to the south so that the entire 60-foot ROW connects to the Gmach Farm Page 14 of 140property (PID 28-120-23-11-0002) to the west rather than straddling the Gmach/Rebensdorf property line. The replat results in no loss or gain of lots to the original Northview Preserve, and the alignment of utilities and roadways is substantially similar to the approved preliminary plat. Associated right-of-way and drainage and utility easement vacations will be processed with the replat which will be reviewed and approved by the City Council. Staff is treating this as a construction plan change to be processed with a new final plat rather than a preliminary plat amendment. Staff Recommendation This is a public hearing. Staff recommends approval of the Northview Preserve 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat with the following conditions. 1. The Developer shall comply with the plat opinion and complete revisions to the Plat as may be required by the City Attorney prior to the recording of the future final plat. 2. The subdivision will be subject to the review, and comments by Hennepin County. 3. The Developer shall adequately address comments from the City Engineer and make plan changes as deemed necessary by the City Engineer and Public Works Department. 4. The Developer shall satisfy comments from the Fire Chief and/or Fire Marshal. 5. The Stormwater and Grading Plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission and City Engineer. 6. The Developer and City of Rogers shall execute a Subdivision Agreement for the development, identifying the terms and conditions of the development and fees, escrows, and financial security obligations required of the Developer at time of Final Plat. 7. A stormwater maintenance agreement may be required by the Public Works Department and/or Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission to determine the disposition and maintenance of the stormwater facilities. 8. The existing septic system shall be properly decommissioned in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 and Hennepin County requirements prior to or concurrent with site grading. 9. The Developer shall coordinate with the existing overhead power line/pole removal and relocation with the applicable utility provider prior to construction. Financial Impact: NA Source Fund: NA Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Resolution No. 2026-34 Preliminary_NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2nd Addition B. 25-12-15 Northview Preserve 2nd Addition Preliminary Plans Page 15 of 140 Page 16 of 140 RESOLUTION NO. 2026 - 34 A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, the Summergate Companies LLC (“Developer”) submitted an application requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat for NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION (“Plat”) for the approximate 4.74 acre parcel at 22885 Territorial Rd with PID 22-120-23-33- 0004 and legally described on Exhibit A (the “Subject Property/Property”); and, WHEREAS, the Developer is proposing to plat the property into 10 single-family lots and one outlot to accommodate a single-family residential development of the area as shown in Exhibit B; and, WHEREAS, the Subject Property contains approximately 4.74 gross acres, is guided as Low Density Residential in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and is within the Single-Family Residential (R2) zoning district; and WHEREAS, the proposed Preliminary Plat is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and current zoning regulations for the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §462.357 the Planning Commission (“Commission”) conducted a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed Plat on April 2nd, 2026; and WHEREAS, notice of the Hearing was posted, published in the City’s official newspaper, and mailed to nearby properties, as required by State Statute; and, WHEREAS, written and verbal comment were received and considered by the Commission; and, WHEREAS, following the Hearing, the Commission recommended approval of the NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION preliminary plat. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROGERS, MINNESOTA, that the Preliminary Plat, NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION, is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The Developer shall comply with the plat opinion and complete revisions to the Plat as may be required by the City Attorney prior to the recording of the future final plat. 2. The subdivision will be subject to the review, and comments by Hennepin County. 3. The Developer shall adequately address comments from the City Engineer and make plan changes as deemed necessary by the City Engineer and Public Works Department. 4. The Developer shall satisfy comments from the Fire Chief and/or Fire Marshal. 5. The Stormwater and Grading Plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission and City Engineer. Page 1 of 5 Page 17 of 1406. The Developer and City of Rogers shall execute a Subdivision Agreement for the development, identifying the terms and conditions of the development and fees, escrows, and financial security obligations required of the Developer at time of Final Plat. 7. A stormwater maintenance agreement may be required by the Public Works Department and/or Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission to determine the disposition and maintenance of the stormwater facilities. 8. The existing septic system shall be properly decommissioned in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 and Hennepin County requirements prior to or concurrent with site grading. 9. The Developer shall coordinate with the existing overhead power line/pole removal and relocation with the applicable utility provider prior to construction. [Remainder of page left intentionally blank] Page 2 of 5 Page 18 of 140 Moved by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember The following voted in favor of said resolution: The following voted against the same: The following abstained: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor, and attested by the Clerk dated this 14th day of April, 2026. __________________________________ Shannon Klick, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________________________ Stacie Brown, City Clerk Page 3 of 5 Page 19 of 140 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Existing Legal Description That part of the West 422.70 feet of the East 808.50 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 22, Township 120 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying South of the center line of County Road No. 116, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND The North 247.50 feet of the West 422.70 feet of the East 808.50 feet of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27, Township 120 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property Page 4 of 5 Page 20 of 140 EXHIBIT B PRELIMINARY PLAT Page 5 of 5 Page 21 of 140© 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR SITE PRELIMINARY PLAT, GRADING, UTILITIES, Vicinity Map STREETS, AND LANDSCAPE (NOT TO SCALE) FOR NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION ROGERS, MN PREPARED FOR: SHEET INDEX SHEET SHEET TITLE SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC NUMBER 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 1 Cover 2 Existing Conditions LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 3 Removals Plan NO. DATE REVISION SHEETS CONTACT: BRYAN TUCKER 4 Preliminary Plat . . 5 Preliminary Grading Drainage & Erosion Control . . . . 6 Preliminary Street & Utility Plan PHONE: 612-490-0982 . . 7 Street Profile . . EMAIL: BRYANT@SUMMER-GATE.COM 8 Signage Plan . . . . 15 Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan & Data . . PREPARED BY: Preliminary Landscape Plan 16 . . 17 Preliminary Landscape Notes & Details . . Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 Fax (952) 937-5822 Minnetonka, MN 55343 PRELIMINARY PLANS Toll Free (888) 937-5150 FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT, GRADING, UTILITIES, PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 STREETS, AND LANDSCAPE CONTACT: THOMAS D. DESUTTER FOR NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION ROGERS, MN INITIAL SUBMITTAL DATE: 12/15/25 SHEET: 1 OF 17 N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-CVP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 22 of 140 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com GAS Common Ground Alliance TUG GAS TUG GAS TUG GAS TUG GAS TUG N72°09'45"W 161.35 GAS R/W shown per the PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 47.0 TUG plat of BIG WOODS 55 TERRITORIAL ROADGAS (C.S.A.H. NO. 116) CROSSING 2ND The following information was provided by Land Title, Inc., Issuing Agent for Stewart Title Guaranty Company, File Number 709010, which has POH R/W © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. STO ADDITION an effective date of February 10, 2025: TUG POH (PUBLIC STREET) That part of the West 422.70 feet of the East 808.50 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 22, Township 120 North , GAS FO Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying South of the center line of County Road No. 116 , Hennepin County, Minnesota. POH 47.0 TUG AND GAS FO POH X The North 247.50 feet of the West 422.70 fest of the East 808.50 feet of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27, Township TUG GGAS X POH FO 120 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota. X POH TUG GAS Abstract Property FO X X T POH TUG GAS HOLDEN WAY X FO (PUBLIC STREET) X 60 southerly line of Highway X 33 POH TUG R/W R/W GAS Easement per Doc No. 5884447, X FO GENERAL NOTES 59055720, 5905721 & 5905722 40.0 POH TUG X X GAS 1. Bearings of property lines shown hereon are based on the Hennepin County coordinate system, (NAD 83 - 2011 Control Adjustment). MAIL FO X POH TUG 2. Lengths of lines and distances between features are measured in US-Survey Feet. GAS centerline of Territorial Road per Hennepin X FO County State Aid Highway No. 116, Plat 21 POH X Hennepin County State Aid Highway TUG X GAS X No. 116, Plat 21 per Doc No. 4057045 POH FO 1 TUG southerly line of Highway GAS Easement per Doc No. 5884447, POH FO X TUG N00°34'25"E 307.18 X SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 22 W. line of the East 808.50 ft of the 59055720, 5905721 & 5905722 X GAS X X POH FO TUG GAS POH POH FO X TUG E. line of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 22 GAS X POH FO TUG X GAS POH FO STO X TUG POH X GAS PID: 22-120-23-33-0005 PID: X FRANCIS & CLAIRE CULLINAN CLAIRE & FRANCIS POH TUG FO GAS SW 1/4 of Sec. 22 E. line of the West 422.70 ft of the East 808.50 ft of the SW 1/4 of the FO X POH X TUG X X X 808.50 X SW Corner of Section 22, X X STO Twp. 120, Rge. 23 X X POH N00°34'25"E 171.82 X POH Fd. Hennepin County 422.70 X Cast Iron Monument X CO POH X PID: 22-120-23-33-0004 S. line of the SW 1/4 of S89°13'59"E X the SW 1/4 of Sec. 22 515.97 LINDA & DOUGLAS THOMPSON SR POH POH 22885 TERRITORIAL ROAD POH X ROGERS, MN 55374 N. line of the NW 1/4 of DT the NW 1/4 of Sec. 27 X POH HHG POH X HOUSE POH E X DT SEP CO 422.70 POH SEP X SEP SHED POH X X X X 8X10 X X X POH DT GARAGE X 808.50 SHED DT X SHED SHED S00°46'39"W 247.50 7X12 SHED X (PUBLIC STREET) 7X14 S00°46'39"W 247.50 HOLDEN WAY DT 247.50 ft of the East 808.50 ft of E. line of the West 422.70 NW 1/4 of Sec. 27 the NW 1/4 of the E. line of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 27 SHED NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 27 X W. line of the East 808.50 ft of the SHED X DT SHED X X 4X10 Fd. 1/2 Inch Open; S. line of the North 247.50 ft of the Fd. 1/2 Inch Open; LS #6743 X NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 27 LS #6743 LEGEND DT X X X X S89°13'59"E 422.70 CO SEWER CLEANOUT T TELEPHONE BOX BOUNDARY LINE SAN SANITARY SEWER CONCRETE SURFACE HH HAND HOLE/JUNCTION BOX SEP SEPTIC COVER RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE STO STORM SEWER BITUMINOUS SURFACE G NATURAL GAS METER TUG TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND CULVERT DT LOT LINE GRAVEL SURFACE FO FIBER OPTIC E ELECTRIC METER STEEL/WOOD POST EASEMENT LINE FOUND MONUMENT (SEE LABEL) X FENCE LINE SIGN SECTION LINE CAST IRON MONUMENT (SEE LABEL) STREET LIGHT CURB & GUTTER 1" = 40' MAIL MAIL BOX GAS GAS LINE GUY WIRE POH POWER OVERHEAD POWER POLE 0' 40 80 120 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01S-EX01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND STATE OF MINNESOTA 2 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 40' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 EXISTING CONDITIONS . . ERNEST M WIRTZ JR westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 8' OR 4' 12/15/25 63119 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 23 of 140 TUG GAS Call 48 Hours before digging: TUG GAS 811 or call811.com TUG TERRITORIAL ROAD GAS REMOVAL LEGEND Common Ground Alliance TUG GAS 18A POH EXISTING PROPOSED TUG GAS POH PROPERTY LINE TUG GAS POH SAW CUT PAVEMENT STO TUG EXISTING REMOVALS POH \ \ \ \ \ \ GAS FO CURB & GUTTER \ POH SAN S \ \ \SAN \ \ \ S SANITARY SEWER \ TUG GAS X FO © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. POH \ REFER TO CSAH 159 TERRITORIAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLANS DATED WAT \ \ \WAT\ \ \ WATER MAIN X 9/22/25 FOR REMOVALS AND RELOCATIONS IN THE COUNTY RIGHT OF \ TUG GGAS \ POH FO WAT \ \ \WAT\ \ \ \ \ X \ \ WAY HYDRANT \ \ X \ X\ \ TUG STO \ \ \STO \ \ \ STORM SEWER \ POH GAS \ FO X \ HOLDEN WAY X \ GAS \ \ \GAS \ \ \ GAS X \ T \ \ POH TUG GAS \ X \ \ FO PUG \ \ \PUG \ \ \ \ \ \ \ X UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC \ X\ \ \ \ \ POH TUG \ GAS POH \ \ \POH \ \ \ \X OVERHEAD ELECTRIC \ \ FO \ \ \ POH TUG TUG \ \ \TUG \ \ \ X UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE \ X\ \ \ GAS \ MAIL FO TOH \ \ \TOH \ \ \ \ \ \ X OVERHEAD TELEPHONE \ POH \ TUG \ GAS \ \ FO \ \ \ FO \ \ \ \X TELEPHONE FIBER OPTIC \ \ \ \ POH X CTV \ \ \CTV \ \ \ \ X CABLE TELEVISION \ \ X \ \ POH \ \ \ \ \ \ \ RETAINING WALL \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ \ \ \ FENCE \ POH X \ \ X \ \ X \ X \ X \ \ POH \ \ \ \ REMOVAL NOTES \ POH \ \ POH \ X \ \ \ \ X \ POH \ 1. LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS \ \ \ PLAN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY SITE CONDITIONS AND UTILITY X \ \ \ \ LOCATIONS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED \ X \ \ POH X IMMEDIATELY IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND. \ X REMOVE EXISTING OVERHEAD \ \ \ POWER LINE/POLE \ \ \ \ 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE LIMITS OF REMOVALS WITH PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS \ \ \ AND FIELD VERIFY CONDITION OF EXISTING APPURTENANCES TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR \ X \ X \ \ \ X \ X SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING OR REPLACING MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (SUCH AS \ \ \ \ \ \ \ X X \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ \ \ X X\ POH FENCES, SIGNS, IRRIGATION HEADS, ETC.) THAT MAY BE DAMAGED BY CONSTRUCTION. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ \X \ \ \ \ \ \ X\ 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE ALL NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES REQUIRED TO \ CO \ \ \ MAINTAIN SITE STABILITY PRIOR TO EXECUTING ANY SITE REMOVALS. X X \ X \ \ X\ \ 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION WITH UTILITY PROVIDERS FOR POH \ \ REMOVAL AND/OR RELOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AFFECTED BY SITE DEVELOPMENT. ALL \ \ \X EXISTING BUILDING/DRIVEWAY PERMITS, APPLICATIONS AND FEES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. \ \ \ DEMOLITION (TYP.) X \ \ \ \ \ G \ HH POH\ X \ \ E \ X \ \ REMOVE EXISTING FENCE \ \ \ \ \ SEP \ CO POH X SEP \ \ \ X \ X SEP \ \ POH X \ \ X \ \ \ \ \ \ X\ \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ X X \ \ \ X \ \ \ X REMOVE EXISTING SEPTIC \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \POH SYSTEM \ \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ X \ \ X \ \ REMOVE CULVER/FLARED END SECTION \ \ X \ \ \ \ X \ FFE=958.73 \ X \ \ \ \ \ \ \ X \ \ X \ \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ \ \ X\ \ \ \ X \ \ \ \X \ \ \ X\ \ REFER TO TREE REMOVAL PLAN FOR TREE REMOVALS SEE SHEETS 15-17 1" = 40' 0' 40' 80' 120' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 964.91 N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-REP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 3 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 REMOVALS PLAN . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 24 of 140 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance SITE DEVELOPMENT DATA LOT STANDARDS SF (R-2 DISTRICT) N72°09'45"W 161.35 © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXISTING ZONING: R-2 STANDARD 161 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LOW RES. MINIMUM LOT AREA 10,757 SF (10,000 sf required) 68 AVERAGE LOT AREA 13,196 SF 65 R/W · GROSS SITE AREA: 4.74 AC MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 70' @ FRT SBK (65' @ FRT SBK MIN. REQUIRED) MAJOR R/W (TERRITORIAL ROAD): 0.66 AC MINIMUM LOT DEPTH 125' · NET SITE AREA: 4.08 AC C.S.A.H. NO. 159 (TERRITORIAL ROAD) SETBACKS Δ=2°05'48" · DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY FRONT (TO R/W) 25' R=7732.02 70' SINGLE FAMILY HOMES: 10 LOTS SIDE INTERIOR LOT 10' / 10'; 20' TOTAL 113 L=282.96 SIDE CORNER LOT 25' 2 · PROJECT DENSITY: 28,889 sf 83 REAR 20' GROSS: (10 un / 4.74 gross acres): ±2.11 UN/AC REAR TO TERRITORIAL ROAD 50' 28 NET: (10 un / 4.08 net acres): ±2.45 UN/AC 50 43 71 158 1 65 R/W 71 50 151 69 N00°34'25"E 307.18 1 TYPICAL 70' SINGLE FAMILY OUTLOT TABLE 13,133 sf 2 120 10,757 sf GROSS 155 OUTLOT USE OWNERSHIP 70.24 70 AREA LOT LINE A PONDING CITY 0.45 AC REAR BUILDING 20' 157 SETBACK 70.50 3 62 11,033 sf 4 BUILDING R40 152 SETBACK LINE 53 10,903 sf OUTLOT A 21 70.50 5' 62 19,440 sf LOT NUMBER 18 N00°34'25"E 171.82 10,000 SF R/W LOT AREA 70.50 VARIES 71 125' 125' DEVELOPMENT NOTES 32 10' B-B 10' 19 71 SIDE SETBACK 90 5' 1. ALL LOT DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST FOOT. 32 B-B 2. ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT. STREET A 1 1 64 5 25' FRONT BUILDING SETBACK 3. STREET NAMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY. 26,226 sf 71 70' 5' SIDEWALK 4. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED. 60 DRAINAGE & R/W 10' ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 70.50 6 TYPICAL LOT 5. STREET WIDTHS ARE SHOWN FROM BACK OF CURB TO BACK OF CURB. 1 7 60 UTILITY EASEMENT DIMENSION 14,206 sf 69 70.60 70.50 2 126 16,611 sf 70.55 248 3 SITE LEGEND 17,224 sf 4 104 EXISTING PROPOSED 94 249 94.24 S00°46'39"W 247.50 14,200 sf 5 HOLDEN WAY 12,944 sf PROPERTY LINE 224 S00°46'39"W 247.50 2 LOT LINE 196 70 SETBACK LINE R/W 140 EASEMENT LINE CURB AND GUTTER 32 TIP-OUT CURB AND GUTTER B-B POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL 6 RETAINING WALL 76 75 10,952 sf 75.00 R/W 8 76 103 VARIES 84 152 S89°13'59"E 422.70 1" = 40' 0' 40' 80' 120' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01S-PP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 4 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 40' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 PRELIMINARY PLAT CORY L. MEYER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 04/17/25 26971 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 DATE: 04/17/25 Page 25 of 140 TUG GAS TUG 954 946 Call 48 Hours before digging: GAS 948 TUG 950 811 or call811.com GAS Common Ground Alliance 952 TUG GAS 954 GRADING & DRAINAGE NOTES GRADING & EROSION CONTROL LEGEND TUG 956 GAS EXISTING PROPOSED TUG GAS 1. ALL CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN TO FINISHED SURFACE/GUTTER GRADES STO UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROPERTY LINE TUG 950 SB-19 SB-19 SOIL BORING LOCATION 2. REFER TO THE SITE PLAN/RECORD PLAT FOR MOST CURRENT HORIZONTAL SITE DIMENSIONS GAS FO 950 980 980 INDEX CONTOUR 952 AND LAYOUT. TUG 954 952 982 982 GAS FO INTERVAL CONTOUR 956 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. SF 958 900.00 900.00 SPOT ELEVATION 956 C.S.A.H. NO. 159 (TERRITORIAL ROAD) TUG GGAS TOPOGRAPHICAL FEATURES WITH THE OWNERS AND FIELD-VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. FO THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR 952 HP/LP SF VARIATIONS FROM PLAN. HIGH/LOW POINT TUG GAS 900.00 FO 954 SF CL-CL T 4. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL RULES. CL-CL ELEVATION TUG GAS 900.00 956 FO SF 0.00% SF TUG 5. POSITIVE DRAINAGE FROM THE SITE MUST BE PROVIDED AT ALL TIMES. FLOW DIRECTION 958 958 GAS 58.4 FO 58.2 SF TW=XXX.XX TOP AND BOTTOM OF 954 TUG GAS 956 BW=XXX.XX RETAINING WALL SF MAIL FO EROSION CONTROL NOTES SILT FENCE (TYP.) 59.0 TUG GAS E.O.F. EMERGENCY OVERFLOW 56.8 2.0% SF 958 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET (TYP.) FO SF PROPOSED STREET PROFILE 1 960 TUG 1. ALL SILT FENCE AND OTHER EROSION CONTROL FEATURES SHALL BE IN-PLACE PRIOR TO ANY X.XX% 960 SF GAS GRADE 60.7 FO EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL VIABLE TURF OR GROUND 960.5 POST-GRADING SILT FENCE (TYP.) TUG STO STORM SEWER 2.0% 55.4 COVER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. EXISTING SILT FENCE ON-SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND OR 960SF GAS 958 REMOVED AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT. IT IS OF FO TREE LINE 956 958 TUG EXTREME IMPORTANCE TO BE AWARE OF CURRENT FIELD CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO 954 STMH-208 1 SF TPF 960.5 RE=957.22 GAS EROSION CONTROL. TEMPORARY PONDING, DIKES, HAY BALES, ETC., REQUIRED BY THE CITY TREE PROTECTION FENCE SF 54.0 OCS-20 RETAINING WALL (MODULAR 2 956 IE=948.89 (15") SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT. SF RE=954.90 BLOCK) R 60.0 3.4% IE=948.95 (15") 952.3 954 IE=950.50 (15") CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER GL POST-SF GRADING LIMITS 960.5 SF 2. ALL STREETS DISTURBED DURING WORKING HOURS MUST BE CLEANED AT THE END OF EACH 960.4 ST POST-SF 952 WORKING DAY. A ROCK ENTRANCE TO THE SITE MUST BE PROVIDED ACCORDING TO DETAILS SF SILT FENCE POST-SF 3:1 956 R STO TO REDUCE TRACKING OF DIRT ONTO PUBLIC STREETS. 59.9 15" FES-23 POST-SF 952.3 4.2% SILT FENCE-POST GRADING SF 960.5 3 959.8 IE=950.50 960 3. REDUNDANT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE NECESSARY WHEN SOIL DISTURBANCE IS HDSF 3:1 EOFSF STO HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE 6" PERFORATED DRAINTILE (TYP.) 958 6.4% CBMH-14 STO RE=957.4558.4 56.5 WITHIN 50 FEET OF SURFACE WATERS. REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS COULD INCLUDE: REDUNDANT SEDIMENT 4 POST-SF RSC IE=953.45 (15") R 59.3 STO 3.1. TWO ROWS OF SILT FENCE (SEPARATED BY 8 FEET); OR CONTROL POST-SF 952 6.8% 952.2 OUTLOT A 960.4 3.2. SILT FENCE AND A TOPSOIL BERM (STABILIZE BERM WITH MULCH); OR INLET PROTECTION INLET SEDIMENT CONTROL (TYP.) SOG FILTRATION BASIN 10 PP STO 3.3. SILT FENCE AND FIBER LOGS; OR EROSION CONTROL 58.9 SF OUTLET = 951.25 3.4. TOPSOIL BERM AND FIBER LOGS (STABILIZE BERM WITH MULCH). CHECKS/BIOROLLS 959.8 STO SF STO 6.6% POST-SF IE = 949.00 BOTT = 950.5 4. REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO DISTURBING WITHIN 50 FEET ROCK CONSTRUCTION POST-SF HWL = 954.9 OF THE SURFACE WATER. ENTRANCE 58.3 27" FES-12 CBMH-15 6.3% EROSION CONTROL BLANKET POST-SF IE=951.25POST-SF RE=957.44 POST-SF 3:1 SF IE=953.35 (15") 952 TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT 948 STO 950 SF 952 954 954 956 POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL STREET A LOT CORNER ELEVATION CBMH-10 956 9.2% WETLAND LINE 980.0 RE=955.71 980.6 LOT NUMBER IE=951.30 (27") 961.1 58.9 DRAINAGE ARROW 99 WETLAND FILL 952.9 HHG ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (TYP.) REAR GROUND GRADE AT SF R 982.8 WETLAND BUFFER CBMH-17 STO 9.1% WALKOUT/LOOKOUT RE=957.67 POND ACCESS MAINTENANCE 954 IE=952.81 (15") 1 961.1 58.4 SAN 982.8 BENCH 960 WO 60.6 952.9 MINIMUM BASEMENT 954 991.0 G FLOOR ELEVATION WETLAND BUFFER LIMITS R 7.2% 958 57.8 952 961.1 WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT 959.9 CBMH-6 CBMH-8 950 FRONT GROUND GRADE 956 SF RE=956.34 RE=955.71 STO AT GARAGE DOOR 951.7 8.2% 59.4 IE=951.49 (24") 57.1 IE=951.35 (24") DO NOT DISTURB 2 R VARIES DND DRIVEWAY 989.6 SF 959.5 989.2 961.1 951.3 POND ACCESS ROUTE R R = RAMBLER, GRADED FOR 8.2' OF DIFFERENCE FROM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION 58.9 958 TO FRONT GROUND GRADE AT GARAGE DOOR. 3 2.0% SF R(1) = RAMBLER, GRADED FOR 7.5' OF DIFFERENCE FROM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION 960 959.9 4 TO FRONT GROUND GRADE AT GARAGE DOOR. EOF SF LO = FULL BASEMENT LOOKOUT GRADED FOR 5.0' OF DIFFERENCE FROM THE REAR GROUND 959.5 58.5 5 7.5% HOLDEN WAY 952 GRADE AT THE LOOKOUT TO THE FRONT GROUND GRADE AT THE GARAGE DOOR. R 954 960.8 952.6 960.8 956 2 956 WO = FULL BASEMENT WALKOUT, GRADED FOR 8.2' OF DIFFERENCE FROM THE REAR GROUND 954 SF GRADE AT THE WALKOUT TO FRONT GROUND AT GARAGE DOOR. 2.0% 952 950 2.0% 57.9 SF 60.3 SOG = SLAB ON GRADE UNIT. 956 57.7 59.6 NOTE: 2.2% 1. THE NUMBER IN THE PARENTHESIS INDICATES THE 954 952 958 956 950 SF NUMBER OF BLOCKS THAT THE GARAGE IS DROPPED. EACH BLOCK=8". 960 6 7.0% SF INDICATES A CUSTOM HOUSE PAD WHICH HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETELY GRADED OR PREPARED 2.7% R CUSTOM TO PROPOSED GRADE. ELEVATIONS AND HOUSE STYLES SHOWN ARE ENGINEERS SUGGESTED 961.7 953.5 961.7 DESIGN FOR CUSTOM LOTS AND SHOULD BE VERIFIED WITH THE DEVELOPER. LP HP LP HP 55.5 56.7 55.5 56.5 LP SF LAST REVISED: 55.5 08/15/17 56.6 2.0% 55.9 2.0% 2.4% 57.8 2.0% 2.0% TYPICAL LOT 61.2 SF GD25A 55.6 59.6 55.6 56.4 SF 56.1 958 958 SF SF SF 958 SF 960 CBMH-1 958 SF CBMH-4 962 CBMH-2 SF RE=955.50 RE=955.50 SF SF RE=955.50 SF IE=952.50 (18") IE=951.98 (18") SF IE=952.23 (18") 960 960 962 LOT TABULATION 960 962 LOT STYLE QUANTITY 962 SOG 1 964 962 964 R 9 966 964 966 1" = 40' 960 952 0' 40' 80' 120' 966 954 958 956 964.91 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 960 N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-GDP01.DWG 962 NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND PRELIMINARY GRADING OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 5 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=50' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 DRAINAGE & EROSION . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN CONTROL DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 26 of 140 TUG GAS TUG Call 48 Hours before digging: GAS TUG 811 or call811.com GAS OVERALL UTILITY LEGEND Common Ground Alliance TUG GAS EXISTING PROPOSED FUTURE TUG GAS SAN S SANITARY SEWER TUG GAS STO STORM SEWER STO TUG DT DRAIN TILE GAS FO WAT WATER MAIN WAT HYDRANT TUG GAS FO © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. C.S.A.H. NO. 159 (TERRITORIAL ROAD) TUG GGAS FO GENERAL UTILITY NOTES TUG GAS FO T TUG GAS 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND FO NOTIFY THE OWNER OF ANY DIFFERENCES. TUG GAS FO 2. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL MATERIALS, CONST. TECHNIQUES AND TESTING SHALL TUG CONFORM TO THE 2023 ED. OF THE "STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN GAS MAIL FO AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION AND SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION BY TUG THE CITY ENGINEERING ASSOCIATION OF MINN." AND TO THE "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR GAS HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION" MINN. DEPT. OF TRANS., 2020 EDITION AND SUPPLEMENTAL FO 1 TUG SPECIFICATIONS SEPTEMBER 2022. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW ALL GAS PROCEDURES AS OUTLINED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY. FO TUG GAS 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECEIVE THE NECESSARY PERMITS FOR ALL WORK OUTSIDE OF THE FO PROPERTY LIMITS. 1 TUG GAS 2 4. VERIFY EXISTING INVERT LOCATION & ELEVATION PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. HYDRANT (TYP.) 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" FOR FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS ST PRIOR TO UTILITY INSTALLATION. CO-32 STO RE=957.40 3 IE=938.00 (E) STO 4 STO OUTLOT A STO STO DT 8" PVC WM STO DT MH-33 STO 163 LF-8" PVC SDR 26 @ 0.40% RE=958.28 REMOVE SANITARY PLUG R40' CONNECT TO EXISTING IE=937.35 (W) HYDRANT (TYP.) CO IE=937.25 (E) SANITARY SEWER DT MH-35 DT RE=956.93 STO TEMPORARY ASPHALT STREET A IE=936.71 (W) REMOVE & SALVAGE EX. HYD. & AUX VALVE TURN AROUND IE=936.61 (E) CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN 135 LF-8" PVC SDR 26 @ 0.40% W/GATE VALVE HHG DT STO 93 LF-8" PVC SDR 26 @ 1 SAN 0.40%SEP COSEP SEP MH-37 DT 2 RE=956.38 STO IE=936.24 (W) IE=928.03 (E) 3 DT DT 4 5 HOLDEN WAY 2 DT DT DT DT 6 DT DT DT DT DT DT 1" = 40' DT DT 0' 40' 80' 120' DT DT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DT DT N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-UTP01.DWG DT DT DT NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION DT DT DT DT SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 6 DRAWN: DJW/CEL PRELIMINARY STREET & OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=50' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 UTILITY PLAN VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 27 of 140 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. STREET A STREET 1 980 980 956.1 957.1 959.3 951.3 955.5 959.2 955.0 962.0 953.6 958.71 956.59 958.56 956.36 957.86 958.34 957.84 957.34 956.84 975 975 H.P ELEV = 958.73 H.P. STA = 3+61.19 970 PVI STA = 3+61.23 970 PVI ELEV = 958.95 L.P ELEV = 956.31 A.D. = -2.00% L.P. STA = 0+85.42 K = 45.04 PVI STA = 0+62.90 90.00' VC PVI ELEV = 955.97 A.D. = 4.00% 965 K = 22.51 965 90.00' VC PVI ELEV = 958.07 PVI STA = 4+49.22 PVI ELEV = 957.86 PVI STA = 0+00.00 ELEV = 958.50 ELEV = 958.50 PVT = 4+06.23 960 PVC = 3+16.23 960 ELEV = 957.32 ELEV = 956.42 PVC = 0+17.90 PVT = 1+07.90 -1.00% 1.00% -3.00% 955 955 950 950 945 945 5+00 4+00 3+00 2+00 1+00 0+00 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-PFP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 7 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 STREET PROFILE . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 28 of 140 GAS TUG GAS Call 48 Hours before digging: TUG GAS 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance TUG SIGNAGE LIGHTING LEGEND GAS TUG GAS EXISTING PROPOSED TUG SIGN (SINGLE POST) GAS SIGN (DOUBLE POST) TUG GAS STO STREET LIGHT TUG GAS FO © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. TUG GAS FO TUG GAS C.S.A.H. NO. 159 (TERRITORIAL ROAD) FO TUG GAS FO TUG GAS FO TUG GAS FO TUG GAS MAIL FO TUG GAS FO 1 TUG GAS TUG 1 2 3 TEMP BARRICADES PER DETAIL SGN-3 4 OUTLOT A STREET LIGHT (TYP.) STREET A REMOVE & SALVAGE BARRICADES STREET/TRAFFIC SIGN 1 PER DETAIL SGN-2 (TYP.) 2 3 4 5 HOLDEN WAY 2 6 1" = 40' 0' 40' 80' 120' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-STP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 8 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 40' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 SIGNAGE PLAN . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 29 of 140© 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-DTP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 09 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 DETAILS . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 30 of 140© 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-DTP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 10 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 DETAILS . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 31 of 140 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-DTP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 09 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: ### Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 DETAILS . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: ### OR ## 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 32 of 140© 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. VARIES PONDED VOLUME THREADED CAP TOP OF POND/BASIN MARK WITH BURIED METAL FOR METAL DETECTION MN STORM WATER MANUAL BURY CAP 4" BELOW GRADE VARIES MIX C - 87% SAND, 8% FINES, EL=951.25 AND 5% MNDOT GRADE 2 FINISHED GRADE POND/BASIN RIPRAP EL=950.50 COMPOST 6" CONCRETE WALK WITH 3:1 3:1 CONTRACTION JOINTS EVERY 5' AND EL=949.50 EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 100' OR AT FILTER FABRIC 6" PERFORATED PVC PIPE 90° INTERSECTIONS 6" 18" SDR 35 (NO SOCK) FINISH GRADE 12" MAX IE = 949.00 PROFILE VIEW EXISTING GROUND 2' MIN. SEE PLAN COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (MNDOT 3149.2H) 6" RIPRAP ONLY REQUIRED IN DRAINTILE 2% CROSS SLOPE 10' TRENCH VARIES TOP OF POND/BASIN FILTER MEDIA PERCENTAGES SHALL BE BY VOLUME P.V.C. P.V.C. SAND SHALL BE FINE FILTER AGGREGATE (MNDOT 3149.2J) SIDE VIEW FILTER FABRIC FINES SHALL BE FROM SILT AND CLAY, MAX. CLAY CONTENT OF 5% 1' MIN. 18" 4" MNDOT SPEC 3138 CLASS 5 FILTRATION BASIN AGGREGATE BASE POND/BASIN 45° LONG RAD. BEND EOF ELEVATIONS P.V.C. LONG SWEEP BOX OR 2-45° BENDS POND 10 = 956.5 NOTES: 1. WALK SHALL BE PER MnDOT SPEC 2521 MIX NO. 3A32 WITH A 28-DAY DESIGN STRENGTH OF 3900-PSI. 10' 2. OUTSIDE EDGE OF SIDEWALK SHALL BE INSTALLED ONE FOOT INSIDE OF RIGHT OF WAY. P.V.C. LAST REVISED: 08/15/17 CONCRETE SIDEWALK SERVICE WYE SI08 INLINE END OF LINE 1' POND/BASIN CONTOURS INSTALL RIP-RAP DOWN TO NOTE: PLAN THE EXISTING GROUND TIE-IN 1. CLEANOUT SHALL MATCH THE DRAINTILE DIAMETER 2. STREET SUBDRAIN CLEANOUTS CAPS TO BE METAL. 3. REAR AND FRONT YARD CLEANOUT CAPS TO BE METAL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. NOTES: COMMON MAIN LINE CLEANOUTS TO FOLLOW DETAIL SAN-3. 1. INSTALL RIPRAP PER MNDOT SPEC 3601 2. RIPRAP SHALL BE CLASS III PER MNDOT SPEC 3601 LAST REVISED: 08/15/17 SUBDRAIN CLEANOUT ST23 TYPICAL RIPRAP OVERFLOW PONDS 5, 6, AND 7 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-DTP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 12 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 DETAILS . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 33 of 140© 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-DTP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 13 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 DETAILS . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 34 of 140 65' CORRECTIVE HOUSE PAD R.O.W CL ROADWAY 12' MIN - 17' 3' 15' 25' 25' 3' 27' VARIES VARIES MAX OVER OVER © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. SIZING SIZING FINISHED GRADE AFTER HOUSE FINISHED GRADE FOR PAD FINISH GRADE SETBACK GROUND @ PAD HOLD DOWN = 0.70' 4:1 MAX BACK OF HOUSE 0.8' 10' 0.4' 5.3% GARAGE FLOOR EL. HOLD DOWN LIMITS 1.20' TO SUBGRADE 3.0% MIN 1:1 0.5' TOPSOIL 1:1 1:1 ENGINEERED FILL ENGINEERED FILL ENGINEERED FILL SUITABLE BEARING SOIL (TYP.) SUITABLE BEARING SOIL (TYP.) SLAB ON GRADE (SOG) 70' Wide Lots N.T.S. 65' CORRECTIVE HOUSE PAD R.O.W CL ROADWAY 12' MIN - 17' 3' 15' 25' 25' 3' 27' VARIES VARIES MAX OVER OVER SIZING SIZING FINISHED GRADE AFTER HOUSE FINISHED GRADE FOR PAD FINISH GRADE SETBACK GROUND @ PAD HOLD DOWN = 2.50' 4:1 MAX BACK OF HOUSE 0.8' 10' 0.4' 5.3% GARAGE FLOOR EL. HOLD DOWN LIMITS 3.00' TO SUBGRADE 3.0% MIN 1:1 1:1 BASEMENT FLOOR 0.5' TOPSOIL 1:1 ENGINEERED FILL ENGINEERED FILL ENGINEERED FILL SUITABLE BEARING SOIL (TYP.) SUITABLE BEARING SOIL (TYP.) RAMBLER (R) 70' Wide Lots NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-DTP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 14 DRAWN: DJW/CEL OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 HORIZONTAL SCALE: Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Minnetonka MN, 55343 PAD HOLD DOWNS . . THOMAS D. DESUTTER westwoodps.com 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 59640 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 35 of 140 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS TREE INVENTORY CALCULATIONS LEGEND (B) TREE AND WOODLAND PRESERVATION DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS SHALL APPLY TO ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING TREE TO REMAIN IN WOODED AREAS: (1) STRUCTURES SHALL BE LOCATED IN SUCH A MANNER THAT THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREES SHALL BE PRESERVED TREE TO BE REMOVED (2) PRIOR TO THE GRANTING OF A BUILDING PERMIT, IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE PERSON © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS SEEKING THE PERMIT TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE ARE NO FEASIBLE OR PRUDENT TREE TO REMAIN ALTERNATIVES TO THE CLEAR-CUTTING OF TREES ON THE SITE AND THAT IF TREES ARE CUT, THE PERSON WILL RESTORE THE DENSITY OF TREES TO THAT WHICH EXISTED BEFORE DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS DEVELOPMENT BUT IN NO CASE SHALL THE PERSON BE COMPELLED TO RAISE THE DENSITY TREE TO BE REMOVED ABOVE 10 TREES PER ACRE 8003 (3) FORESTATION, REFORESTATION OR LANDSCAPING SHALL UTILIZE A VARIETY OF TREE DENOTES SILT FENCE / SPECIES AND SHALL NOT UTILIZE ANY SPECIES PRESENTLY UNDER DISEASE EPIDEMIC. GRADING & C.S.A.H. NO. 159 (TERRITORIAL ROAD) G SPECIES PLANTED SHALL BE HARDY UNDER LOCAL CONDITIONS AND COMPATIBLE WITH DISTURBANCE LIMIT THE LOCAL LANDSCAPE. (4) A TREE INVENTORY WILL BE PREPARED. T TREE PROTECTION DETAIL TREE INVENTORY DATA 1 DENOTES SILT FENCE DRIPLINE 8021 1 & GRADING LIMITS 2 8025 ORANGE MESH CONSTRUCTION FENCE LOCATION AS SHOWN ON PLAN. MAINTAIN MAXIMUM DISTANCE FROM TRUNK POSSIBLE. ST 8024 8040 6' METAL FENCE POST. STAKE EVERY 6' 3 8038 MAXIMUM. 4 8037 ELEVATION OUTLOT A 6' MAX. " T " POST OR EQUAL 8036 ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE 8023 8022 STAKED EVERY 6' PLAN 8044 8045 STREET A NOTES: 8046 8047 1. PRUNING WILL BE DONE BY PROFESSIONALS DURING APPROPRIATE PRUNING SEASON. 2. NO STORAGE OF MATERIALS, OPERATION OF MACHINERY, OR DEVELOPMENT OF ANY SORT WILL OCCUR WITHIN THE FENCE-LINE WITHOUT APPROVAL IN WRITING FROM THE CITY. 3. SITE GRADING TO BE DONE ONLY AFTER PROTECTIVE MEASURES HAVE BEEN TAKEN, CITY HAS APPROVED 1 FENCING LOCATIONS, AND ALL CONTRACTORS HAVE BEEN BRIEFED ON TREE PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES. LAST REVISED: 05/28/15 TREE PROTECTION 2 TP08 *ABBREVIATIONS: PD=PHYSICALLY DAMAGED 3 BD=BIOLOGICALLY DAMAGED DD=DEAD 4 X=MULTI-TRUNKED 5 HOLDEN WAY 2 8054 8053 8052 8064 8051 8066 8056 6 8055 8065 8068 8067 8063 8049 7960 8057 8050 7959 8059 8058 8061 7965 8062 7964 1" = 40' 0' 40' 80' 120' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-TPP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND PRELIMINARY TREE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 15 DRAWN: DJW/CEL Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Fax (952) 937-5822 Minnetonka, MN 55343 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 40.00002' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 PRESERVATION PLAN & . . CORY L. MEYER 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 8' OR 4' 12/15/25 26971 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATA DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 36 of 140 Call 48 Hours before digging: FINAL LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE - BY DEVELOPER 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance CODE QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPACING O.C. MATURE SIZE DECIDUOUS TREES - 18 REO^ 3 RED OAK / QUERCUS RUBRA 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 50`-70` W 40`-50` RSM^ 6 RED SUNSET MAPLE / ACER RUBRUM 'FRANKSRED' 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 45` W 35` REL 2 REDMOND LINDEN / TILIA AMERICANA 'REDMOND' 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 40`-60` W 30`-40` SKH^ 7 SKYLINE HONEY LOCUST / GLEDITSIA TRIACANTHOS INERMIS 'SKYCOLE' 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 50` W 30`-35` EVERGREEN TREES - 16 BHS 5 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE / PICEA GLAUCA DENSATA 6` HT. B&B AS SHOWN H 35`-45` W 20`-25` COS 5 COLORADO SPRUCE / PICEA PUNGENS 6` HT. B&B AS SHOWN H 40`-60` W 15`-30` CCF 6 CONCOLOR FIR / ABIES CONCOLOR 6` HT. B&B AS SHOWN H 40`-50` W 15`-30` © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. FINAL LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE - BY HOME BUILDER CODE QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPACING O.C. MATURE SIZE C.S.A.H. NO. 159 (TERRITORIAL ROAD) G DECIDUOUS YARD TREES - 10 3 - CCF ACE* 1 ACCOLADE ELM / ULMUS JAPONICA X WILSONIANA 'MORTON' TM 2.5" CAL B&B AS SHOWN H 70` W 40`-50` ASL* 3 AMERICAN SENTRY LINDEN / TILIA AMERICANA 'MCKSENTRY' 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 60` W 30`-40` T HAK* 1 HACKBERRY / CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 50`-75` W 50` NRM* 2 NORTHWOOD RED MAPLE / ACER RUBRUM 'NORTHWOOD' 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 40`-60` W 40` 5 - BHS REO* 1 RED OAK / QUERCUS RUBRA 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 50`-70` W 40`-50` SWO* 2 SWAMP WHITE OAK / QUERCUS BICOLOR 2.5" CAL. B&B AS SHOWN H 50`-60` W 60`-80` 1 - ACE* 3 - CCF ABBREVIATIONS: B.B. = BALLED AND BURLAPPED CAL. = CALIPER HT. = HEIGHT MIN. =MINIMUM O.C. = ON CENTER SP. = SPREAD QTY .= QUANTITY CONT. = CONTAINER NOTES: 1) QUANTITIES ON PLAN SUPERSEDE LIST QUANTITIES IN THE EVENT OF A DISCREPANCY. 2) LABELS WITH ^ INDICATE DECIDUOUS STREET TREE, NO CHANGES IN SPECS. FROM OTHER DECIDUOUS TREES. 2 - ASL* 1 3) LABELS WITH * INDICATE DECIDUOUS YARD TREE, NO CHANGES IN SPECS. FROM OTHER DECIDUOUS TREES. 5 - COS 50' SIGHT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS & PROVISIONS PLANT LEGEND 1 1 - SWO* 2 - REL TRIANGLE PREVIOUS ADDITION: 2 OVERSTORY DECIDUOUS OVERSTORY DECIDUOUS STREET TREES STREET TREES ST DECIDUOUS PREVIOUS ADDITION: YARD TREES DECIDUOUS YARD TREES 3 (BY HOME BUILDER) (BY HOME BUILDER) 4 PREVIOUS ADDITION: DECIDUOUS DECIDUOUS OUTLOT A OVERSTORY TREES OVERSTORY TREES EVERGREEN PREVIOUS ADDITION: TREES EVERGREEN TREES 1 - REO^ EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING DECIDUOUS STREET A TREE TO REMAIN 6 - RSM^ 1 50' SIGHT TRIANGLE 2 7 - SKH^ NOTES NATIVE SEEDING LEGEND MNDOT SOUTHERN TALLGRASS 3 1. STREET TREE LOCATIONS AND SPACING ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE ROADSIDE (STR) SEED MIX BASED ON CONSTRUCTED DRIVEWAY AND UTILITY LOCATIONS. TOTAL AREA (0.1 AC) 4 1 - NRM* 2. STREET TREES (WITHIN SINGLE FAMILY LOTS) TO BE PLANTED MIN. 5 HOLDEN WAY 11' FROM R.O.W., AND OUTSIDE THE D&U EASEMENT. NO TREES ARE MNDOT WET DITCH ALLOWED WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. (WD) SEED MIX 1 - HAK* 2 TOTAL AREA (0.3 AC) 2. STREET TREES WITHIN OUTLOT A TO BE PLANTED MIN. 4' FROM R.O.W. NO TREES ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. * ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE SODDED UNLESS NOTED 3. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING AND OTHERWISE CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. * ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN CITY ROW ALONG 4. TREES LOCATED AT FRONT OF INDIVIDUAL LOTS SHALL BE PLANTED TERRITORIAL ROAD TO BE SEEDED WITH MESIC GENERAL IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CURBSTOPS OR ROADSIDE MIX (25-141) 1 - SWO* INDIVIDUAL SEWER & WATER CONNECTIONS. 1 - NRM* 1 - REO* 6 5. LOT YARD TREES WILL BE PLANTED BY BUILDER AFTER 2 - REO^ CONSTRUCTION ON LOTS IS COMPLETE. TIMING OF INSTALLATION WILL BE DEPENDENT UPON SEASON AND PLANT AVAILABILITY. 1 - ASL* 6. NO STREET TREES OR YARD TREES ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE 50' SIGHT TRIANGLES. 7. DECIDUOUS TREES SHOULD BE LOCATED A MINIMUM OF 5' OFF ANY UTILITY PIPE AND CONIFEROUS TREES TREES SHOULD BE LOCATED A MINIMUM OF 15' OFF ANY UTILITY PIPE. 8. NO TREE SHOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN 10' OF A HYDRANT OR 15' FROM A STREETLIGHT. 1" = 40' 9. NO TREES SHOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN A STORM POND HWL. 10. NO TREES SHOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN STORM POND ACCESS ROUTE. 0' 40' 80' 120' 11. NO DECIDUOUS TREE WITH 5' OF A SIDEWALK OR TRAIL AND NO CONIFEROUS TREES WITHIN 20' OF A PROPOSED SIDEWALK OR TRAIL. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-PLP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 16 DRAWN: DJW/CEL Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 PRELIMINARY OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Fax (952) 937-5822 Minnetonka, MN 55343 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 40.00002' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 . . CORY L. MEYER 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 LANDSCAPE PLAN VERTICAL SCALE: 8' OR 4' 12/15/25 26971 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 37 of 140 Call 48 Hours before digging: PLANTING NOTES PLANTING DETAILS 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT COMMON GROUND ALLIANCE AT 811 OR CALL811.COM TO VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL PRUNE OUT MISDIRECTED BRANCHES. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PLANTS OR LANDSCAPE MATERIAL. PRUNE OUT MISDIRECTED BRANCHES. PROVIDE ONE CENTRAL LEADER. PROVIDE ONE CENTRAL LEADER. GUYING AND STAKING, AS REQUIRED, FOR 2. ACTUAL LOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS. GUYING AND STAKING, AS REQUIRED, FOR ONE (1) YEAR ON ALL DECIDUOUS AND ONE (1) YEAR ON ALL DECIDUOUS AND CONIFEROUS TREES: 3. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. CONIFEROUS TREES: TOP STAKES 5' ABOVE GROUND (MAX.) TOP STAKES 5' ABOVE GROUND (MAX.) OR TO FIRST BRANCH. BOTTOM OF OR TO FIRST BRANCH. BOTTOM OF 4. ALL SUBSTITUTIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF ANY BID AND/OR QUOTE STAKE 3' (MIN.) BELOW GROUND. STAKE 3' (MIN.) BELOW GROUND. STAKING POSTS TO BE 2"X2" STAINED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. STAKING POSTS TO BE 2"X2" STAINED WOOD OR PAINTED STEEL DELINEATOR WOOD OR PAINTED STEEL DELINEATOR POSTS. PLACE 3 POSTS EQUIDISTANT 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ONE YEAR GUARANTEE OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS. THE GUARANTEE BEGINS ON THE DATE OF POSTS. PLACE 3 POSTS EQUIDISTANT AROUND AND OUTSIDE ROOT BALL. © 2025 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S OR OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE OF THE INITIAL PLANTING. REPLACEMENT PLANT MATERIAL AROUND AND OUTSIDE ROOT BALL. SECURE TREE TO POSTS WITH 16" LONG SHALL HAVE A ONE YEAR GUARANTEE COMMENCING UPON PLANTING. SECURE TREE TO POSTS WITH 16" LONG POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE, 40 POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE, 40 MIL., 1.5" WIDE STRAP. 6. ALL PLANTS TO BE SPECIMEN GRADE, MINNESOTA-GROWN AND/OR HARDY. SPECIMEN GRADE SHALL ADHERE TO, BUT IS NOT MIL., 1.5" WIDE STRAP. LIMITED BY, THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS: ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WOUNDS, SCARS, ETC. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM NOTICEABLE GAPS, HOLES, OR DEFORMITIES. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES. TREE WRAP MATERIAL FROM GROUNDLINE ALL PLANTS SHALL HAVE HEAVY, HEALTHY BRANCHING AND LEAFING. UPWARD TO FIRST BRANCHES, AS REQUIRED. CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL HAVE AN ESTABLISHED MAIN LEADER AND A HEIGHT TO WIDTH RATIO OF NO LESS THAN 5:3. PLACE MULCH, DEPTH AS SPECIFIED, OVER PLACE MULCH, DEPTH AS SPECIFIED, OVER PLANT PITS - DO NOT PILE AGAINST TRUNK. 7. PLANTS TO MEET AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1-2014 OR MOST CURRENT VERSION) REQUIREMENTS 2X 2XBALL BALL PLANT PITS - DO NOT PILE AGAINST TRUNK. DIAMETER FOR SIZE AND TYPE SPECIFIED. DIAMETER FORM 3" DEEP WATERING BASIN. FORM 3" DEEP WATERING BASIN. 8. PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER MNLA & ANSI STANDARD PLANTING PRACTICES. BACKFILL PLANT PIT WITH SPECIFIED BACKFILL PLANT PIT WITH SPECIFIED BACKFILL BACKFILL SOIL. SOIL. 9. PLANTS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL AT SITE. PROPERLY HEEL-IN MATERIALS IF NECESSARY; TEMPORARY REFER TO AMERICAN STANDARD FOR REFER TO AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK FOR MINIMUM BALL SIZE. ONLY. NURSERY STOCK FOR MINIMUM BALL SIZE. ROOT FLARE TO BE PLANTED AT OR NEAR ROOT FLARE TO BE PLANTED AT OR NEAR FINISHED GROUNDLINE. 10. PRIOR TO PLANTING, FIELD VERIFY THAT THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR IS LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE BALLED & BURLAP FINISHED GROUNDLINE. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. TREE. IF THIS IS NOT THE CASE, SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED DOWN TO THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR. WHEN THE BALLED & SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. BURLAP TREE IS PLANTED, THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR SHALL BE EVEN OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. SET ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL SET ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL OR COMPACTED SOIL MOUND MATCHING 11. OPEN TOP OF BURLAP ON BB MATERIALS; REMOVE POT ON POTTED PLANTS; SPLIT AND BREAK APART PEAT POTS. OR COMPACTED SOIL MOUND MATCHING TREES NATURAL GROUNDLINE WITH TREES NATURAL GROUNDLINE WITH FINISHED FINISHED SITE GRADE. SITE GRADE. 12. PRUNE PLANTS AS NECESSARY - PER STANDARD NURSERY PRACTICE AND TO CORRECT POOR BRANCHING OF EXISTING AND N.T.S. N.T.S. PROPOSED TREES. LAST REVISED: LAST REVISED: DECIDUOUS TREE 10/19/18 EVERGREEN TREE 10/19/18 13. THE NEED FOR SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED UPON SITE SOIL CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING. LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLANTING CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THE NEED OF ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS. LA28 LA29 14. BACKFILL SOIL AND TOPSOIL TO ADHERE TO MN/DOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION 3877 (SELECT TOPSOIL BORROW) AND TO BE EXISTING TOP SOIL FROM SITE FREE OF ROOTS, ROCKS LARGER THAN ONE INCH, SUBSOIL DEBRIS, AND LARGE WEEDS UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. MINIMUM 4" DEPTH TOPSOIL FOR ALL LAWN GRASS AREAS AND 12" DEPTH TOPSOIL FOR TREE, SHRUBS, AND PERENNIALS. 15. MULCH TO BE AT ALL TREE, SHRUB, PERENNIAL, AND MAINTENANCE AREAS. TREE AND SHRUB PLANTING BEDS SHALL HAVE 4" DEPTH OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO BE USED AROUND ALL PLANTS WITHIN TURF AREAS. PERENNIAL AND ORNAMENTAL GRASS BEDS SHALL HAVE 2" DEPTH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. MULCH TO BE FREE OF DELETERIOUS MATERIAL AND COLORED RED, OR APPROVED EQUAL. ROCK MULCH TO BE BUFF LIMESTONE, 1 1/2" TO 3" DIAMETER, AT MINIMUM 3" DEPTH, OR APPROVED EQUAL. ROCK MULCH TO BE ON COMMERCIAL GRADE FILTER FABRIC, BY TYPAR, OR APPROVED EQUAL WITH NO EXPOSURE. MULCH AND FABRIC TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. MULCH TO MATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS (WHERE APPLICABLE). 16. EDGING TO BE COMMERCIAL GRADE VALLEY-VIEW BLACK DIAMOND (OR EQUAL) POLY EDGING OR SPADED EDGE, AS INDICATED. POLY EDGING SHALL BE PLACED WITH SMOOTH CURVES AND STAKED WITH METAL SPIKES NO GREATER THAN 4 FOOT ON CENTER WITH BASE OF TOP BEAD AT GRADE, FOR MOWERS TO CUT ABOVE WITHOUT DAMAGE. UTILIZE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS FOR EDGING WHERE POSSIBLE. SPADED EDGE TO PROVIDE V-SHAPED DEPTH AND WIDTH TO CREATE SEPARATION BETWEEN MULCH AND GRASS. INDIVIDUAL TREE, SHRUB, OR RAIN-GARDEN BEDS TO BE SPADED EDGE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. EDGING TO MATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS (WHERE APPLICABLE). 17. ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE SODDED OR SEEDED, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PARKING LOT ISLANDS TO BE SODDED WITH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH AROUND ALL TREES AND SHRUBS. SOD TO BE STANDARD MINNESOTA GROWN AND HARDY BLUEGRASS MIX, FREE OF LAWN WEEDS. ALL TOPSOIL AREAS TO BE RAKED TO REMOVE DEBRIS AND ENSURE DRAINAGE. SLOPES OF 3:1 OR GREATER SHALL BE STAKED. SEED AS SPECIFIED AND PER MN/DOT SPECIFICATIONS. IF NOT INDICATED ON LANDSCAPE PLAN, SEE EROSION CONTROL PLAN. 18. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE NECESSARY WATERING OF PLANT MATERIALS UNTIL THE PLANT IS FULLY ESTABLISHED OR IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS OPERATIONAL. OWNER WILL NOT PROVIDE WATER FOR CONTRACTOR. 19. REPAIR, REPLACE, OR PROVIDE SOD/SEED AS REQUIRED FOR ANY ROADWAY BOULEVARD AREAS ADJACENT TO THE SITE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 20. REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY FROM PLANTING OPERATIONS AT NO COST TO OWNER. 21. RAIN GARDEN NOTE: PROVIDE AND INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET AT RAIN GARDEN AREA SIDE SLOPES AFTER ALL PLANTING HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. BLANKET TO BE ONE SEASON GEOJUTE, MN/DOT CATEGORY 2 (STRAW 1S, WOOD FIBER 1S), OR APPROVED EQUAL. BLANKET TO BE OVERLAPPED BY 4" AND ANCHORED BY SOD STAPLES. PLACE BLANKET PERPENDICULAR TO THE SLOPE. TRENCH IN EDGES OF BLANKET AREA TO PREVENT UNDER MINING. PROVIDE SILT FENCE AT TOP OF SLOPE AS NEEDED. SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO MATCH OTHER PROJECT PLANTING MULCH. PLACE 4" DEPTH OF MULCH AT ALL PLANTING AND EROSION CONTROL BLANKET AREA (NO FILTER FABRIC). SEE RAIN GARDEN DETAIL FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. RAIN GARDEN TO PROVIDE PROPER INFILTRATION AND DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS PER ENGINEERS APPROVAL. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N:\0033874.01\DWG\CIVIL\PRELIMINARY\0033874.01C-PLP01.DWG NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION SHEET NUMBER: INITIAL ISSUE: 12/15/25 DESIGNED: TDD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME REVISIONS: PREPARED FOR: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A CHECKED: TDD DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS . . NORTHVIEW PRESERVE 2ND PRELIMINARY OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 17 DRAWN: DJW/CEL Phone (952) 937-5150 12701 Whitewater Drive, Suite #300 OF . . SUMMERGATE COMPANIES LLC ADDITION Fax (952) 937-5822 Minnetonka, MN 55343 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=50' Toll Free (888) 937-5150 LANDSCAPE NOTES & . . CORY L. MEYER 17305 CEDAR AVENUE, SUITE 200 VERTICAL SCALE: 12/15/25 26971 17 . . LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 DATE: LICENSE NO. ROGERS, MN DETAILS DATE: 12/15/25 . . PROJECT NUMBER: 0033874.01 Page 38 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 4.2 COMMISSION Subject: Consider Amendments to Zoning Code Section 125-42 Variances Prepared By: Alec Henderson, City Planner Overview / Background / Analysis City Staff is proposing amendments to Section 125-42 (Variances) of the Rogers Zoning Code to align the City’s variance criteria with the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 462.357, Subd. 6. The proposed changes are set forth in Ordinance No. 2026-09, which has been reviewed by the City Attorney. In 2011, the Minnesota Legislature amended § 462.357, Subd. 6 (Laws 2011, ch. 19) in response to the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision in Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka, 783 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. 2010). That amendment replaced the “undue hardship” variance standard with a “practical difficulties” standard and defined the term using a three-factor test: (1) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the ordinance; (2) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and (3) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The amendment also clarified that conditions imposed on variances must be directly related to, and bear a rough proportionality to, the impact created by the variance. The current language in Sec. 125-42(c) has not been adequately updated to reflect these statutory changes and contains several provisions that do not align with state law. Specifically, the existing criteria still reference the outdated “non-economic undue hardship” standard, include two extra-statutory findings—a public interest balancing test in (c)(5) and an “injurious to other property / orderly subdivision” test in (c)(6)—that have no basis in § 462.357, Subd. 6 and are not part of the League of Minnesota Cities model ordinance framework. Summary of Proposed Changes to Sec 125-42 Subsection (a) — Purpose. Replaces “literal provisions” with “requirements” to mirror the statute’s language. Adds a reference to Comprehensive Plan consistency and clarifies the “practical difficulties” framework established by the 2011 statutory amendments. Subsection (b) — Procedure. Minor updates including changing “may refer” to “shall refer” in (b)(2) to clarify that Planning Commission referral to City Council is mandatory rather than discretionary. In (b)(4), “Board” is replaced with “City Council” to reflect the Page 39 of 140City’s current practice. Subsection (c) — Criteria for Granting a Variance. This subsection contains the most substantive changes: The introductory clause is revised to remove “include, but are not limited to” language, which implied the listed criteria were merely illustrative. Because variance findings are a quasi-judicial function, the criteria should be definitive and tied directly to the statutory standard. Criterion (c)(2) replaces the outdated “non-economic undue hardship” standard with “practical difficulties” and defines the term using the three-factor test from § 462.357, Subd. 6: reasonable use, unique circumstances not created by the landowner, and no alteration of the essential character of the locality. The former (c)(3) and (c)(4), which addressed uniqueness and essential character as standalone criteria, are consolidated into the three-factor test under (c)(2). Former criteria (c)(5) and (c)(6) are deleted. The public interest balancing test in (c)(5) and the “injurious to other property / orderly subdivision” test in (c)(6) have no basis in § 462.357, Subd. 6 and are not part of the League of Minnesota Cities model variance framework. These extra-statutory criteria introduce subjective policy considerations into what should be a quasi-judicial determination and could expose the City to legal challenge if a denial relied upon them. New criteria (c)(3) through (c)(6) codify provisions expressly stated in the statute that were previously absent from the Rogers code: the economic considerations limitation, the solar access and earth-sheltered construction provisions, the prohibition on use variances, and the proportionality standard for conditions imposed on approved variances. Staff Recommendation This is a public hearing. Discuss the proposed changes and recommend approval of the ordinance amendments to City Council. Possible motion: Motion to recommend approval of Ordinance 2026-09, amending Sec. 125-42 Variances, to City Council. Financial Impact: NA Source Fund: NA Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation Page 40 of 140A. Ord 2026-09 - Amending Sec 125-42-Variances Page 41 of 140 CITY OF ROGERS ORDINANCE NO. 2026-09 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROGERS CITY CODE SECTION 125-42 VARIANCES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROGERS, MINNESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 125-42 Variances is hereby amended. The strikethrough text indicates removal of text and the underlined text indicates added text: Sec. 125-42. Variances (a) Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to provide for deviations from the literal requirements provisions of this Chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Variances for subdivision shall be granted only with respect to the standards for subdivision plat approval, and not for the process for obtaining subdivision plat approval. VARIANCES Note limitations in Code Prohibited form of function Page 1 of 3 Page 42 of 140(b) Procedure. (1) The applicant shall fill out and submit to the Zoning Administrator the application form and all information as required on the form unless a waiver of certain information is granted by the Zoning Administrator. (2) The Zoning Administrator shall refer the application to the Planning Commission for review, which then may shall refer it to the City Council. Application & Fee required (3) The application will be subject to the procedure outlined in Sec. 125-21. General Review Procedures. (4) The Board City Council shall make written findings of fact in any case of an application for a variance and shall state therein the reasons for its decision; the order issued shall include the legal description of the land involved. Any such order shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator. (5) No application for the same variance as ruled upon by the City Council shall be resubmitted for a period of 12 months from the date of denial of the previous application unless there has been a substantial change in circumstances as it relates to the request. Note limitations in Code (6) An approved variance will become null and void if after 1 year no construction begins that is related to the variance unless an extension is granted by City Council. (c) Criteria for granting a variance. The Planning Commission shall hear and the City Council shall make findings of fact that the proposed variance from the literal provisions of this Chapter be granted or denied pursuant to the requirements of Minn. Stats. Section 462.357 and any amendments thereto, which include, but are not limited to the following considerations review and make a recommendation and the City Council shall make findings of fact on whether to grant or deny the proposed variance. Variances shall only be permitted when the applicant demonstrates the following criteria are met pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 462.357, Subd. 6: (1) Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of City code and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (2) Variances may only be permitted when the The applicant establishes that there are non-economic undue hardship in complying with the zoning ordinance, meaning the property owner proposes to use the lot or parcel in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code. practical difficulties in complying with this Chapter. “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: i. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner; and iii. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Page 2 of 3 Page 43 of 140 (3) The plight of the property owner must be due to circumstances that are unique to the lot or parcel and is not created by the property owner. (4) The variances must not alter the essential character of the locality including all zoning district and overlay district provisions. (5) Under the circumstances, the public interest underlying the proposed variance outweighs the public interest underlying the particular regulation for which the variance is granted; and (6) The granting of the variance will not be injurious to other property and will not prevent the orderly subdivision of other property in the area in accordance with these regulations. (3) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. (4) Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minn Stat. Section 216.06, Subd. 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. (5) A variance shall not permit any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zoning district where the subject property is located. (6) The City Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately after its passage and publication in accordance with applicable law. Dated the 14th day of April, 2026. _______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk Page 3 of 3 Page 44 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 4.3 COMMISSION Subject: Consider Amendments to Sec. 125-54, 125-55, and 125-84 Related to Accessory Structures and Fences Prepared By: Alec Henderson, City Planner Overview / Background / Analysis City Staff is proposing ordinance amendments to Section 125-84 as it relates to accessory structures and fences. The City has received multiple variance requests related to accessory structure size and number. When variances are repeatedly requested and approved, it is generally an indication that code amendments are warranted to respond to changes in market conditions or community attitudes toward a regulation. In response to these recurring variances, the City is proposing to increase permitted accessory structure sizes in the AG District, R1 District, and R2 district parcels over 2 acres. Following Planning Commission review, the City Council directed additional amendments including: allowing detached accessory structures to be located in the front yard or side yard of residential properties (subject to the front setback of the applicable district), and increasing the maximum detached accessory structure size for R2 properties under 2 acres from 528 to 650 square feet. The changes to fences are proposed for a number of reasons. The City has already administratively ceased requiring permits or fees for residential fences at or under 6 feet in height. Fences over 7 feet require a building permit per building code, and are currently only permitted on non-residential properties. Despite prior requirements for fence permit submittals with site plans, multiple property line disputes have arisen in connection with fence installations. The City does not have a licensed surveyor on staff and therefore cannot legally resolve property boundary disputes. Additionally, the City has not conducted fence installation inspections for residential fences, nor is there staff capacity to do so. In order to align code with current practice and reduce administrative burden, the City proposes codifying relaxed fence standards. Primary Issues to Consider 1. Proposed changes to the accessory structures section 2. Proposed changes to the fences section Analysis of Primary Issues 1. Proposed Changes to Accessory Structures — Section 125-84(a) Page 45 of 140Size increases — AG District. The bulk of the size changes are to accessory structure allotments in the AG and R1 districts. Based on past variance approvals, staff recommends doubling the square footage allotment for AG properties up to 1.99 acres, increasing allotments to approximately 2% of base acreage for properties between 2.00 and 4.99 acres, and approximately 1.5% of base acreage for larger thresholds. Agriculturally Zoned Properties Acreage Square Feet (proposed) Up to 1.99 800 1,600 2.00 - 3.99 1,300 1,800 4.00 - 4.99 1,700 2,600 5.00 - 6.99 1,900 3,200 7.00 - 7.99 3,100 4,500 8.00 - 8.99 3,600 5,200 9.00 - 9.99 3,900 7,800 10.00 + 4,200 8,700 Size increases — R1 District (and R2 parcels over 2 acres). The Planning Commission reviewed and supported the same size increases for R1 as for AG, but recommended a modest reduction in allotments for properties of 5 acres and above, calibrated to approximately 1.4% of base acreage. The Commission also recommended adding a Conditional Use Permit pathway to allow up to 2% of base acreage without requiring a variance. Staff supports this mechanism as a more proportionate and efficient process than the variance route. R1 Properties (and R2 properties over 2 acres) Acreage Square Feet (proposed) Up to 1.99 800 1,600 2.00 - 3.99 1,300 1,800 4.00 - 4.99 1,700 2,600 5.00 - 6.99 1,900 3,000 7.00 - 7.99 3,150 4,200 8.00 - 8.99 3,600 4,800 9.00 - 9.99 3,900 5,500 10.00 + 4,200 6,000 CUP pathway example: A homeowner with 7.5 acres in the R1 District seeking more than the 4,200 sq. ft. base allotment could apply for a Conditional Use Permit for up to 6,098 sq. ft. (2% of base acreage). Square footage above that threshold would require a variance. Council-directed changes — front and side yard placement. Following Planning Commission review, the City Council directed an amendment to allow detached accessory structures to be located in the front yard or side yard of properties in the AG, R1, R2, R3, and R4 districts, provided the structure meets the front setback of the applicable zoning district. This change eliminates the prior prohibition on front yard and Page 46 of 140side yard placement for detached accessory structures in urban residential districts. The district tables in Sections 125-54 and 125-55 have been amended accordingly to add an explicit front setback line for accessory structures and to remove the prior rear- yard-only restriction. The use standards in Section 125-84(a)(3) are amended to remove the CUP requirement for non-rear-yard placement and replace it with a direct reference to the applicable district setback standards. Council-directed changes — R2 urban residential detached structure size. For R2, R3, and R4 parcels under 2 acres, the maximum size for a detached accessory structure is increased from 528 to 650 square feet, reflecting current market expectations for usable storage and garage space on smaller urban lots. Other changes to accessory structures include: • Increasing the permitted number of accessory structures by one for R1 and AG properties: up to two structures on parcels of 3 acres or less, and up to three structures on parcels greater than 3 acres. • Clarification of how lot area is calculated for accessory structure sizing purposes, including removal of wetlands from the exclusion and addition of a cross- reference to Chapter 109 (Wetland Protection) for wetland setback compliance. • Reduction of internal inconsistencies between setback requirements across sections. • Revised language for attached garages in the urban residential district, limiting attached garage size to the footprint of the habitable area of the home, with an administrative exception for tuck-under garages. • Removal of the 10% rear yard coverage cap for detached accessory structures in urban residential districts, which became redundant and inconsistent with front and side yard placement now being permitted. • Correction of the internal cross-reference for R2 parcels over 2 acres to properly cite §125-84(a)(2) and §125-84(a)(3) in lieu of the prior shorthand format. 2. Proposed Changes to Fences — Section 125-84(f) The fence section has been substantially reorganized and updated. The substantive changes are as follows: • Permit threshold raised: only fences 7 feet or taller require a permit. Residential fences at or under 6 feet no longer require a permit, consistent with current administrative practice. • Front yard — decorative fences now expressly permitted: Decorative fences not exceeding 4 feet in height and 50% opacity are permitted anywhere in the front yard. Such fences must not serve as an enclosure. Permitted decorative fence styles include split rail, picket, and brick; chain-link is not permitted in the front yard. • Side and rear yards: Privacy and decorative fences up to 6 feet are permitted. Any fence style and opacity is permitted in these yards. Chain-link fences remain permitted at a maximum of 4 feet in height with a minimum gauge of 11. Page 47 of 140 • Corner lots: The prior fence-specific traffic visibility triangle (30-foot measurement) is replaced with a cross-reference to the existing traffic control standard in Section 125-83(c)(7), which applies a 50-foot sight line. Decorative fences not exceeding 4 feet in height and 50% opacity are deemed not to materially impede vision for purposes of that section. • Easements: Fences may encroach into drainage and utility easements at the owner’s risk. The City may require removal at owner’s expense for maintenance access. Fences shall not be placed in trail easements. • Reorganization: Requirements are now grouped by context (general requirements, residential performance standards, residential design requirements, residential land use separation, commercial and industrial areas) for improved clarity. • Best practices: A new advisory subsection recommends joint maintenance agreements for shared boundary fences and encourages property owners to notify neighbors of fence improvements. The City recommends informing neighbors of planned fence work and notes that property line disputes remain the responsibility of the owners to resolve. • The Planning Commission recommended additional clarification to subsection titles, addition of the best practices section, and exempting decorative brick fences from opacity restrictions. These recommendations are reflected in the final ordinance. Staff Recommendation This is a public hearing. Staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance amendments to Section 125-84 as presented, incorporating the Council-directed changes to front and side yard accessory structure placement and the R2 detached structure size increase, along with the fence section updates described above. Possible motion: Motion to approve Ordinance 2026-04, amending City Code Sections 125-54, 125-55, and 125-84 related to accessory structures and fences. Financial Impact: NA Source Fund: NA Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Ord 2026-04 Sec._125_84.___Accessory_Use_Standards-Rev_Final B. Rogers_Fence_Requirements_Handout C. Resolution 2026-21 Authorizing Summary Publication of Ordinance 2026-04 Page 48 of 140 CITY OF ROGERS ORDINANCE NO. 2026-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROGERS CITY CODE SECTION 125-54, 125-55 AND 125-84 RELATED TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND FENCES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROGERS, MINNESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The district table in Section 125-54 are hereby amended. The strikethrough text indicates removal of text and the underlined text indicates added text: Table 5. AG - AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT a. LOT STANDARDS a.1 Lot Size - 20 acre min. a.2 Lot Coverage - NA. a.3 Lot Width - 200 feet min. b. BUILDING HEIGHT b.1 Principal Building - 35 ft. max. b.2 Accessory Building - 30 ft. max.* Maximum heights for various roof types are detailed in Sec. 125-85. Lot and Building Standards: Design Elements. * This height limitation shall not apply to grain elevators, silos, windmills, elevator lags, cooling towers, water towers, chimneys and smokestacks, church spires, or electric transmission lines. Accessory buildings shall not contain dwelling units. c. SETBACKS PRINCIPAL BUILDING Principal buildings shall be distanced from the lot lines as shaded. c.1 Front Setback, 30 ft. min.** c.2 Side (Street) Setback, Same as Front Setback. c.3 Side (Interior) Setback, 20 ft. min. c.4 Rear Setback, 40 ft. min. ** Principal front setback, adjacent to collector street or higher classification: 75 feet. Attached front porches, uncovered steps or stoops shall be allowed to encroach 10 feet maximum within front yard setback. Overhangs may encroach 2 feet within front yard setbacks. Page 1 of 16 Page 49 of 140 d. SETBACKS ACCESSORY*** Accessory buildings or structures such as sheds or garages, off-street parking and trash/refuse containers shall be distanced from the lot lines as shown by diagonal hatching. d.1 Front Setback, 30 ft. min.*** d.2 Side (Street) Setback, 30 ft. min. d.3 Side (Interior) Setback, 20 ft. min. d.4 Rear Setback, 20 ft. min. ***All accessory farm structures shall require a 75 foot minimum setback for all required setbacks and shall be a minimum of 50 feet from any principal structure. Agricultural District lots must be served by septic and well: Lot area shall be adequate for primary and alternate treatment system, and well system. SECTION 2. The district tables in Section 125-55 are hereby amended. The strikethrough text indicates removal of text and the underlined text indicates added text: Table 6. R1 - RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT a. LOT STANDARDS a.1 Lot Size - 1 acre minimum. a.2 Lot Size, for future development in a ghost plat - 10,000 sq. ft. min. a.3 Lot Coverage - 75% max. a.4 Lot Width - 100 feet min. b. BUILDING HEIGHT* b.1 Principal Building - 35 ft. max. b.2 Accessory Building - 30 ft. max.* Maximum heights for various roof types are detailed in Sec. 125-85. Lot and Building Standards: Design Elements. * This height limitation shall not apply to grain elevators, silos, windmills, elevator lags, cooling towers, water towers, chimneys and smokestacks, church spires, or electric transmission lines. Accessory buildings shall not contain dwelling units Page 2 of 16 Page 50 of 140 c. SETBACKS PRINCIPAL BUILDING** Principal buildings shall be distanced from the lot lines as shaded. c.1 Principal FontFront Setback, 30 ft. min.*** c.2 Side (Street) Setback, Same as Front Setback c.3 Side (Interior), 10 ft. min. c.4 Rear Setback, 20 ft. min. **For setbacks adjacent to County, State, and Federal roadways, see City Code Sec. 125-83C.8 ***Principal font setback, adjacent to collector street or higher classification: 75 feet. Attached front porches, uncovered steps or stoops shall be allowed to encroach 10 feet maximum within front yard setback. Overhangs may encroach 2 feet within front yard setbacks. d. SETBACKS ACCESSORY*** d.1 Front Setback, 25 ft. min. d.1 d.2 Side (Street)Setback, 20 ft. min.**** d.2 d.3 Side (Interior), 10 ft. min. d.3 d.4 Rear Setback, 20 ft. min. ***Lots five acres or larger may have detached accessory structures in the front yard or side yard with street frontage, provided the accessory is setback at least 200 feet from the road right-of- way. ****In no instance shall an accessory structure on a corner lot be located closer to the road right-of-way than an adjacent primary structure fronting the same road right-of-way. Rural Residential District lots must be served by septic and well: Lot area shall be adequate for primary and alternate treatment system, and well system. … Table 7. R2 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Page 3 of 16 Page 51 of 140 a. LOT STANDARDS a.1 Lot Size - 10,000 sq. ft. min. a.2 Lot Coverage - 75% max a.3 Lot Width - 65 ft. min. b. BUILDING HEIGHT and CONFIGURATION b.1 Principal Building - 35 ft. max. b.2 Accessory Building - 15 ft. max. Maximum heights for various roof types are detailed in Sec. 125-85. Lot and Building Standards: Design Elements. Attached accessory structures shall be limited in size to 100% of the principal structure. c. SETBACKS PRINCIPAL BUILDING* Principal buildings shall be distanced from the lot lines as shaded. c.1 Principal Front Setback, 25 ft. min. c.2 Side (Street) Setback, Same as Front Setback. c.3 Side (Interior), 10 ft. min. c.4 Rear Setback, 20 ft. min. *Principal front setback, adjacent to City collector street or higher classification: 35 feet. For setbacks adjacent to County, State, and Federal roadways, see City Code Sec. 125-83C.8 Attached front porches, uncovered steps or stoops shall be allowed to encroach 10 feet maximum within front d. SETBACKS ACCESSORY d.1 Front Setback, 25 ft. min d.1 d.2 Side (Street) Setback, 25 ft. min.* d.2 d.3 Side (Interior) 5 ft. min. d.3 d.4 Rear Setback, 10 ft. min. *In no instance shall an accessory structure on a corner lot be located closer to the road right-of- way than an adjacent primary structure fronting the same road right-of-way. Page 4 of 16 Page 52 of 140 Minimum separation between all structures on adjacent parcels shall be 15 feet. Detached accessory structures such as garages shall be placed in the rear yard. … Table 8. R3 - MID-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT a. LOT STANDARDS a.1 Lot Size per unit - single-family detached - 7,200 sq. ft. min. a.2 Lot Size per unit- twin home, detached townhome - 7,000 sq. ft. min. a.3 Lot Size per unit - attached townhome, duplex, triplex, quad - 5,000 sq. ft. min. a.4 Lot Coverage - 75% max. a.5 Lot Width - single-family detached - 65 ft. max. a.6 Lot Width - twin home - 100 ft. min. base lot a.7 Lot Width - duplex, triplex, quad - 110 ft. min. a.8 Lot Width - attached townhome - 110 ft. min. base lot. b. BUILDING HEIGHT b.1 Principal Building - 35 ft. max. b.2 Accessory Building - 15 ft. max. Maximum heights for various roof types are detailed in Sec. 125-85. Lot and Building Standards: Design Elements. c. SETBACKS PRINCIPAL BUILDING Principal buildings shall be distanced from the lot lines as shaded.* c.1 Principal Front Setback, 25 ft. min. c.2 Side (Street) Setback, Same as Front Setback. c.3 Side (Interior), 10 ft. min. c.4 Rear Setback, 20 ft. min. Attached front porches, uncovered steps or stoops shall be allowed to encroach 10 feet maximum within front yard setback. Overhangs may encroach 2 feet within front yard setbacks. *For setbacks adjacent to County, State, and Federal roadways, see City Code Sec. 125-83C.8 Page 5 of 16 Page 53 of 140 d. SETBACKS ACCESSORY d.1 Front Setback, 25 ft. min d.1 d.2 Side (Street) Setback, 25 ft. min.* d.2 d.3 Side (Interior) 5 ft. min. d.3 d.4 Rear Setback, 10 ft. min. * In no instance shall an accessory structure on a corner lot be located closer to the road right-of- way than an adjacent primary structure fronting the same road right-of-way. Detached accessory structures such as garages shall be placed in the side or rear yard of twin homes, detached townhomes, attached townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, or quad lots. … Table 9. R4 - MIXED DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT a. LOT STANDARDS a.1 Lot Size - Lot size varies and may be flexible provided Land Use density minimums are met a.2 Lot Coverage - 75% max. a.3 Lot Width - twin homes - 40 ft. per unit min. / all other residential — 50 ft. min. b. BUILDING HEIGHT b.1 Principal Building - NA b.2 Accessory Building - 15 ft. max. Maximum heights for various roof types are detailed in Sec. 125-85. Lot and Building Standards: Design Elements. c. SETBACKS PRINCIPAL BUILDING Principal buildings shall be distanced from the lot lines as shaded.* c.1 Principal Front Setback, 25 ft. min. c.2 Side (Street) Setback, Same as Front Setback. Page 6 of 16 Page 54 of 140 c.3 Side (Interior), 5 ft. min. c.4 Rear Setback, 20 ft. min. or 30 ft. min multi- family residential. *For setbacks adjacent to County, State, and Federal roadways, see City Code Sec. 125-83C.8 d. SETBACKS - ACCESSORY d.1 Front Setback, 25 ft. min d.1 d.2 Side (Street) Setback, 25 ft. min.* d.2 d.3 Side (Interior) 5 ft. min. d.3 d.4 Rear Setback, 10 ft. min. * In no instance shall an accessory structure on a corner lot be located closer to the road right-of- way than an adjacent primary structure fronting the same road right-of-way. Accessory buildings for multi-family developments, including any structure not attached directly or via an enclosed, covered walkway to the principal structure, must be approved as part of the initial site plan. Detached accessory structures such as garages shall be placed in the side or rear yard for any non- single-family lot unless otherwise approved by as part of the initial site plan. … Table 10. R5 - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT a. LOT STANDARDS a.1 Lot Size - 1 acre a.2 Lot Coverage - 75% max. a.3 Lot Width - 150 ft. min. b. BUILDING HEIGHT b.1 Principal Building - No max. b.2 Accessory Building - 15 ft. max. Maximum heights for various roof types are Page 7 of 16 Page 55 of 140 detailed in Sec. 125-85. Lot and Building Standards: Design Elements. c. SETBACKS PRINCIPAL BUILDING & ACCESSORY Principal buildings shall be distanced from the lot lines as shaded.* c.1 Principal Front Setback, 25 ft. min. c.2 Side (Street) Setback, Same as Front Setback. c.3 Side (Interior), 15 ft. min. c.4 Rear Setback, 25 ft. min. Attached uncovered steps or stoops shall be allowed to encroach 10 feet maximum within front yard setback. Overhangs may encroach 2 feet within front yard setbacks. Encroachment into the side yard setback shall require a variance Accessory structures may only be located behind the principal structure. *For setbacks adjacent to County, State, and Federal roadways, see City Code Sec. 125-83C.8 d. SETBACKS - PARKING d.1 Side (Street), 25 ft. min. d.2 Side (Interior), 5 ft. min. d.3 Rear Setback, 10 ft. min Off-street parking and trash/refuse containers shall be distanced from the lot lines as shown by diagonal hatching. Accessory buildings for multi-family developments, including pool houses, common rooms and other shared amenity spaces, must be approved as part of the initial site plan. SECTION 3. Section 125-84 (a) Accessory Structures, and Section 125-84 (f) Fences are hereby amended. The strikethrough text indicates removal of text and the underlined text indicates added text: Sec. 125-84. Accessory Use Standards (a) Accessory structures. (1) AG district standards. Page 8 of 16 Page 56 of 140 a. Accessory structures associated with active agricultural activities on properties greater than ten acres in size shall not be limited in size or number allowed but must follow all other provisions herein. b. In agriculture zoning districts, an administrative site plan shall accompany all requests for accessory structures but construction shall be exempt from building permit fees for all structures for the use of legitimate farming operations, including sheltering animals, agricultural machinery and storage of agricultural products, but this exemption is not intended to include horse barns, commercial stables, or other activities not qualifying as active farming. Administrative review of the application and site plan is required. c. Maximum size of detached accessory structures: Table 20. AG - Detached Structure Size Allowed. TABLE 20. AG - DETACHED STRUCTURE SIZE ALLOWED Acreage Square Feet 1.00 Up to 1.99 800 1,600 2.00 - 3.99 1,300 1,800 4.00 - 4.99 1,700 2,600 5.00 - 6.99 1,900 3,200 7.00 - 7.99 3,100 4,500 8.00 - 8.99 3,600 5,200 9.00 - 9.99 3,900 7,800 10.00 + 4,200 8,700 (2) R1 districts standards. a. OneTwo private garages or accessory structure on parcels of three acres or less. b. Up to two three private garages or accessory structures on parcels greater than three acres. c. An accessory structure shall be considered attached to the principal building if it is within 6 ft. or less from the principal building. d. No portion of the accessory structure shall be closer than six ft. to another structure or building on the same property. e. The following criteria shall be used to determine the maximum square footage for accessory structures: 1. When determining lot size, wetlands and lakes shall not be included in the lot area. The City may require a Wetland Delineation prior to issuing a permit to ensure wetland setbacks are met per Chapter 109 – WETLAND PROTECTION. 2. Attached garages shall not be considered as part of the maximum accessory building square footage. 3. Lean-tos, carports and open wall structures are to be included in the calculation of total square footage, except gazebos. f. Accessory structures may exceed the height of the principal building, with the approval of a variance conditional use permit. g. All detached accessory structures are to be used for personal use only. No commercial use or commercial related storage is allowed in residential zoning without a conditional or Interim Use Permit. h. Maximum size of accessory structures in R1 zoning district: See Table 21. R1 - Detached Structure Size Allowed. Page 9 of 16 Page 57 of 140 TABLE 21. R1 - DETACHED STRUCTURE SIZE ALLOWED Acreage Square Feet 1.00 Up to 1.99 800 1600 2.00 - 3.99 1,300 1,800 4.00 - 4.99 1,700 2,600 5.00 - 6.99 1,900 3,000 7.00 - 7.99 3,1504,200 8.00 - 8.99 3,6004,800 9.00 - 9.99 3,9005,500 10.00 + 4,2006,000 i. A conditional use permit may be approved to exceed accessory structure size in the given acreage bracket provided the accessory structure square footage does not exceed 2% of the base acreage. Accessory structures may exceed 2% of the base acreage with the approval of a variance. (3) Urban residential district standards (R2, R3, R4 Districts, parcels less than 2 acres). a. One detached accessory structure is allowed per lot residential lot. Commercial uses shall not be permitted within accessory buildings with the exception of lawful Home Occupations as regulated by this section. b. No detached accessory storage type building shall be located in any yard other than a rear yard except by Conditional Use PermitDetached accessory structures shall meet the minimum setback requirements for accessory uses or structure as required in the underlying zoning district (Sec. 125-55). c. In the event the accessory structure is movable, the structure may be placed in the side or rear yard but not closer than five feet to the lot line. d. No accessory structure shall exceed 10% of the available rear yard measured from the rear of the residence (extending in straight lines) to the side lot lines. e.d. No accessory structure shall exceed the height of the principal building. f.e. An accessory structure shall be considered an integral part of the principal building if it is connected to the principal building by a covered, enclosed passageway built on a slab or other suitable foundation. g.f. No detached accessory structure shall be located closer than six ft. from the principal structure. h.g. No attached private garage used or intended for the storage of passenger automobiles shall exceed 1,150 sq. ft. of gross area the footprint of the habitable area home for a one-family dwelling. One-family and two-family dwellings are required to have two enclosed spaces per unit attached to the dwelling. Exceptions to garage footprint restrictions may be granted by the Zoning Administrator in the cases of tuck under garages provided the gross square footage of the garage does not exceed the gross square footage of the habitable portion of the home. The intent of this provision is the ensure that there is not more attached garage than home in Urban Residential Districts. i.h. When a private garage is oriented so as to face onto a public street, it shall not be less than 20 ft. from the front lot line Private garages shall meet the setback requirements of the of the properties zoning district. j.i. No detached accessory structure, excluding decks not enclosed and covered shall be greater than 528 650 sq. ft. Page 10 of 16 Page 58 of 140 k. In no case shall a detached accessory structure be located in a required front yard or a required side yard paralleling the depth of the principal structure. l.j. An accessory structure shall not be a pole barn nor of pole barn type construction, except in the R1 zoning district or on R2 parcels over 2 acres. On residential lots outside of the R1 district, a permitted accessory structure exceeding 200 sq. ft. in size shall be an on-site custom-made stick- built structure, and is to mean a structure which is wholly constructed on the lot. A structure shall be deemed constructed on the lot if 90% of the value of the structure is constructed on the lot from individual block, board, plywood, siding, roofing, finishing and other individual construction materials. Value shall be measured on the basis of the cost of the materials used in the construction of the structure. m.k. On any property in the Single Family Residential (R2) zoning district that is over 2 acres in area (not including wetlands), the Rural Residential (R1) district standards in §125-84A.2 §125-84(a)(2). shall apply to accessory structures, and the R2 district standards detailed in §125-84A.3§125-84(a)(3). shall not apply. All other applicable standards not specifically mentioned in this ordinance shall still apply to such a property. (4) In commercial and industrial districts:. a. No accessory structure shall exceed the height of the principal building except by Conditional Use Permit. b. Accessory structures may be located any place in the rear yard of the principal building subject to the building code and the fire zone regulations. c. Accessory structures shall not exceed ten% of the gross floor area of the principal structure except after obtaining a Conditional Use Permit authorizing the same. (5) In all districts:. a. No accessory structure or use shall be constructed or developed on a lot prior to construction of the principal building, except as approved by the City Council. b. Where the natural grade of a lot at the building line is eight feet or more above the established curb level, a private garage may be erected within any yard provided one-half or more of its height is below grade level and it is not located less than 10 ft. from any street line. c. Accessory structures located on lake or stream frontage lots may be located between the public road and the principal structure provided it is clearly demonstrated that physical conditions require such a location. In no event, however, shall the structure be located closer than the required front setback of the district 20 ft. to the public road right-of-way. The more restrictive of requirements shall apply for all properties located in the shoreland overlay district. d. A site plan shall be submitted with all requests for detached accessory structures. Accessory structures in excess of 200 sq. ft. or more, or on a permanent foundation, shall require the issuance of a building permit and be subject to all requirements in this Section. Less than 200 sq ft shall may require zoning review. Site plans must include the following information (and other information required by zoning officials): 1. Existing buildings and their relationship to property lines. 2. Indication of location for well, septic system and driveways. 3. Any easements. 4. Property lines and setback requirements. 5. Rural or agricultural lots requiring an on-site septic system area by the building inspector, shall include the location of a certified alternate septic system area in accordance with the applicable codes for on-site sewage treatment. Page 11 of 16 Page 59 of 140 e. All detached accessory structures shall be both designed and constructed to meet minimum standards as required for residential accessory structures under the state building code, compatible with the principal building and general neighborhood environments, including, but not limited to, exterior finish, materials, overhangs, soffits and fascia. f. All accessory structures shall be constructed to comply with the following side wall height, eaves and overhang restrictions: TABLE 22. SIDE WALL HEIGHT RESTRICTION Height (ft) Eaves (in) minimum Overhang (in) minimum 10 or less 12 12 12 or less 12 18 14 or less 12 18 g. Accessory structures shall not be placed within the setback or buffer areas of delineated wetlands. (6) Interpretation; abrogation and greater restrictions. It is not the intention of this Section to interfere with, advocate or annul any covenant or any other agreement between any parties; provided, however, where this Section imposes a greater restriction upon the use of the premises for detached accessory structures than are imposed or required by other ordinances, rules or regulations or permits, or by covenants or agreements, the provisions of this ordinance shall govern. …. (f) Fences. (1) Intent of fence regulations. The purpose of this Section is to enact minimum restrictions on fencing necessary to ensure orderly and attractive development, to enhance "curb appeal" from city streets, to protect the health and welfare of the citizens, to allow free flow of air, and to prohibit unreasonable restrictions while allowing each property owner to protect their property in privacy. (2) Fence permit required. a. Permit required. Except as otherwise provided herein, no person shall erect, alter or relocate any fence of 7 feet or taller within the City without first having been issued a permit therefor. b. Permit fee. A fee as set forth by the City Fee Schedule shall be charged for a permit under this subdivision for new fences, as well as the replacement of fences in the same location. c. Application procedures. Each application for a permit under this subdivision shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator or his designee on forms provided for by the City. Each application shall include a site plan drawn to scale showing the location of the houses, garages and other structures on the lot and location of the fencing to be erected, altered or relocated. d. Best practices. When fences are intended to mark a shared property boundary and are on the property line, a joint maintenance agreement should be considered. If the property owner intends to maintain both sides of the fence, enough room should be provided along the property boundary to maintain the lawn on either side of the fence. The city recommends informing neighbors of fence improvements. Any property line disputes are the responsibility of the homeowners to resolve. (3) General requirements for all fences in all districts. a. New construction, maintenance, and design requirements. 1. Fencing shall be constructed and maintained so as not to endanger life or property. Any fence which through lack of repair, type of construction, or which otherwise imperils Page 12 of 16 Page 60 of 140 health, life, property, or the aesthetic quality of a neighborhood shall be deemed a public nuisance. 2. The side of the fence considered to be the face shall face abutting property. The face shall be defined as the finished side of the fence rather than the side with structural supports. 3. If fencing is built away from a property line, property on both sides of the fence must be maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. (4) Requirements for residential areas. a. General design requirements. 1. The use of barbed wire, or of any electrical current is prohibited. 2. If a chainlinkchain-link fence is constructed, it shall have a minimum gauge of 11. 3. Residential fences shall not exceed 6 feet in height. 4. Traffic visibility requirements. On any corner lot, fences shall meet the requirements of Sec. 125-83(c)(7), traffic control, 5. Drainage and Utility Easements and Stormwater Management. Fences may encroach into drainage and utility easements, however, placement is at the owners risk. If maintenance is required within the easement area, the cost of moving or removal of the fence will be the responsibility of the owner. Fences should not be placed within pond maintenance routes or should be designed to be removeable. In no case shall the fence cause drainage patterns to change which impacts stormwater management or impact physical public infrastructure such as utility pipes. 6. Other easements. Fences shall not be placed in Trail Easements. Encroachment into any other jurisdictions’ easement (pipeline, gas, electric) is at the discretion of the easement holder. b. Rear yard boundary fenceResidential Fence Performance Standards. 1. Height restrictions. A rear or side yard boundary fence shall not exceed six feet in height. 2. Required yard location. i. A rear yard boundary fence shall be permitted only within the rear yard, except where rear yard access from the principal building is achieved from an entrance/exit to a side yard. In such instances, a rear yard boundary fence is permitted in the side yard to a distance not greater than three feet closer to the front lot line than the entrance/exit Privacy fences, or decorative fences in excess of 4 ft shall not be permitted in the front yard. ii. Should a corner lot have a rear lot line in common with the side lot line of an abutting lot, the boundary fence shall meet the principal structure's required side yard setback for corner lots. No fence may extend closer to the street than the front yard setback line, except as follows: (A). Decorative fencing is allowed in the front yard if no higher than 4 feet and not designed or serving as an enclosure. Decorative fencing includes such things as split rail, pricket and brick fences, but not such things as chain link fences. (B). A fence may be placed in the front yard of a corner lot which abuts an residential or arterial street, but shall meet traffic visibility requirements. Decorative fences not exceeding 4 feet in height and 50% opacity shall not be deemed to materially impede vision for purposes of this section. Page 13 of 16 Page 61 of 140 3. Traffic visibility requirements. On any corner lot, no fence shall be erected in the triangle formed by the front lot line, side street lot line, and a third straight line joining points on such property lines 30 feet from their intersection at the corner of the lot when such action would impede vision above a height of 2½ feet above the centerline grades of the adjacent streets. c. Fences for the separation of residential land uses. 1. Explanation. Fences used for screening may be required where a property zoned R-4 or R-5 abuts a property zoned AG, R-1, R-2, or R-3. 2. Height restrictions. The screening required shall consist of a continuous fence or wall at least six but not more than eight feet in height. 3. Construction and design requirements. i. The screening fence required shall have an opacity of at least 75%. ii. A louvered fence shall be considered adequate if it blocks vision from a 90- degree angle to the fence. iii. Plant materials of a type approved by the community development department may also be required in addition to, or in lieu of, fencing. cd. Decorative fencesDesign Requirements for Fences. 1. Height restrictions. A decorative fence, shall not exceed four feet in height within the limits of the front and side yards. Fence types. Fences may be a variety of styles: privacy, decorative, chain-link. However, in no case shall a chain-link fence be erected at a height in excess of 4 feet. 2. Required yard location Opacity of Decorative Fences. Decorative fences shall have an opacity of no greater than 50% with the exception of brick fences. 3. Alternative fence styles. If a fence style is not mentioned by this section, alternative designs may be evaluated by the Zoning Administrator for administrative approval. 4. Restricted materials. Chicken wire, or wood pallets, or unfished materials shall not be considered an approved fence or decorative fence material. i. A decorative fence may not be located within the drainage and utility easement or any other easement. ii. A decorative fence is the only type of fence allowed within the limits of the front yard or side yards, except where permitted by subsection (b) (ii)1 of this Section. 3. Traffic visibility requirements. On any corner lot, no fence shall be erected in the triangle formed by the front lot line, side street lot line, and a third straight line joining points on such property lines 30 feet from their intersection at the corner of the lot when such action would impede vision above a height of 2½ feet above the centerline grades of the adjacent streets. 4. Design requirements. A decorative fence shall have an opacity of no greater than 50%. dc. Fences for the separation of residential land uses. 1. Explanation. Fences used for screening may be required where a property zoned R-4 or R-5 abuts a property zoned AG, R-1, R-2, or R-3. 2. Height restrictions. The screening required shall consist of a continuous fence or wall at least six but not more than eight feet in height. Page 14 of 16 Page 62 of 140 3. Construction and design requirements. i. The screening fence required shall have an opacity of at least 75%. ii. A louvered fence shall be considered adequate if it blocks vision from a 90- degree angle to the fence. Iii Plant materials of a type approved by the community development department may also be required in addition to, or in lieu of, fencing. (5) Requirements for commercial and industrial areas. a. Fences for screening outdoor storage areas. 1. Height restrictions. All fences required for the screening of outdoor storage areas shall be at least six but not more than eight feet in height. 2. Construction and design requirements. i. All fences required for screening open storage areas shall have an opacity of at least 90%. ii. Screening fences shall be architecturally harmonious with the principal building and shall be compatible with the natural surroundings. b. Fences for the separation of incompatible land uses. 1. Explanation. Fences used for screening may be required at locations where commercial or industrial uses are adjacent to or across the street from property zoned or developed for residential or public use, as described in Sec. 125-83. Design Standards and Required Improvements B. Screening. 2. Height restrictions. The screening required shall consist of a continuous fence or wall at least six but not more than eight feet in height. 3. Construction and design requirements. i. The screening fence required shall have an opacity of at least 75%. ii. A louvered fence shall be considered adequate if it blocks vision from a 90- degree angle to the fence. iii. Plant materials of a type approved by the community development department may also be required in addition to, or in lieu of, fencing. 4. Required location on property. i. The screening fence shall not extend to within 15 feet of any street or driveway opening onto a street. ii. The fence shall be placed along property lines or, in case of screening along a street, five feet off the property line with landscaping (trees, shrubs, grass, and other plant materials) between the screening fence and the property line. c. Fences for protection from danger and of valuable private property. It may be necessary for a commercial or industrial use to construct fences specifically to protect people from danger or to guard valuable private property. Such uses may be enclosed with an industrial chainlink fence of at least six feet but not more than eight feet in height topped with three strands of barbed wire, provided they project over the property on the interior side of the fence. … Page 15 of 16 Page 63 of 140 SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately after its passage and publication in accordance with applicable law. Dated the 14th day of April, 2026. _______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk Page 16 of 16 Page 64 of 140 Fence Handout - 2026 City of Rogers — Fence Requirements Residential Districts · Sec. 125-84(f) · Reference guide for property owners YARD LOCATION QUICK REFERENCE Front yard Side & rear yard Corner lots — all yards Decorative only · max 4 ft · 50% Privacy or decorative · max 6 ft · any Must meet Sec. 125-83(c)(7) traffic opacity or less opacity visibility requirements Front yard Side & rear yard Permits & materials Decorative fences only Privacy or decorative fences When approval is required ● Decorative fences are ● Maximum height: 6 feet ● Permit required for permitted anywhere in fences 7 feet or taller ● Any fence style and only (non-residential) the front yard opacity permitted, ● Maximum height: 4 feet including solid privacy ● Fences 6 ft and under: fences no permit required ● Opacity: 50% or less (split rail, picket, brick ● Chain-link: minimum ● Not permitted as fence — not chain-link) 11-gauge, maximum 4 materials: chicken wire, feet in height wood pallets, or ● Must not serve as an unfinished materials enclosure ● Barbed wire and electrified fences are ● Unlisted fence styles ● Privacy fences and prohibited in all may be reviewed fences over 4 ft are not residential areas administratively by the permitted in the front Zoning Administrator yard ● Finished face of fence must face neighboring ● Fences must be property maintained so as not to endanger life, property, or neighborhood aesthetics CORNER LOTS EASEMENTS & PROPERTY LINES On any corner lot, fences shall meet the traffic visibility Fences may encroach into drainage and utility requirements of Sec. 125-83(c)(7). No fence may easements at the owner’s risk — the City may require obstruct sightlines between 2.5 and 10 feet above removal at owner’s expense for maintenance access. grade within 50 feet of the intersection of right-of-way Fences shall not be placed in trail easements. lines. A decorative fence may be placed in the front Encroachment into pipeline, gas, or electric easements yard of a corner lot abutting a residential or arterial is at the discretion of the easement holder. When a street but must not materially impede vision. Decorative fence marks a shared property boundary, a joint fences not exceeding 4 feet in height and 50% opacity maintenance agreement is recommended. Property line shall not be deemed to materially impede vision. disputes are the responsibility of the property owners to resolve. 22350 S. Diamond Lake Rd. | Phone: 763-428-8580 Fax: 763-428-4470 | www.rogersmn.gov Page 65 of 140 RESOLUTION 2026-21 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 2026-04 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rogers adopted Ordinance No. 2026-04 titled “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROGERS CITY CODE SECTION 125-84 RELATED TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND FENCES”, and WHEREAS, in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps, Minnesota state law allows the City Council to approve, by a four-fifths vote, the publication of an Ordinance by title and summary only; and WHEREAS, the expense to publish the complete text of Ordinance No. 2026-04 is not justified; and WHEREAS, the following summary clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rogers, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following summary is hereby approved for official publication: Summary of Ordinance 2026-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROGERS CITY CODE SECTION 125-84 RELATED TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND FENCES On the 24th day of February, 2026, the Rogers City Council passed Ordinance No. 2026-04, An Ordinance Amending the City of Rogers City Code Section 125-54, 125-55, 125-84 Related to Accessory Structures and Fences. The amendment increases the accessory structure allotments for the Ag, R1, and R2 districts, increases the number of accessory structures permitted in this district by one, relaxes front yard restrictions, and clarifies standards. Additionally, the ordinance relaxes fence standards and removes the requirement for residential fence permits for fences 6 ft and under, clarifies fence yard requirements, height requirements, and design requirements. The full text of the Ordinance may be reviewed at City Hall, located at 22350 South Diamond Lake Road, Rogers, MN 55374. The ordinance can also be viewed online at our website http://rogersmn.gov. Moved by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember ; The following voted in favor of said resolution: The following voted against the same: The following abstained: Page 1 of 2 Page 66 of 140Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor, and attested by the City Clerk dated this 14th day of April, 2026. ATTEST: Shannon Klick, Mayor Stacie Brown, City Clerk Page 2 of 2 Page 67 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 5.1 COMMISSION Subject: Review a Concept Plan by Oasis Group, inc. for a Senior Residential Living Facility at 13020 Hawkins Drive Prepared By: Alec Henderson, City Planner Overview / Background / Analysis Oasis Senior Living (Oasis Group), with Brunton Architects, has submitted a Concept Plan application for review of a proposed Senior Residential Living Facility at 13020 Hawkins Drive. The subject site is approximately 9.1 acres and is currently zoned R3, Mid-Density Residential. The applicant proposes a 160-unit senior living campus consisting of 100 independent living units, 40 assisted living units, and 20 memory care units in a connected three-story structure with a total building footprint of approximately 52,000 square feet and a total building area of approximately 165,900 square feet. The concept also includes dedication of approximately 1 acre for park purposes with a shelter. A pre-application meeting was held on March 4, 2026 with the developer, architect, City Planner, and Assistant City Engineer. The meeting identified that while a Senior Residential Living Facility is a conditional use in the R3 district under Table 4 of the Zoning Code, the proposed density of 160 units on a site with approximately 6.1 net acres significantly exceeds the R3 district’s maximum density range of 5.0 to 11.0 units per net acre. As a result, additional zoning approvals beyond a standard Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat will be required. This concept plan is presented to the Planning Commission for informal feedback. No formal action is requested or required at this time. Primary Issues to Consider 1. Land Use, Zoning, and Density 2. Application Pathway Options 3. Building Height and Setbacks 4. Access, Traffic, and Parking 5. Wetlands and Environmental Considerations 6. Park Dedication and Trail Connectivity Page 68 of 140 Analysis of Primary Issues 1. Land Use, Zoning, and Density The subject property at 13020 Hawkins Drive is zoned R3, Mid-Density Residential. Per Section 125-55(c), the purpose of the R3 district is to allow alternative forms of housing development and a mixture of housing types, including rowhouses, townhomes, duplexes, and smaller-lot single-family homes. The R3 district applies to properties classified as Medium Density Residential on the 2040 Future Land Use Plan, which provides for residential development at a density of 5.0 to 11.0 units per net acre. Under Table 4 (Permitted Uses), a Senior Residential Living Facility is listed as a Conditional Use (“C”) in the R3 district. While the use itself is conditionally allowed, the proposed density substantially exceeds what the district permits. The existing lot is 9.1 gross acres; however, when wetlands (approximately 2.1 acres) and stormwater areas (approximately 0.5 acres) are netted out, the developable area is approximately 6.1 net acres. At 160 units, the proposed net density is approximately 26.2 units per acre—well above the 11.0 unit/acre maximum for the R3 district. Density Analysis Summary R3 Standard Proposed Gross Site Area — 9.1 acres Wetlands / Stormwater (netted) — ±2.6 acres Net Developable Area (Hawkins only) — ±6.1 acres Total Units — 160 Net Density (Hawkins only) 5.0–11.0 du/ac ±26.2 du/ac Net Density (if 9 ac. Weber land added) 5.0–11.0 du/ac ±11.0 du/ac Maximum Building Height 35 ft. 3 stories (TBD) As shown above, the proposed development on the Hawkins parcel alone exceeds the R3 density maximum by approximately 15 units per acre. Even if approximately 9 acres of additional Weber property were incorporated into the development for density calculation purposes, the net density would be approximately 11.0 units per acre—at the upper boundary of the R3 range. The density overage is the central issue that drives the need for additional zoning approvals beyond a standard CUP. Surrounding Area Context Direction Zoning Land Use Existing Use North R3 Med. Density Res. Undeveloped / Rural East R2 Low Density Res. Single-Family Homes South R3 / R2 Med./Low Density Weber Homestead / Rural West R3 / R2 Med./Low Density Weber Property / Page 69 of 140 Undeveloped Proposed Unit Summary Unit Type Floor 1 Floor 2 Floor 3 Total Independent Living 29 38 33 100 Assisted Living — 20 20 40 Memory Care 20 — — 20 Total 49 58 53 160 2. Application Pathway Options During the pre-application meeting, staff identified several potential pathways for the applicant to pursue this development. Each has different implications for required approvals, timeline, and the surrounding area: Option A – Incorporate Weber Land and Reguide to R3. The developer has indicated that Weber may be a willing seller of the R2-zoned property west of and across from Hawkins Drive (PID 2112023110004). This land could be reguided from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and rezoned to R3 to be included in the density calculation. Approximately 9 acres of additional R3 land would bring the net density to approximately 11.0 units per acre. This option requires a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (subject to Metropolitan Council review), rezoning, preliminary plat, and CUP. Staff noted this configuration could also include a trail easement or greenway corridor along the west side of Hawkins Drive, which would advance trail connectivity goals. A key question is whether trail easement land would be netted from the density calculation, which could require additional acreage. Option B – PUD on the Hawkins Parcel Only. The applicant could pursue a Planned Unit Development on the existing Hawkins site. Under Section 125-29(f)(6)(a), the maximum density of a PUD shall not exceed the maximum density specified in the Comprehensive Plan unless approved by the City Council and deemed in the public interest. Council would need to determine whether the community’s need for senior living options, combined with the proposed park dedication, constitutes sufficient public benefit to justify a density deviation of this magnitude. Building height may also need flexibility depending on the final roof design. This pathway requires a PUD concept plan, Master Development Plan, rezoning to PUD, preliminary plat, and CUP. Option C – Combination: Weber Land with PUD. A hybrid approach where some portion of Weber land is incorporated along with a PUD that requests a smaller density deviation. This could include vacation of the existing Hawkins Drive right-of-way south to Cowley Lake and creation of a trail/greenway corridor. This option reduces the density deviation required under the PUD while also achieving trail and greenway benefits. Required approvals would include Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Page 70 of 140rezoning, PUD Master Development Plan, preliminary plat, and CUP. Option D – Reguide to High Density (Less Preferred). The Hawkins parcel could be reguided from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, which allows 11.0 to 60.0 units per net acre under the R5 district. While this would resolve the density issue, it would represent a significant land use change that may be difficult to justify given the surrounding R2 and R3 context. This option was identified as less preferred by staff during the pre-application meeting. 3. Building Height and Setbacks The R3 district limits principal building height to 35 feet maximum per Table 8. The proposed facility is three stories. Depending on the roof style and mechanical equipment, the building height may exceed the 35-foot maximum, which would require either a PUD deviation or other relief. The concept plan shows building setbacks of 25 feet from the front (south) property line along 129th Avenue North and 30 feet from the north property line. A 5-foot parking setback is shown along the south property line. Side setbacks appear to meet or exceed the 10-foot minimum. Staff will need detailed building elevation drawings with final height dimensions at the time of formal application to confirm compliance or quantify deviations. The surrounding context includes R2-zoned single-family neighborhoods to the east and R3 properties to the west (Weber). Given the scale difference between a three- story, 165,900-square-foot institutional building and single-family homes, the Planning Commission may wish to consider whether additional buffering, landscaping, or setback enhancements are warranted along the eastern boundary. 4. Access, Traffic, and Parking The facility would have direct access only from the existing Hawkins Drive. A traffic study will be required with any formal application. Staff has noted that preliminary traffic data comparing the proposed senior living use to a townhome development (which could otherwise be built under the R3 zoning) would be useful context for evaluating traffic impacts. Senior living facilities generally generate fewer vehicle trips than conventional residential development at comparable unit counts. The zoning code requires parking for a community residence/assisted living center at a rate of one space for each bed plus one space for each three employees other than doctors (Table 25, Sec. 125-86). The applicant’s concept plan shows 149 total parking stalls: • 43 underground parking spaces • 67 surface spaces for independent living • 39 surface spaces for memory care/staff parking The applicant indicates 140 assisted and independent living units would require parking plus staff counts that are to be determined. A complete parking analysis based on Page 71 of 140actual bed counts and projected staffing levels will be required at the time of formal application. 5. Wetlands and Environmental Considerations The site contains three existing wetlands totaling approximately 2.1 acres: a 1.5-acre wetland to the northeast, a 0.5-acre wetland to the east, and a 0.1-acre wetland at the southeast corner. The concept plan shows filling of the central wetland area to accommodate the building footprint while preserving the northeast and southeast wetlands. Two stormwater ponds totaling approximately 0.5 acres are shown. A stormwater management plan is a requirement of preliminary plat submittals. Wetland impacts will require review and approval by the applicable Wetland Conservation Act authority. If additional property is incorporated into the plat, additional wetland delineations will be required where they have not already been completed. The concept plan shows a 30-foot setback from the eastern wetland. Required wetland buffers and setbacks will need to be confirmed against City and state requirements at the time of formal application. 6. Park Dedication and Trail Connectivity The concept plan shows a proposed 1-acre lot at the southeast corner of the site for future park purposes with a shelter. Per Section 125-37, park land dedication is required for subdivisions. If a PUD is pursued, dedicated open space must be consistent with the Parks and Trails Master Plan or approved by the Park Board (Sec. 125-29(f)). Staff identified during the pre-application meeting that a trail easement or greenway corridor along the west side of Hawkins Drive could advance trail connectivity goals. If Weber land is incorporated, a corridor extending south from Cowley Lake Preserve could provide meaningful pedestrian and trail connections. The Planning Commission may wish to provide direction on whether park dedication at this location and in this configuration would be beneficial, and whether trail connectivity should be a condition of any future approval. Staff Recommendation As this is a Concept Plan, no formal action is requested at this time. Per Section 125-26 and Section 125-29(b)(2), any comments provided by the Planning Commission are advisory only and shall not be considered binding on any future action. The City Council will hear the concept plan review within 30 days following the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission is encouraged to provide feedback on the following: • Does the Commission support a Senior Residential Living Facility of this type and scale at this location? • Which application pathway (or combination) does the Commission believe is most appropriate: incorporating Weber land to meet density (Option A), a PUD with density deviation on Hawkins alone (Option B), a combination with Page 72 of 140 trail/greenway corridor (Option C), or another approach? • Are the proposed building height, massing, and setbacks appropriate given the proximity to single-family neighborhoods to the east? • What expectations or conditions should be communicated to the developer regarding buffering, landscaping, and neighborhood transition? • Is the proposed park dedication location and configuration desirable, and should trail connectivity be a requirement? • What additional information should the applicant provide before submitting a formal application? Future formal applications will need to address, at minimum: preliminary plat, conditional use permit, and either a Comprehensive Plan Amendment with rezoning (Options A/D) or a PUD Master Development Plan with rezoning to PUD (Options B/C). A traffic study, complete parking analysis, wetland permitting, landscape plans, and detailed building elevations will be required at that time. Financial Impact: NA Source Fund: NA Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Staff_Comments_Memo_Hawkins_Senior_Living B. Assisted Living Site Plan C. Neighborhood_Meeting_Summary_Hawkins_4-2-26 Page 73 of 140 CITY OF ROGERS INTERDEPARTMENTAL STAFF COMMENTS TO: Planning Commission / City Council FROM: Alec Henderson, City Planner DATE: April 2, 2026 RE: Staff Comments – 13020 Hawkins Drive Senior Living Facility Concept Plan The following is a summary of interdepartmental staff comments received on the concept plan for a proposed 160-unit Senior Residential Living Facility at 13020 Hawkins Drive. Comments were solicited from Public Works/Engineering, Fire, and Parks and Recreation in advance of the April 6, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Fire Department Jason Albers, Fire Marshal – March 5, 2026 • A secondary access point is required from somewhere other than Hawkins Drive, either through the park connecting trail or off 129th Avenue North. • All fire access roads shall extend to within 300 feet of all parts of the building, measured along the path a hose would be pulled (not as the crow flies). • Fire-flow calculations indicate five hydrants are required for the site. • Truck turning movement exhibits are required based on the City’s ladder truck dimensions: 46’9” length, 12’ height, 21’6” wheelbase, 36’7” curb-to-curb turning radius, 44’8” wall-to-wall turning radius, and 80,000 lbs. gross vehicle weight. Parks and Recreation Mike Bauer, Parks and Recreation Director – March 23, 2026 • The proposed 1-acre park would typically be classified as a mini-neighborhood park with a service area radius of approximately ¼ mile. Per the City’s Open Space Plan, mini- neighborhood parks are generally recommended only when a larger park site is not practical, as their ability to serve broader neighborhood needs is more limited. • This area was reviewed during a previous development proposal. It is unclear whether a park of this size will align with residents’ expectations; additional community input could help clarify preferences. • Trail connectivity should be improved. The concept plan should show whether a trail connection exists and whether it can connect directly to the proposed park. Continuing the 129th Avenue trail across the south end of the property would enhance accessibility and community use. Page 1 Page 74 of 140 Public Works / Engineering Mike Albers, PE, Assistant City Engineer – March 30, 2026 Project Narrative and Entitlement • Provide a written project narrative addressing neighborhood compatibility, including height, traffic, parking, and lighting. • Clarify the proposed entitlement path and confirm whether the project meets R-3 standards as proposed or if a PUD is being requested. Indicate whether additional land acquisition is required. • Provide the boundary/certificate of survey for all property involved. Access, Streets, and Fire Coordination • Coordinate the number and location of access points with the Fire Department. • If Fire requires a secondary access or street connection at 130th Avenue, the project must define which streets are proposed as public versus private. Public streets must connect to another public street or terminate in a cul-de-sac per City details STR-4 or STR-5. Streets should not alternate public/private/public. • If Fire does not require a secondary connection at 130th Avenue, or if the mini-park is not included, Public Works would be comfortable leaving 130th Avenue as-is and would likely request pavement surface removal at some point. • Provide fire apparatus access turning movements. Right-of-Way and Setbacks • Dedicate a 50-foot half right-of-way along 129th Avenue. • If Hawkins Drive is proposed to remain a public roadway, provide an offset cul-de-sac where the roadway terminates per City detail STR-5, provide 10-foot wide drainage and utility easements along the Hawkins Drive ROW per Section 125-83, and provide setbacks around the perimeter of the site in accordance with Section 125-55. Sidewalk and Trail Connections • Provide a 10-foot trail along Hawkins Drive from 129th Avenue to Aspen Drive in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provide a 10-foot trail along 129th Avenue from Hawkins Drive to Oakwood Drive. • Show internal sidewalk connections within the project, including ADA stalls and accessible routes from parking areas to the building, and any secondary egress paths for memory care/assisted living components as required by applicable life safety standards. • Show sidewalk connections from the project to Hawkins Drive and to the potential mini- park. Provide a sidewalk connection from Oakwood Drive to the potential mini-park. Clarify what components of the mini-park would be built by the development. Wetlands and Buffers • Provide a wetland delineation report and wetland buffer exhibit. • Identify any proposed WCA sequencing (avoid/minimize/replace) if wetland impacts are proposed. • Show wetland and stormwater pond buffers consistent with City and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission requirements. Utilities • Show all existing and proposed water, sanitary, and storm utilities. Page 2 Page 75 of 140 • Note that an existing sanitary sewer forcemain is located within the Hawkins Drive ROW and a storm drain tile exists near the Hawkins Drive/129th Avenue ROW intersection. If a ROW vacation is proposed and all improvements become private, Public Works would likely require a drainage and utility easement over the vacated area, subject to review of existing and proposed utilities. • A stormwater management plan meeting City and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission standards will be required. • Show all proposed drainage and utility easements. Easements are required for all stormwater ponds, pond buffers up to the 100-year HWL, wetlands, wetland buffers, and other areas per City Code. Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage • Provide a conceptual landscape plan showing tree counts/species, screening or fencing, foundation plantings, and parking-lot island treatments. • Show any proposed site or parking-lot lighting, including fixture types, mounting heights, cutoff characteristics, and photometrics following City Code. • Show the proposed locations and sizes of any monument or wall signs. Page 3 Page 76 of 140 EXISTING LOT: 9.1 ACRES BUILDING: LOWER LEVEL PARKING (14,900 SF) 30' - 0" FIRST FLOOR (52,000 SF): (20) 1-BED MEMORY CARE UNITS (29) INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS (20) 1 BED UNITS (9) STUDIO SECOND FLOOR (52,000 SF): 25' - 0" PROPOSED (38) INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS POND (24) 1 BED UNITS ~0.3 ACRES (14) STUDIO 10' - 0" (20) ASSISTED LIVING UNITS TYP (12) 1-BED UNITS (8) STUDIO THIRD FLOOR (47,000 SF): EXISTING (33) INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS WETLAND (21) 1-BED UNITS ~1.5 ACRES (12) STUDIO (20) ASSISTED LIVING UNITS (12) 1-BED UNITS (8) STUDIO TOTAL SF: ±165,900 (160) TOTAL UNITS PARKING: REQUIRED: COMMUNITY RESIDENCE/ UNDERGROUND ASSISTED LIVING CENTER = ONE SPACE PARKING ±14,900 SF FOR EACH BED PLUS ONE SPACE FOR EACH THREE STAFF OTHER THAN DOCTORS (140) ASSISTED & INDEPENDENT UNITS + NUMBER OF STAFF TBD PROVIDED: (43) UNDERGROUND (67) INDEPENDENT LIVING (39) MEMORY CARE / STAFF PARKING (149) TOTAL PARKING STALLS INDEPENDENT LIVING (3-STORIES) ±28,000 SF TOTAL FOOTPRINT CENTER LINK ±52,000 SF (2-STORIES) ±5,700 SF EXISTING WETLAND 30' - 0" ~0.5 ACRES MEMORY CARE/ ASSISTED LIVING (3-STORIES) ±18,200 SF MEMORY GARDEN PROPOSED FUTURE PARK POND w/ SHELTER ~0.2 ACRES 5' - 0" PROPOSED LOT = 1 ACRE BUILDING SETBACK 25' - 0" PARKING SETBACK EX. WETLAND ~ 0.1 ACRES PROPERTY LINE 1 SITE PLAN OPTION 2 1-3 1" = 80'-0" ROGERS ASSISTED LIVING 13020 HAWKINS DR ROGERS, MN Page 77 of 140 INDEPENDENT LIVING ASSISTED LIVING MEMORY CARE BUILDING SUPPORT 1 SOUTHWEST ISOMETRIC VIEW 1-4 2 NORTHEAST ISOMETRIC VIEW 1-4 ROGERS ASSISTED LIVING 13020 HAWKINS DR ROGERS, MN Page 78 of 140 CITY OF ROGERS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY TO: Planning Commission / City Council FROM: Alec Henderson, City Planner DATE: April 2, 2026 RE: Neighborhood Meeting – 13020 Hawkins Drive Senior Living Facility MEETING DATE: April 2, 2026 ATTENDANCE: Approximately 8–10 residents A neighborhood meeting was held on April 2, 2026 for the proposed 160-unit Senior Residential Living Facility at 13020 Hawkins Drive. The meeting was hosted by the developer (Oasis Group) with City staff in attendance. Approximately 6 to 10 area residents participated. The following is a summary of comments, concerns, and discussion points raised during the meeting. General Sentiment Attendees were generally very positive about the design and layout of the proposed facility. However, residents expressed concerns about the building’s height and visual impact adjacent to single-family homes, site lighting, traffic on 129th Avenue, and the overall fit of the proposed use within the R3 zoning district. Concerns Raised by Residents • Zoning Compatibility. Residents expressed that the R3 zoning feels like the wrong zone for this property as a whole. The proposed use and density do not align with what neighbors expected and believe there was a lack of communication/notice for the 2020 Zoning and Land Use updates (2040 Plan). • Building Height. The three-story building was described as too tall, particularly given its proximity to single-family residential homes to the east. Residents raised concerns about the visual impact and the change in neighborhood character. • Lighting. Concerns were raised about site lighting impacts on adjacent residential properties, including parking lot lighting and building illumination associated with a 24- hour facility. • Traffic and Road Capacity. Residents questioned the capacity of 129th Avenue to handle additional traffic generated by the development and raised concerns about traffic impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. • 24-Hour Operations. The facility would operate 24 hours a day with three shifts of staff, raising concerns about off-hours vehicle traffic, noise, and activity levels. • Location Suitability. Some attendees expressed the view that the proposed facility may be in the wrong location given the surrounding single-family neighborhood context. Page 1 Page 79 of 140Developer Mitigation Concepts Discussed In response to the concerns raised, the developer discussed several potential mitigation strategies: 1. Full cutoff lighting fixtures to prevent light spillage onto adjacent properties. 2. Enhanced landscaping and berming along the site perimeter to provide visual screening from neighboring homes. 3. Staffing level management to minimize off-hours activity (staffing levels to be determined). 4. Building step-backs on upper floors to reduce the perceived height and visual impact, particularly for views from adjacent single-family properties. 5. Flexibility to expand underground parking to lower the overall building profile (to be determined based on further design development). Additional Information Identified The following information was identified as needed to adequately respond to neighborhood concerns and inform future review: • A traffic study to quantify trip generation and distribution for the proposed senior living use. • A 129th Avenue capacity information, including evaluation of future Main Street/129th Avenue intersection improvements. • Building height and form comparisons to provide residents with a sense of scale relative to familiar structures in the area. • Lighting plans, landscaping and architectural plans to mitigate visibility/view concerns. Other Items Noted • Operator. SilverCrest Senior Communities Management was identified as the proposed facility operator, Developer would remain owner of the facility and property. • Construction Timeline. If the project moves forward, the developer estimated approximately one year for the entitlement process followed by a roughly two-year construction period. • Building Form. It should be noted that both in the R2 district and in the R3 district the maximum height of structure is 35 feet (measure to the mean gable). The proposed height of this project is similar to the height that any surrounding property can build to. While there are not many three-story single-family homes, the views to a walkout basement is a similar height. Additionally, should this property develop as a townhome project (like what was previously proposed from another developer) the height of the structures would be similar to the proposed, but the proximity of the homes would be closer to the existing neighbors due to the circulation and driveway needs of a townhome development. • Attendance. Attendance included around 8-10 nearby residents with around 10 additional attendees with some connection to the project. Likely the scheduling near spring break impacted attendance and the same noticing radius should be used for future public hearings. Page 2 Page 80 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 5.2 COMMISSION Subject: Review and Consideration of the Main Street Master Plan Prepared By: Brett Angell, Community Development Director Overview / Background / Analysis The Downtown/Main Street district has long served as the core for the community and where the city initially grew from. Over the past several years, the City of Rogers has emphasized this area for both planned public improvements and overall long-range planning efforts. Through these efforts, the city had a goal of ensuring the long-term viability of the area while seeking improvements that could be made to the district to create a more pedestrian-friendly district that will serve residents and attract visitors. What is a Master Plan? A master plan is a comprehensive, long-term strategic document that outlines the vision for future growth, infrastructure improvements, development, redevelopment or land use for a defined area. In many ways, there are similarities between a city's comprehensive plan. However, a master plan has a more defined area and is more defined in nature than a comprehensive plan. A master plan provides additional guidance to the city for future land use considerations for the defined area regardless of if these considerations correspond to public or private improvements. Master plans are a common practice for areas deemed of significant importance by the city. If done properly, a master plan will be a "living" document that is consistently referred to and is amended as needed into the future. Main Street Planning Efforts In 2020-2022, the city adopted the Downtown Master Plan and Main Street Streetscape Plan. Additionally, the city went through the process of drafting a Main Street Small Area Plan, which was not officially adopted by the city. In early 2025, the city applied for and was awarded a grant from Hennepin County's Hennepin Planning Grant program for the creation of a new master plan. The HPG grant was pivotal for ensuring a thoughtful and well-defined process and funded a majority of the work that was completed. Throughout 2025, the city worked with Cardo, the selected consultant through the HPG program, Hennepin County, and the community on the drafting of the plan. Why Update Past Plans? There were numerous reasons why it was determined that it was important to update and create a new Main Street Master Plan as detailed below: Page 81 of 140 • Clarity — with multiple past plans covering one area, there was the opportunity for confusion for the public, staff, elected officials, and/or interested developers or businesses interested in the area. Creating a unified plan ensures transparency and clarity for the area moving forward. • Market Conditions/Changes— Since the time of the past planning efforts there have been changes to the market conditions and anticipated developments as compared to past plans. One example of this would be the planned civic campus site on the north end of main street which was not previously anticipated. This development sets a new vision for the subject property, an anchor for the downtown district, and other public amenities such as plaza space and public parking. • Anticipated Turn Back— With the Fletcher Bypass project currently undergoing construction, Main Street will be turned back from the County to the City in the very near future. With the turn-back and city gaining control of the roadway, the city anticipates a reconstruction of Main Street. The city is currently working towards obtaining the required funding for the reconstruction. • Upcoming Comprehensive Plan— Starting in 2026, the city will be undergoing the process of updating its comprehensive plan for 2050. The engagement efforts and vision set for the downtown area aid in laying the groundwork for the comprehensive plan. Public Engagement Process Throughout the master planning process, there were numerous online and in-person public engagement opportunities. This included public open houses, stakeholder meetings, a project website, online surveys, and a joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting. The stakeholder meetings included Main Street business and property owners. There were two sets of stakeholder meetings and two public open houses. The first occurred early on in the process to get an understanding of existing challenges, preferences, and potential opportunities. The second very-well attended open house presented a couple of different master plan scenario options. Following the second round, highlighted elements from each option were combined to create one plan. The project website shared updates on process, meeting notes, and an online survey for those who wished to share feedback. Master Plan Components and Sections A copy of the master plan is attached to this item for review. The items below highlight and summarize the different sections and components of the master plan. Introduction The introduction section lays the stage for what the district is and what the master plan is seeking to establish. This section further details the 'why' of the plan and some demographic information of the city. Existing Conditions Page 82 of 140In order to properly plan for improvements or any changes, it is important to understand the existing conditions and how the area currently operates. The existing conditions pages refer to the existing land use, building footprints, parking areas, and stormwater. Vision & Guiding Principles The vision and guiding principles are what guides what the city is trying to accomplish. These principles, as defined in the plan, include creating a Main Street district that is safer for pedestrians, supports and grows businesses, is a mixed-use neighborhood, and is connected in its core to the community. Process The process section defines what occurred over the course of the master plan process. This is broken down into three sections: understand, explore, and implement. Under the 'understand' section, past plans were evaluated and initial public engagement took place. Under the explore section, alternative plans were created for review and feedback. Under the implement section, the final report and defined recommendations were created. Planned Vision The identified 25-year vision took certain components from what was learned and the two alternatives to create a unified vision for the district moving forward. The identified vision includes exploring the uses and identifying opportunities for redevelopment. The vision seeks to create a mixed-use neighborhood that retains the small town feel of Rogers and historic nature of the district. The plan, similar to past planning efforts, explores the incorporation of some different housing opportunities to provide a direct and immediate population base to support commercial businesses. The vision section further breaks down certain areas of the district, including the main street core, Main/129th/Memorial intersection, eastern area, and redevelopment of the western industrial areas. Transportation The area that received the most amount of feedback during the engagement sessions corresponded to various transportation elements — both automobile and pedestrian- related. The transportation section is broken down into multiple categories including pedestrian safety, designed street sections, and parking. Implementation The implementation section includes short-term and long-term recommendations corresponding to parking, phasing of development, open space, stormwater management, and zoning. Incremental Changes An important component for all Master Planned areas which involve redevelopment or primarily privately held properties is that changes as established within the master plan may be incremental in nature and occur over the course of several years. Similar to the comprehensive plan, the master plan will help guide future decisions made for the area. Page 83 of 140Developments may not directly match the footprints or structuring as shown in the master plan, but it is important that the general characteristics are similar for advancing the goals and vision for the area. What Happens Next? If adopted, the master plan will move into the implementation stage. This will help guide comprehensive plan changes, and subsequent zoning changes. The initial redevelopments as shown on the plan, including the Duffy Main Street redevelopment, civic campus, and redevelopment of 21601 John Deere Lane are anticipated to continue to move forward, and this vision will help guide the potential interest of other interested parties. The master plan would be added to the city website with a likely new page created specific to the Main Street area. Staff Recommendation The Commission is requested to provide feedback and/or a recommendation on the Main Street Master Plan for the City Council, subject to the finalization of comments from staff. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Source Fund: Not applicable. Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Rogers Main Street Master Plan Page 84 of 140ROGERS MAIN STREET MASTER PLAN ©2026Page Cardo 85 of 140 LLCINTRODUCTION 3.25.26 A NEIGHBORHOOD GROWTH 25-YEAR VISION Main Street has been a focal point of the community and its leadership The City of Rogers experienced a dramatic 54�6% increase in population This vision will not happen quickly or overnight and is intended to for several years� It is the historic core of a town that was once a small, between 2010 and 2020 according to the United States Census Bureau� guide the form of the Main Street neighborhood over the next 25 years� rural community with a stop on the Great Northern Railroad and a The Metropolitan Council projects that by 2040 Rogers will grow by The Master Plan will require the cooperation of numerous developers, wagon turnaround� The vast majority of buildings from 100 years another 79%� This process highlighted the importance of responsible builders, land owners, City Councils, and residents that do not yet call ago no longer remain and Rogers has grown into a mature suburb of growth� The vast majority of residents engaged throughout the Master the City of Rogers home� Recessions, periods of economic growth, and Minneapolis, yet this location in town has always remained the heart Plan acknowledged this expansion can be an asset to leverage� However changes in leadership are guarantees, and they will slow or accelerate and soul of the community� some residents did express hesitation and are concerned for the changes to this area� This document is meant to be the steady hand that community they love� guides growth in the Main Street neighborhood until 2050� Many towns and cities attempt to replace or replicate the fabric of an old Main Street, but there are few substitutes for the real place� The The best way for cities to grow is by using what they already have� While this Master Plan directs the form of streets, parks, and community clearly wants to build on the foundation and character of Every parcel shown as developed in this Master Plan has previously development, it is not a guide for future utility infrastructure� As this the existing Main Street� This Master Plan starts here, by preserving been developed and is already connected to an existing infrastructure Plan becomes reality, further study by engineers and City staff will and enhancing the existing businesses, buildings, and cherished small- grid� This is not only financially intelligent for the City, but it is also determine the appropriate next steps for water, sewer, natural gas, town feel that already exists� Then it charts a direction to support this environmentally friendly� Housing, commercial spaces, parks, and electricity, and telecommunication utilities� Fortunately, most of the commercial core in a mixed-use, walkable, and human-scaled way that civic uses all located next to one another helps reduce automobile needed infrastructure is in place, but it will be critical to make sure will ensure this neighborhood is strengthened over time� trips� At the same location on John Deere Lane between Main Street development and utility capacity align� and Industrial Drive, the average number of daily automobile trips No, this is not a compilation of development projects that happen to This Master Plan thinks both big and small� On one hand, this document is projected to decrease by 42�3% by 2040 according to the 2040 share geography� This is a seamless, integrated network of streets, parks, illustrates what the Main Street neighborhood might look like in 25 Comprehensive Plan� The principles that guide this Master Plan will help and a range of building types that act as one� A healthy neighborhood is years� On the other hand, it also anticipates which steps need to be create a more resilient, safe, and beautiful Main Street neighborhood� composed of blocks where numerous uses, building types, and different taken in the next few years� The City of Rogers has positioned itself well developers create a well-defined street edge� Parking is relegated to for reinvestment in the area by moving the City Hall and Police Station the center of blocks and the street edge is made for interaction� This to a prominent position on Main Street� Improvements to Main Street interaction might be with items in a storefront window, neighbors itself, once the City takes control of the right-of-way, will cement and chatting on a porch, or with friends enjoying a park or plaza� After all, continue to signal to investors, developers, and community members these interactions are what create community� that it is committed to this neighborhood� Introduction & Purpose ©2026 Cardo LLC 2 of 34 Page 87 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 5.3 COMMISSION Subject: Consideration of Amendments to City Code Chapter 22-XIV Licensing Procedures and Regulations Related to Cannabis Businesses Prepared By: Brett Angell, Community Development Director Overview / Background / Analysis On November 26th, 2024, the City of Rogers passed ordinances pertaining to cannabis businesses following a state law change legalizing adult use cannabis and corresponding cannabis businesses. Two ordinances were passed at the time of original adoption. One related to the licensing and general regulations for cannabis businesses and one related to amending the city's use table for allowable zoning districts where a cannabis business may locate. Since the time of adoption, the ordinances have been the guiding rules for any cannabis businesses within the city. Throughout this time, there have been some rule and guidance changes from the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) and the city has identified areas of the ordinance that should be amended for further clarification or better alignment with state regulations. Through discussions with the city's legal council, a few amendments have been identified to City Code Chapter 22-XIV corresponding to the regulations and registration procedures for cannabis businesses. Recently, the city has also received a text amendment application requesting the city amend its buffer regulations to allow for a potential retail cannabis location at 13625 Northdale Blvd. The code amendment request seeks to alter the buffer distance requirement from daycare facilities from 500 feet to 480 feet or to amend the language to be measured from building-to-building rather than property line to property line. When measuring from property line to property line, the subject property is at approximately 485 feet. If measuring from the daycare building to the proposed tenant space, the distance is approximately 710 feet. The narrative from the applicant is attached to this item along with signatures from other tenants of the building supporting the proposed use. If the city were to allow the proposed change and the space did become a retail cannabis location, it is anticipated that the space would become the second and last initial retail cannabis location since the city currently has a cap of two available registrations based on population size. The other location is 21753 S Diamond Lake Rd (former El Loro/Los Mariachis) which is currently under interior buildout. Other proposed clean-up amendments to the ordinance include the following items: Page 120 of 140 • Clarifications on the pre-licensing procedures for the city and obtaining locations; • Clarification on the processing of retail registrations; • Amending the registration cap to explicitly state cannabis retailers to conform to statute; • Adding language to detail the maximum amount of time a registration application will be considered and codifying a waitlist for pending applications; • Amendments and clarifications to the buffer requirements. Since this item is not an amendment to the City's zoning code, a public hearing is not required. Notice was published in the paper related to consideration of amendments. Planning Commission review is not legally required for amendments to Chapter 22, however staff felt it was important for the Planning Commission to provide input on the proposed request to alter the buffer distances as they are tied to land use. Staff Recommendation Review the proposed ordinance amendments and provide a recommendation to the City Council for amendments to City Code Chapter 22-XIV Licensing Procedures and Regulations Related to Cannabis Businesses. A draft of Ordinance 2026-10 is attached for consideration. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Source Fund: Not applicable. Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Ordinance 2026-10 Cannabis Licensing and Regulations Amendments B. Existing Full Code C. Applicant Narrative Page 121 of 140 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-10 CITY OF ROGERS STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LICENSING PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO CANNABIS BUSINESSES The City of Rogers hereby ordains: SECTION 1. Chapter 22, Article XIV, Section 841 of the City Code is hereby amended as follows: Applicant means an entity with a license, preliminary license approval, endorsement, or other applicable written approval issued by the OCM that is applying for an initial registration or for registration renewal. Cannabis Retailer means a business with a cannabis retailer license or cannabis retail endorsement, or other applicable written approval, from OCM. SECTION 2. Chapter 22, Article XIV, Section 842, of the City Code is hereby amended as follows: (b) Potential licensees are responsible for obtaining all necessary zoning, building, and fire code approvals prior to the city receiving the request for certification from the OCM. If a potential licensee fails to obtain approvals prior to the city receiving a request for certification, the city will inform the OCM that the potential licensee does not meet zoning and land use laws or does not meet building and fire code requirements. Potential licensees are responsible for obtaining all necessary zoning approvals prior to the City receiving the request for certification from the OCM. If a potential licensee fails to obtain necessary zoning approvals prior to the City receiving a request for certification, the City will inform the OCM that the potential licensee does not meet zoning and land use laws. If, at the time the City receives a request for zoning certification, there are no further intended alterations to the building where the business is to be conducted, the City will also certify compliance with building and fire code regulations, provided that the potential licensee has obtained inspections prior the City’s receipt of a request for certification from the OCM. Building and fire code inspections will be valid for 1 year from completion. (c) For cannabis retailers, receiving a pre-license certification does not ensure the cannabis retailer will receive a registration under § 122.14. SECTION 3. Chapter 22, Article XIV, Section 843, of the City Code is hereby amended as follows: (d) Processing Registrations. (1) Applications will be processed on a first-come, first-served basis based on the city receiving a complete application and payment of all fees. Page 122 of 140 (2) The date a certification under Sec. 22.03 is issued will have no impact on the applicant’s registration processing. (2) Once an application is considered complete, the city shall inform the applicant as such, process the application fees, and forward the application to the City Council for approval or denial. (3) If a registered cannabis business’s license lapses or is revoked by the OCM, resulting in the business’s registration terminating, the City will conduct a lottery to select the order in which the City will process applications for that open registration. Within one month of the date the registration terminates, the City Administrator will accept applications from businesses seeking a registration. Businesses submitting complete applications will be placed in a lottery. The lottery will consist only of businesses that have submitted complete applications. Businesses will be randomly selected and placed in the order of the selection. All sections of this Article shall apply to the lotter selection process, except the language in Section 22-843(d)(1 and 2). If no applications are received, then the registration will be issued pursuant to 22-843(d)(1 and 2). (4) The date of the certification under Sec. 22-842 is issued will have no impact on the applicant’s registration processing. (e) Retail Registration Limits (1) The City will issue one cannabis retailer registration per 12,500 residents in the city, except that the city will not issue any cannabis retailer registrations if there is one cannabis retailer registration per 12,500 residents in Hennepin County. (2) The number of registrations available will be calculated by dividing the state demographer’s most recent estimate of the city’s population by 12,500 and rounding up to the nearest whole number. (3) The city will update the number of registrations available based on the most recent data available from the state’s demographer on January 1 and June 1 each year. (3) The number of registrations in the County will be based on the number of registrations in the county on the day the application is received. (4) If the number of registrations available within the city decreases based on the county reaching the one per 12,500 threshold or the city’s population decreases below a previous threshold, businesses with current registrations will be allowed to maintain and renew their registrations but no new registration will be issued. (5) Registrations issued to businesses with a preliminary license preapproval will count toward the City’s registration limit. (6) Businesses operating under a tribal compact entered into under Minnesota Statutes, section 3.9224 or 3.9228 and tribally issued licenses and registrations are counted towards the city’s registration limit and the county registration limit. (f) Application. The applicant must submit a registration application or renewal form provided by the city. The form may be amended from time to time by the City Administrator or designee, but must include or be accompanied by: (1) Name of the property owner (2) Name of the applicant (3) Address and parcel ID for the property for which the registration is sought 2 Page 123 of 140 (4) Certification that the applicant complies with the requirements of this article (5) Fee Required. At the time of initial application, and prior to the city’s consideration of any renewal application, each retailer must pay, as established in the city’s fee schedule, the following fees: a. At the time of initial registration: i. An initial registration fee. The initial registration fee will pay for the costs of registration and the cost of the first year of operation. ii. The renewal fee for the second year of operation. a. At the time of the first annual renewal (prior to the second year of operation), no fee will be due. b. At the time of the second annual renewal, and each year thereafter, the renewal fee must be paid prior to the city issuing any renewal registration. c. Initial registration fees and renewal registration fees are nonrefundable. (5) Proof of taxes, assessments, utility charges or other financial claims of the city of the state are current. (6) A copy of a valid state license, preliminary license approval, or other applicable written approval from written notice of OCM license preapproval (7) Amending an Application. An applicant may not amend information on the application once it has been submitted. (8) Immediate Denial. An applicant that does not comply with the distance requirements of Section 22-847 will be immediately denied. (g) Processing Applications. Once the City receives a completed application, and the maximum number of registrations defined in Section 22-843(e)(1) have been issued, the applicant will receive written confirmation confirming that the applicant has submitted a complete application and informing the applicant of the steps that must be completed before the City will issue the registration. (1) Preliminary Compliance Check. The City shall conduct a preliminary compliance check to ensure compliance with this Chapter and any other regulations established pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 342.13. (2) Fee Required. At the time of initial application, and prior to the city’s consideration of any renewal application, each retailer must pay, as established in the city’s fee schedule, the following fees: i. At the time of initial registration: ii. An initial registration fee. The initial registration fee will pay for the costs of registration and the cost of the first year of operation. iii. The renewal fee for the second year of operation. (3) At the time of the preliminary compliance check, the applicant must also submit a form recertifying that the applicant complies with the requirements of this article and proof of taxes, assessments, utility charges, or other financial claims of the city or the state are current for both the applicant and the proposed location. (4) Applicants will have six (6) months between the date of the initial complete application is submitted to complete the required steps to receive the registration. Once the six-month period has passed, the application shall be denied. Applicants shall have submitted applications prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall have six (6) 3 Page 124 of 140 months from the effective date of this ordinance to complete the required steps to receive the registration. During the time when applications for open registration slots are being processed, applicants that submitted complete applications will be placed on a waitlist based on the order in which they were received or the order selected in the lottery and processed should applicants ahead of them be denied. (g) Preliminary Compliance Check. The City shall conduct a preliminary compliance check to ensure compliance with this Chapter and any other regulations established pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 342.13. (h) Reasons for Denial. The City shall not issue a registration or renewal if any of the following conditions are true: (1) The applicant has not submitted a complete application. (2) The applicant does not comply with the requirements of this article. (3) The applicant does not comply with applicable zoning and land use regulations. (4) The applicant is found to not comply with the requirements of the Act or this article at the preliminary compliance check. (5) The maximum number of registrations, pursuant to subsection (e), have been issued by the city or within the county. (6) The applicant does not have a valid license, preliminary license approval, or other applicable written approval from the OCM. (7) An applicant obtains a registration, or the maximum number of registrations, making them ineligible under state law to obtain an additional cannabis retail registration. (i) Issuing the Registration or Renewal. The city shall issue the registration or renewal if the retailer meets the requirements of this article, including that none of the reasons for denial in subsection (h) are true. (j) Nontransferable. A registration is not transferable. This prohibition does not apply to a transfer of property ownership at the location where a cannabis retailer is located. (k) Location Change. A registered business that wishes to move locations within the city must submit the new proposed location to the city as part of a new application for registration / on a form provided by the City, including a certification that the location meets all zoning requirements. Such change will be approved provided that it complies with the requirements of this article and all zoning regulations, and there are no other grounds for denial as described in subsection (h). SECTION 4. Chapter 22, Article XIV, Section 847, of the City Code is hereby amended as follows: (a) The city prohibits the establishment and operation of a cannabis business within the following buffer zones: • 1,000 from a school 4 Page 125 of 140 • 500 475 feet from a day care • 500 feet from an attraction with a park feature • 500 feet from another cannabis business (b) The buffers in this section will be measured from the potential licensee’s proposed business location based on the location of schools, day cares, and park features on the earlier of the date the city receives the request from the OCM for certification date the city receives the request from the OCM for certification pursuant to Sec. 22-843 that is ultimately successful or the date the city receives a complete application for retail registration pursuant to Sec. 22-843(c). A buffer from another cannabis retailer will only be established from other cannabis retailers with city-issued registrations and from other applicants that have submitted complete applications but have not received a registration from the city. If an applicant amends the proposed business location after submitting a complete application, buffers will be reestablished on the date the application is amended. Buffer distances will be measured from the cannabis retailers front door to the property lines of the buffer feature. (c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a registered cannabis business from continuing to operate at the same location if a school, day care, residential treatment facility, or park feature establishes within the buffer. (d) This section does not pertain restrict the location of to lower-potency hemp edible productsretailer. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect following its passage and publication in accordance with state law. Dated the 14th day of April, 2026. _______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk 5 Page 126 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances ARTICLE 22-XIV. - LICENSING PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO CANNABIS BUSINESSES Sec. 22-840. - Findings and Purpose The City of Rogers makes the following legislative findings: The purpose of this ordinance is to protect the public health, safety, welfare in the city by implementing regulations pursuant to Minn. Stat. ch. 342 related to cannabis and hemp businesses within the city. The city finds and concludes that these regulations are appropriate and lawful, that the proposed amendments will promote the community's interest in reasonable stability in the development and redevelopment of the city for now and in the future, and that the regulations are in the public interest and for the public good. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-01), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-841. - Definitions The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Applicant means an entity with a license issued by the OCM that is applying for an initial registration or for registration renewal. Cannabis business has the same meaning as defined in Minn. Stat. § 342.01. Cannabis retailer means a business with a cannabis retailer license or cannabis retail endorsement from OCM. Day care means a location licensed with the Minnesota Department of Human Services to provide the care of a child in a residence outside the child's own home for gain or otherwise, on a regular basis, for any part of a 24-hour day. OCM means the Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management. Park feature means an attraction within a public park that is regularly used by minors, including a playground or athletic field. These include playground structures, athletic fields, ice sheets, and concessions facilities and are designated on a city map available on the city website. Potential licensee means an applicant that has not received a license from the OCM. Retailer means every business that is licensed under the Act and required to register with the city under Minn. Stats. § 342.22. Including cannabis businesses and lower-potency hemp edible retailers. about:blank 1/8 Page 127 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances School means a public school, as defined in Minn. Stats. § 120A.05, subdivisions 9, 11, 13, and 17, or a nonpublic school, or church or religious organization in which a child is provided instruction in compliance with this section and Minn. Stats. § 120A.24, but does not include a home school. The Act means Minn. Stats. ch. 342, as is may be amended from time to time. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-02), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-842. - Pre-License Certification of Cannabis Businesses (a) The community development director is authorized to certify whether a proposed cannabis business complies with the city's zoning ordinances, this chapter, and if applicable, with state fire code and building code pursuant to Minn. Stats. § 342.13. (b) Potential licensees are responsible for obtaining all necessary zoning approvals prior to the city receiving the request for certification from the OCM. If a potential licensee fails to obtain necessary zoning approvals prior to the city receiving a request for certification, the city will inform the OCM that the potential licensee does not meet zoning and land use laws. If, at the time the city receives a request for zoning certification, there are no further intended alterations to the building where the business is to be conducted, the city will also certify compliance with building and fire code regulations, provided that the potential licensee has obtained inspections prior the city's receipt of a request for certification from the OCM. Building and fire code inspections will be valid for one year from completion. (c) For retailers, receiving a pre-license certification does not ensure the retailer will receive a registration under Minn. Stats. § 122.14. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-03), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-843. - Retailer Registration (a) Retail registration required. Before making retail sales to customers or patients, a retailer must register with the city. Making retail sales to customers or patients without an active registration is prohibited. (b) Civil penalties. Subject to Minn. Stat. 342.22, subd. 5(e) the city may impose a civil penalty, as specified in the city's fee schedule, for making a sale to a customer or patient without a valid registration from the city and a valid license from the OCM. (c) Acceptance of complete application. Applications will be considered complete when all materials in subsection (f) are received by the city and include all required information and the fee described in subsection (f)(5) is received. If the city determines that the application is incomplete, it shall notify the applicant of the deficiencies in writing. (d) Processing registrations. about:blank 2/8 Page 128 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances (1) Applications will be processed on a first-come, first-served basis based on the city receiving a complete application and payment of all fees. (2) The date a certification under Section 22-842 is issued will have no impact on the applicant's registration processing. (3) Once an application is considered complete, the city shall inform the applicant as such, process the application fees, and forward the application to the city council for approval or denial. (e) Retail registration limits. (1) The city will issue one registration per 12,500 residents in the city, except that the city will not issue any registrations if there is one registration per 12,500 residents in Hennepin County. (2) The number of registrations available will be calculated by dividing the state demographer's estimate of the city's population by 12,500 and rounding up to the nearest whole number. (3) The city will update the number of registrations available based on the most recent data available from the state's demographer on January 1 and June 1 each year. (4) The number of registrations in the county will be based on the number of registrations in the county on the day the application is received. (5) If the number of registrations available within the city decreases based on the county reaching the one per 12,500 threshold or the city's population decreases below a previous threshold, businesses with current registrations will be allowed to maintain and renew their registrations but no new registration will be issued. (6) Registrations issued to businesses with a license preapproval will count toward the city's registration limit. (7) Businesses operating under a tribal compact entered into under Minn. Stats. § 3.9224 or 3.9228 and tribally issued licenses and registrations are counted towards the city's registration limit and the county registration limit. (f) Application. The applicant must submit a registration application or renewal form provided by the city. The form may be amended from time to time by the city administrator or designee, but must include or be accompanied by: (1) Name of the property owner; (2) Name of the applicant; (3) Address and parcel ID for the property for which the registration is sought; (4) Certification that the applicant complies with the requirements of this article; (5) Fee required. At the time of initial application, and prior to the city's consideration of any renewal application, each retailer must pay, as established in the city's fee schedule, the following fees: about:blank 3/8 Page 129 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances a. At the time of initial registration: 1. An initial registration fee. The initial registration fee will pay for the costs of registration and the cost of the first year of operation. 2. The renewal fee for the second year of operation. b. At the time of the first annual renewal (prior to the second year of operation), no fee will be due. c. At the time of the second annual renewal, and each year thereafter, the renewal fee must be paid prior to the city issuing any renewal registration. d. Initial registration fees and renewal registration fees are nonrefundable. (6) Proof of taxes, assessments, utility charges or other financial claims of the city of the state are current. (7) A copy of a valid state license or written notice of OCM license preapproval. (g) Preliminary compliance check. The city shall conduct a preliminary compliance check to ensure compliance with this Chapter and any other regulations established pursuant to Minn. Stats. § 342.13. (h) Reasons for denial. The city shall not issue a registration or renewal if any of the following conditions are true: (1) The applicant has not submitted a complete application. (2) The applicant does not comply with the requirements of this article. (3) The applicant does not comply with applicable zoning and land use regulations. (4) The applicant is found to not comply with the requirements of the Act or this article at the preliminary compliance check. (5) The maximum number of registrations, pursuant to subsection (e), have been issued by the city or within the county. (6) The applicant does not have a valid license from the OCM. (i) Issuing the registration or renewal. The city shall issue the registration or renewal if the retailer meets the requirements of this article, including that none of the reasons for denial in subsection (h) are true. (j) Nontransferable. A registration is not transferable. (k) Location change. A registered business that wishes to move locations within the city must submit the new proposed location to the city as part of a new application for registration / on a form provided by the city, including a certification that the location meets all zoning requirements. Such change will be approved provided that it complies with the requirements of this article and all zoning regulations, and there are no other grounds for denial as described in subsection (h). (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-04), 11-26-2024) about:blank 4/8 Page 130 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances Sec. 22-844. - Registration Enforcement (a) Generally. The city council may impose a fine or suspend a registration under this article on a finding that the registered business has failed to comply with the requirements of this article or any applicable statute, including the Act, or regulation. (b) Notice and right to hearing. Prior to imposing a fine or suspending any registration under this article, the city shall provide the registered business with written notice of the alleged violations and inform the registered business of his or her right to a hearing on the alleged violation. (1) Notice shall be delivered in person or by regular mail to the address of the registered business and shall inform the registered business of its right to a hearing. The notice will indicate that a response must be submitted within ten business days of receipt of the notice, or the right to a hearing will be waived. (2) The registered business will be given an opportunity for a hearing before the city's city council before final action to fine or suspend a registration. Provided, the registered business has submitted a written application for appeal within ten business days after the notice was served. The city council shall give due regard to the frequency and seriousness of the violations, the ease with which such violations could have been cured or avoided and good faith efforts to comply and shall issue a decision to fine or suspend the registration only upon written findings. Within ten business days of the city council order, the decision may be appealed. (3) If no request for a hearing is received within ten days following the service of the notice, the matter shall be submitted to the city council for imposition of the fine, suspension, revocation, or non-renewal. (c) Emergency. If, in the discretion of the city, a registered business poses an imminent threat to the health or safety of the public, the city may immediately suspend the registration and provide notice of the right to hold a subsequent hearing as prescribed in part (b) of this section. (d) Reinstatement. The city may reinstate a registration if it determines that the violations have been resolved. The city shall reinstate a registration if the OCM determines the violations have been resolved. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-05), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-845. - Compliance Checks The city shall complete at minimum one compliance check per calendar year of every registered business to assess if the business meets age verification requirements, as required under Minn. Stats. § 342.22, subd. 4(b) and Minn. Stats. § 342.24 and any applicable cannabis or hemp regulations adopted by the city. about:blank 5/8 Page 131 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances The city shall conduct a minimum of at least one unannounced age verification compliance check per calendar year. Age verification compliance checks shall involve persons at least 17 years of age but under the age of 21 who, with the prior written consent of a parent or guardian if the person is under the age of 18, attempt to purchase adult-use cannabis flower, adult-use cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles, or hemp-derived consumer products under the direct supervision of a law enforcement officer or an employee of the city. Any failures under this section are a basis for enforcement action and must be reported to the OCM. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-06), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-846. - Hours of Operation Cannabis retailers are limited to retail sale of cannabis, cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower- potency hemp edibles, or hemp-derived consumer products between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-06), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-847. - Minimum Distance Requirements (a) The city prohibits the establishment and operation of a cannabis business within the following buffer zones: • One thousand [feet] from a school. • Five hundred feet from a day care. • Five hundred feet from an attraction with a park feature. • Five hundred feet from another cannabis business. (b) The buffers in this section will be measured from the potential licensee's proposed business location based on the location of schools, day cares, and park features on the date the city receives the request from the OCM for certification pursuant to Section 22-843. Buffer distances will be measured from property lines. (c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a registered cannabis business from continuing to operate at the same location if a school, day care, residential treatment facility, or park feature establishes within the buffer. (d) This section does not pertain to lower-potency hemp edible products. about:blank 6/8 Page 132 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-07), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-848. - Temporary Cannabis Events (a) License/permit required. A special event license is required to be issued and approved by the city prior to holding a temporary cannabis event held by a licensed cannabis event organizer, as defined and provided for in Minn. Stats. ch. 342. (b) Registration and application procedure. A registration fee, as established in the city's fee schedule, shall be charged to applicants for temporary cannabis event permits/licenses. (c) Application submittal and review. An applicant must submit an application for city approval of a temporary cannabis event permit on a form provided by the city clerk. The application may be amended from time to time but shall include or be accompanied by: (1) Full name of the property owner and applicant; (2) Address, email address, and telephone number of the applicant; (3) The application fee as established in the city's fee schedule; (4) A copy of the OCM cannabis event license application, submitted pursuant to Minn. Stats. § 342.39, subd. 2. The application shall be submitted to the city clerk, or other designee for review. (d) The application shall be submitted to the city clerk, or other designee for review. The application will be considered complete when the application form is submitted with all of the required information included and application fee paid. If the submitted application is incomplete, the city clerk shall return the application to the applicant with the notice of deficiencies. (e) The application fee shall be non-refundable once processed. (f) A request for a temporary cannabis event that does not meet the requirements of this section shall be denied. The city clerk shall notify the applicant of the standards not met and basis for denial. (g) Temporary cannabis events shall only be held between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. (h) Pursuant to Minn. Stats. § 342.40, subd. 8, the city prohibits on-site consumption cannabis and hemp products, as provided in Minn. Stats. § 342.40, subd. 8. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-08), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-849. - Penalties Administration and Enforcement Any violation of the provisions of this article or failure to comply with any of its requirements constitutes a misdemeanor and is punishable as defined by law. Each day each violation continues or exists, constitutes a separate offense. Violations of this article can occur regardless of whether about:blank 7/8 Page 133 of 1403/31/26, 9:20 AM Rogers, MN Code of Ordinances or not a permit is required for a regulated activity listed in this ordinance. Violations of this article may also be addressed under City Code, Section 2-265—Administrative Penalties. Violation of this article shall be grounds for enforcement against any business license issued by the City of Rogers. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-09), 11-26-2024) Sec. 22-850. - Severability If any section, clause, provision, or portion of this article is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this article shall not be affected thereby. (Ord. No. 2024-07, § 1(22-10), 11-26-2024) about:blank 8/8 Page 134 of 140 Barb’s Greenery LLC Official Submission to City of Rogers Cannabis Dispensary Buffer Amendment Request Property Address: 13625 Northdale Blvd, Rogers, MN Submitted by: Barbara Beuning, Owner Executive Summary This proposal requests a minor adjustment to the City of Rogers cannabis dispensary buffer requirement. Specifically, a reduction from 500 feet to 450 feet, or a change to a building-to-building measurement standard. This adjustment preserves community intent while allowing practical site use. Requested Amendment Option 1: Reduce buffer from 500 ft to 450 ft (property line to property line). Option 2: Modify measurement standard to building-to-building. Factor Summary Landlord Position Fully supports dispensary at site Tenant Position Support increased traffic and business synergy Zoning Context Located in commercial corridor Economic Impact Increased tax revenue + local business growth Site Justification The property is located within a developed commercial corridor suitable for retail use. The current 500 ft buffer restricts the site due to property line measurements rather than actual building proximity. Economic Impact Page 135 of 140The dispensary will generate new tax revenue for the City of Rogers through cannabis-related taxation and sales tax. Additionally, it will increase foot traffic, supporting surrounding businesses and strengthening the commercial corridor. Community & Business Support Both the property owner and existing tenants support the dispensary, recognizing the increased traffic and economic benefits. Commitment to Compliance Barb’s Greenery LLC will operate in full compliance with all Minnesota and City of Rogers regulations, including security and operational standards. Conclusion This request represents a balanced, reasonable adjustment that supports economic development while maintaining community standards. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Beuning Owner, Barb’s Greenery LLC Page 136 of 140 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 6, 2026 ROGERS PLANNING Agenda Item: 6.1 COMMISSION Subject: Past Planning Commission Items Report Prepared By: Brett Angell, Community Development Director Overview / Background / Analysis The Planning commission last met on March 2nd with a few items on the agenda. Details related to each item can be found below. Trailers Plus - Site Plan and Variance The Planning Commission reviewed a site plan and variance request from Trailers Plus related to proposed site improvements at the property located at 19520 County Road 81. Following discussion of the request, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the site plan and variance. This item went before the City Council at the March 10th meeting and was subsequently approved. Malmborg's Garden Center — Sign Variance The Planning Commission reviewed a variance request corresponding to changes to the pylon sign at Malmborg's Garden Center located at 20045 County Road 81. The proposed variance was related to the proposed alteration of the sign into an electronic message center sign. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance request, and it was later approved by the City Council at the March 10th meeting. Other Items of Note The list of items below corresponds to updates of other items for the Planning Commission's review. 2050 Comprehensive Plan Kick-Off It is anticipated the May Planning Commission meeting will be a joint meeting with the City Council to kick-off the 2050 Comprehensive Plan update process with the city's consultant team of TC2, SRF, and Landform. Willis Trucking Redevelopment At a past meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed a site plan for the redevelopment of the property at 21601 John Deere Lane into a 181-unit multifamily development. The site plan was later approved by the City Council and at the March 10th meeting, the City Council approved the creation of a redevelopment TIF district for the development. The TIF request was reviewed by staff and the city's consultant, Ehlers, which showed a financial gap and the need for TIF for the development to move forward. With the TIF Page 139 of 140district creation, the city is retaining a percentage of the annual increment for the purposes of building a connection from John Deere Lane to Industrial Blvd. Intersection Improvements The city's engineering department applied for, and was awarded, a grant for the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Main Street and Territorial Road. With this grant, the improvements to this intersection will be coming in the near future. Also, at the March 10th meeting, the City Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with SRF for intersection concept design services for 129th/Main St/Memorial Drive. This design work will provide the final guidance needed for improvements to this intersection when Main Street is reconstructed following a turnback from the county. Staff Recommendation This item is for informational purposes. No action is required. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Source Fund: Not applicable. Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation None Page 140 of 140