Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/11/2016 P&Z PacketCITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING Wednesday, May 11, 2016 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers Please be courteous and turn off all electronic devices during the meeting. ACF.NIIA 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 13, 2016 4. OPEN MIKE 5. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION for Watermark PUD Residential Development B. PUBLIC HEARING for Interim Use Permit for a Batch Plant for Arnt Construction (2209 Phelps Road) 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Project Updates 7. ADJOURN Meeting guidelines on reverse side. City of Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board MEETING GUIDELINES Open Mike — The purpose of a Board Meeting is to accomplish the business of the city. When presenting at a meeting please remember to be respectful, and follow these guidelines: • Please address the meeting chair. • State your name and address for the record. • Please observe a 4-minute limit. • The topic must relate to city business. • Open Mike is for items not on the agenda. • A spokesperson must represent a group of five or more — groups will have 8 minutes. • The Presiding Officer may limit duplicative presentations. • Remember, the meeting is to discuss city business only. Public Hearing - Held as a separate item of business on the agenda. The public hearing segment is your opportunity to tell the Board how you feel about issues scheduled to be heard. Typically, a hearing follows these steps: • The Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice -Chair) will announce the proposal to be reviewed and ask for the staff report. The presiding Officer shall maintain strict order and etiquette at all meetings. • Staff will present their report on the proposal. • Board members will then ask City Staff questions about the proposal. • The Presiding Officer will then open up the public hearing for anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions about the proposal. Comments should be limited to four (4) minutes unless further time is granted by the Presiding Officer. All comments should be directed to the Board as a body and not to any individual Board Member or City Staff Member unless permission is granted by the Presiding Officer. No person shall be permitted to enter into any discussion, either directly or through a member of the Board without the permission of the Presiding Officer. • After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his/her comments, the Presiding Officer shall close the public hearing. • The Board will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. • The Board will then make a recommendation(s) and/or a decision. When you are called upon for your comments, please step to the microphone at the podium and state your name and address for the record. Occasionally, the Board may continue a hearing to another meeting before taking action. Meeting Etiquette The Planning & Zoning Board must preserve order and decorum while the meeting is in session. A resident shall not, by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings or the business of the Board, nor disturb any resident or Board Member while speaking or refuse to obey the orders of the Board. CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE : April 13, 2016 TIME STARTED : 6:30 P.M. TIME ENDED : 9:55 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Neil Evenson, Matt Kassner, Perry Laden, Lou Masonick, Michael Root, Dale Stoesz MEMBERS ABSENT : Paul Tralle (Chair) STAFF PRESENT : Michael Grochala, Diane Hankee, Katie Larsen I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Vice Chair Root called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. on April 13, 2016. IL APROVAL OF AGENDA y The Agenda was approved as presented. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 9, 2016 Mr. Masonick made a MOTION to approve the March 9, 2016 Meeting Minutes. Motion was supported by Mr. Kassner. Motion carried 4 - 0. (Root and Laden abstained.) IV. OPEN MIKE Mr. Root declared Open Mike at 6:31 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:32 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Kassner. Motion carried 5 - 0. (Root abstained.) DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board April 13, 2016 Page 2 V. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review for Veterinary Hospital for Rice Creek Animal Hospital Katie Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and site plan review for the veterinary hospital subject to the following conditions: 1. All comments from the City Engineer letter dated April 6, 2016 shall be addressed. 2. A building permit is required prior to construction. 3. A sign permit is required prior to installation of any new wall or monument signage. 4. City SAC & WAC trunk fees will be paid with the building permit in accordance with Met Council's SAC determination. 5. Exterior lighting plans and details for the vestibule addition shall be submitted. Board members and City staff discussed the drive-thru, parking and signs. Applicant Brian Hansen, business address 6511 Ware Road, commented on the topics of concern from the Board. There may be opportunities to create additional parking, but he ensured that parking has worked fine for the business and he has not received any complaints from clients. Mr. Hansen is hoping they can close on the building and start building 2-3 months after approval from the City Council. ILA& Mr. Root declared the Public Hearing open at 6:53 p.m. Mr. Kassner made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 6:54 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Masonick. Motion carried 5 - 0. (Root abstained) Mr. Laden made a MOTION to recommend approval of the conditional use permit and site plan review. Motion was supported by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 5 - 0. (Root abstained.) B. PUBLIC HEARING: Watermark PUD Residential Community Ms. Larsen presented the staff report. Staff recommends continuation of the public hearing for PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat to allow further review of the project. Preliminary comments to be addressed prior to next Planning & Zoning Board meeting are: 1. Comments from WSB Plan Review Letter dated April 6, 2016 shall be addressed. 2. Streets a. The 24 foot wide private roads on the east side of the townhome neighborhood along I-35E shall be 26 foot wide minimum. b. A block section along Street C exceeds 1,500 feet. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board April 13, 2016 Page 3 i. This length shall be reduced by eliminating the "ghost plat" cul de sac and extending the road to the north. c. The Street D block from Street C to 20th Avenue shall be re-evaluated and possibly reconfigured. i. The lots abutting 20th Avenue need to meet 40 setback ii. The number of driveways accessing Street D should be minimized. iii. d. Cul de sacs on Street F, K, L, P and Q exceed 500 feet in length i. Fire hydrants shall be located every 300 feet ii. Roadway width shall be 32 feet back to back iii. Street P and Q should be redesigned to create one loop vs. 2 long cul de sacs iv. A trail connection shall be made off the cul de sac of Street L potentially through Lots 650-651 through the storm pond outlot to Street B e. Temporary cul de sacs shall be required at the north end of Street D and at the end of any street that terminates between development stages. 3. Utilities a. Storm sewer pipes shall run along the side or rear property lines to the greatest extent possible to avoid drainage & utility easements encumbering large portions of side or rear yards. i. For example: Lots 561, 505, 506, 255-258, etc. 4. Setbacks a. Lot 130 and 131 require a minimum 40 feet setback along CSAH 54. b. Twenty (20) foot side yard setbacks will only be allowed on back to back lots. c. Twenty (20) foot side yard setbacks shall be minimized to the greatest extent possible. d. For example, Lots 704, 761, 412, 128, 129 etc. shall be revised. 5. Buffer and Screen Standards a. Detailed landscape berm plans and sections are required along CSAH 54. b. Landscape screening and buffers shall be installed along CSAH 54, I-35E and in between the townhomes and commercial. c. Attention shall be made to the location of landscape plantings, buffer and berms in regards to grading, storm sewer and utility location, catch basins, etc. d. Water re -use pump stations shall be viewed to determine if screening is required. 6. Lot Size a. Lot sizes for single family lots shall be continuous buildable land and at a minimum size of the Lot Width Product x 130 feet. i. Example: 1. 44 ft x 130 ft = 5,720 s.f.; 2. 55 ft x 130 ft = 7,150 s.f.; 3. 65 ft x 130 ft =8,450 s.f.; 4. 75 ft x 130 ft = 9,750 s.f. b. The 100 year High Water Level shall not encroach into any yard. c. Wetlands and buffers shall not encroach into any yards. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board April 13, 2016 Page 4 i. See Lot 231-232. d. The required 10 feet drainage and utility easement above the HWL maybe included in the lot as part of the standard D&U easement. 7. Single Family Neighborhoods a. Detailed house architectural plans, color renderings and material palette shall be submitted for all single family lots abutting CSAH54, Street A and the public park. 8. Townhome Neighborhood a. A separate plan set detailing the townhome neighborhood shall be required. i. Details on Sheet 43 are not for 32 foot wide townhome product. b. Detailed architectural plans and color renderings shall be submitted for all townhome building elevations. 9. Parks and Trails a. Details on water fountains shall be required with PUD Final Plan. b. A Trail Phasing Plan shall be required with PUD Development Stage Plan c. A "trail corridor" shall be installed along one side of Street B in lieu of sidewalk to make a connection to the park. The trail could be bituminous or concrete. d. Trail location needs to be evaluated between Lot 135 and wetland. 10. Wetlands and Buffers a. The lots surrounding Outlot A shall be evaluated to verify proper wetland buffers (10-25 feet) can be established outside of lots. b. Wetland area calculations differ from Sheet 23 and Wetland Permit Application. Please adjust accordingly. 11. Water Re -use a. Irrigation system for public park, berm area and townhome open space shall utilize stormwater re -use as recommended in the Watermark Water Re -Use Feasibility Study. 12. Sheet 3: Preliminary Plat Index Sheet a. Under Site Data, the number of Single Family Lot shall be 706 and add 1 line for Clubhouse lot to be consistent the Land Use Plan map. 13. Sheets 19-22: Site Plan a. The scale bar is incorrect. Topics of discussion included: • Homeowner's association • Buildout of townhomes • Trail connections • Transportation plan • Definition of Mixed Use in Comprehensive Plan • Stormwater system • Bridge maintenance • Noise study DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board April 13, 2016 Page 5 Developer Rick Packer of Mattamy Homes responded to questions and concerns from the board. Mr. Packer discussed the architectural style that makes their buildings stand out and asked that the board evaluate the homes on their merits. Next time he is in front of the Planning and Zoning Board he will have more photographs. Mr. Packer also discussed noise requirements. Mr. Kassner asked Mr. Packer what would be the degradation to planning if certain homes require add-ons in the back of the house, such as wider window frames. Mr. Packer explained his aversion to evaluating houses on an individual basis and believes once the development is approved, they should be allowed to go forward without needing to look at the houses one -by -one. Michael Grochala, Community Development Director, agreed that the City will not want to check every single house. Staff is comfortable with giving options and having developers meet one of those options. Mr. Packer also discussed market research. Mr. Root declared the Public Hearing open at 8:35 p.m. Jim Huber, Centerville resident, questioned why he received a public notice from the Army Corps of Engineers regarding the wetlands around his house. Mr. Huber was wondering if the wetland will be taken away and voiced his concerns on the matter. He also brought up noise levels on 20th Avenue. Corrine Mitsch, Centerville resident, brought up concerns which included 44' lot sizes, permitted parking, noise, and Native American burial grounds. Stephanie Heckman, Centerville resident, explained her traffic concerns and wondered how residents on Deer Pass will be able to get onto 201h Avenue with the increased traffic, taking into consideration existing traffic from Eagle Brook Church. Staff addressed concerns brought up during the Public Hearing. Mr. Grochala discussed wetlands and drainage in the area and affirmed that the wetland near Mr. Huber's residence will not be impacted. He discussed noise considerations and ensured that staff is working with developers to do what they can to design around the noise and avoid mistakes that were made in the past. Mr. Grochala explained that an archaeological study was done on this site and no burial grounds were found. He described permitted street parking and described the houses on the 44' lots in more detail to put the size into perspective. Ms. Larsen added that the City does not allow parking in the grass in any of our neighborhoods. Mr. Grochala also addressed traffic on 20th Avenue. There will be no signaled intersections for now since it is not warranted, but when those warrants are met signals can be added. Until then, the intersections should still be able to operate at the existing level of service. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to recommend continuation of the Public Hearing. Motion was supported by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 5 - 0. (Root abstained.) DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board April 13, 2016 Page 6 Mr. Root called for a short recess at 9:03 p.m. The meeting was resumed at 9:11 p.m. C. North Oaks PUD Concept Plan Ms. Larsen presented the staff report. Staff recommends submission of a Land Use Application for PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat addressing all comments noted in the staff report. Board members brought up questions and concerns regarding lack of commercial property and mixed use, traffic on County Road J, and density requirements. Applicant Chris Heim of North Oaks Company explained that the development is mainly designed for senior housing and discussed similarities to Waverly Gardens. Staff is looking for input from the Board on how to move forward with the project. The commercial component is a huge concern for Mr. Laden, Mr. Kassner, and Mr. Root. No further action is needed at this time. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Outdoor Storage in Industrial Districts Mr. Grochala discussed the 35E Distribution Facility and ways staff is trying to accommodate for the development. Staff considered doing an ordinance amendment, but after talking to the City attorney they may be looking at rezoning the site to a PUD. Mr. Laden concurred that it sounds like a PUD may be the way to go with this project. B. Planning & Zoning Board Packet Delivery Discussion postponed until the next meeting. C. Proiect Updates Mr. Grochala provided an update of current city projects. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Masonick made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Kassner. Motion carried 5 - 0. (Root abstained.) Respectfully submitted, Nicole DeDeyn Community Development Administrative Assistant DRAFT MINUTES STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA ITEM 5A Katie Larsen, City Planner May 11, 2016 REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED for Watermark PUD Residential Community 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2. Rezoning 3. PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat CASE NUMBER: APPLICANTS: REVIEW SCHEDULE: CP2016-001 RZ2016-001 PD2016-001 PP2016-001 Mattamy Partnership 7201 Washington Avenue S. Edina, MN 55439 Complete Application Date: February 1, 2016 60-Day Review Deadline: April 1, 2016 120-Day Review Deadline: May 31, 2016 Environmental Board Meeting: April 27, 2016 Park Board Meeting: April 4, 2016 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: April 13, 2016 & May 11, 2016 City Council Work Session: May 2, 2016 & June 6, 2016 City Council Meeting: June 13, 2016 BACKGROUND The applicant has submitted a land use application for PUD Development Stage/Preliminary Plat review. The proposed development is a PUD master planned residential community located in the northwest quadrant of I-35E and CSAH 14/Main Street. It contains 12 parcels totaling approximately 372 gross acres and consists of a residential density mix of 706 single family lots 1 and 165 townhome units totaling 871 housing units. The proposed development is called Watermark. The Land Use Applications are: • Comprehensive Plan Amendment for one 10 acre parcel on the northwest corner o Land use guidance from Urban Reserve to Mixed Use o Sanitary District 3 to I • Rezone property from R, Rural and R-BR, Rural -Business Reserve to PUD, Planned Unit Development • PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat ANALYSIS The Planning & Zoning staff report dated April 13, 2016 details the project. The Board opened the public hearing on April 13, 2016 and motioned to continue the hearing. General Comments: 1. In order to provide maximum flexibility to the development, architectural design standards, civil, grading and landscaping plans will be reviewed and approved with each PUD Final Plan/Final Plat. 2. The recreational center will be closer to 4,000 square feet in size with an outdoor patio and grilling area. The April 131h staff report states 5,000 s.f. 3. The four (4) 24 foot wide private driveways on the east side of the townhome neighborhood are acceptable to the fire chief. 4. No parking on either side of the private drives (24 feet or 28 feet) in the townhome neighborhood shall be allowed. 5. The open space area in the 44 foot neighborhood is a private park. 6. The site will be mass graded in two or more phases. 7. The City will require a combination of land dedication and cash is lieu of land dedications. a. Land dedication for the public and private parks will be credited from the total payment in lieu. b. Costs for public park improvements and trail construction will be credited from the total payment in lieu. c. Improvements to the private parks and recreational center will not be credited. Transportation Comments: 1. The preliminary plat was reconfigured to address the following staff concerns: a. Street V was extended through the ghost plat and connected with Street C. This breaks up the 1,500 foot long block section and eliminates a long cul de sac. b. An "eye brow" cul de sac was designed on the north side of Street D to eliminate direct driveway access onto Street D. 2 c. The lots along 20' Avenue and Street D were reconfigured to eliminate direct driveway access onto Street D. d. After further review, due to drainage and elevation issues, Street P and Q are not required to be looped. e. Street W was shifted to the north to provide more wetland buffer between the lots and wetland. f. The trail will be re -aligned along the south side of Street D to 201h Avenue to avoid dangerous mid -block street crossings. g. Sidewalk shall be extended along the north side of Street D to 201h Avenue. Architectural Design Standard Comments: For both the single family homes and the townhomes, the following are acceptable exterior materials and styles: 1. Exterior Materials a. Vinyl, aluminum or steel siding b. Brick c. Stone d. Stucco e. Wood f. Engineered siding products such as LP board, Hardie board or similar 2. Styles a. Lap siding b. Board and batten c. Shakes The following guidelines are intended to establish a minimum baseline for architectural standards for both single family homes and townhome units. In order to provide maximum PUD flexibility and adapt to changing market demands, detailed architectural design standards, floor plans, elevations, exterior materials, styles and color packages will be reviewed and approved with each PUD Final Plan/Final Plat. Single Family Mattamy is proposing a variety of house plans and variations that are different for each lot width classification (75-, 65-, 55- and 44-foot width). The developer has provided floor plans and elevations for the homes, but has not provided details about the color or exterior material palette. Each house plan will be reviewed by the City prior to building permit to ensure that the ordinance standards as modified by the PUD are met. However, because this development will be constructed over a period of time, we expect that new or modified house plans will be added to the product line and would be administratively reviewed and approved by the City staff. Generally, we would expect to see material samples and color palettes for all buildings proposed in the development and a draft of the Homeowners Association documents showing how architectural standards will be enforced. The applicant has indicated that Mattamy has an anti- 3 monotony code to ensure variety in the housing products, but these exterior materials must be submitted for staff review and City approval as part of the PUD final stage plan and final plat for phase I of the project. The exterior materials should ensure that the design of homes elevations be varied with a minimum of five different styles provided in the development and that homes in proximity to each other not look alike in terms of the combination of color of siding, accent and roofing materials. The home under consideration will be compared to the two homes on each side and to the three homes directly facing it. Furthermore, staff believes that due to the high visibility of the homes in this PUD, the City should require a higher level of design on the single family home elevations that that are visible from 201h Avenue (CSAH 54), Street A, Street E and the public park. While the front elevations of the homes have articulation and a variety of exterior materials, the side and rear elevations of the single family homes are generally plain, flat walls. Because the home elevations that face these facilities will be so visible, staff believes that one of the PUD benefits of the project could be a higher level of design on these faces. This should include one of the following three architectural features for those homes visible from these streets and the public park: A minimum of 4 inch window trim on side and/or rear elevations to match the dimensions of the front elevation. 2. Incorporate trim and banding in complementary colors to add interest and variety to the side and/or rear elevations. 3. Incorporate more than one exterior material and/or style on the side and/or rear elevations. The developer shall provide staff with revised plans showing how the intent of these standards will be met. The developer shall also provide a map highlighting the applicable single family lots. Townhomes The Watermark project includes 165 townhome units in thirty-three (33), 4-to 6 unit buildings. Each building has a different floor plan for each unit (e.g. Tanager, Albans, Jennings, Halstead and Maxwell). One of the end units, the Tanager, has the main entrance of the home on the side. Mattamy is proposing three unique building facades for each elevation of their townhomes. A variety of color packages will also be incorporated into the townhome development. It is proposed to develop the townhome neighborhood in three separate phases. A landscape screen (planting, berm or fence) is not required between the townhomes and Street A. The end units of the townhomes facing Street A will be the "Tanager" elevation that provides a main entrance and higher aesthetic value. The following minimum architectural standards shall be incorporated into the townhome neighborhood: M 1. A minimum of three (3) unique building facades (A, B and C) for each elevation of the townhomes shall be provided. a. A table of architectural fagade data shall be included for each elevation. 2. A unique building color package shall be included for each phase of development. 3. At no point will the same fagade and same color package be specified on buildings that are immediately adjacent to or directly across the road from each other. 4. A minimum of 4 inch window trim on side and/or rear elevations to match the dimensions of the front elevation. 5. In no case shall any exterior material be less than 10%. 6. Front elevations shall have a combination of 3 exterior materials and/or styles. a. At least 60% (e.g. two of the three buildings) of the facades in each phase shall include brick, stone or stucco on the front elevation. 7. Rear elevations shall have a combination of 2 exterior materials and/or styles. 8. Rear elevations shall include some vertical trim or element to break up the longer horizontal planes. 9. Side elevations that are exposed to roadways or open space and are highly visible will incorporate architectural details to match the front fagade (e.g. the Tanager and the Maxwell Side (exposed)). 10. Side elevations that are not exposed to roadways or open space shall require only one exterior material (e.g. Maxwell (unexposed)). 11. Decorative garage doors are required on all units. a. At least 60% of the buildings shall have decorative garage doors with windows for any given development phase. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Watermark Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Comments from WSB Plan Review Letter dated April 6, 2016 and May 4, 2016 shall be addressed. 2. Comments from the Environment Board Staff Report dated April 27, 2016 shall be addressed. 3. Streets and Trails a. Cul de sacs on Street F, K, L, P and Q exceed 500 feet in length. i. Fire hydrants shall be located every 300 feet. ii. Roadway width shall be 32 feet back to back. iii. A trail connection shall be made off the cul de sac of Street L to Street B. b. Temporary cul de sacs shall be required at the north end of Street D and at the end of any street that terminates between development stages. c. Trail corridors shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. i. Revise corridor between Lots 436 & 437. ii. Note for corridor from Street L to Street B. d. Sidewalk shall be extended along the north side of Street D to CSAH 54/20th Avenue N. 5 e. Reconfigure Lot 246 so the driveway accesses onto Street W. f. Street V shall include sidewalk. 4. Utilities a. Storm sewer pipes shall run along the side or rear property lines to the greatest extent possible to avoid drainage & utility easements encumbering large portions of side or rear yards. i. For example: Lots 561, 505, 506, 255-258, etc. b. Drainage and utility easements along side lot lines over utility pipes shall be wide enough to allow for maintenance equipment and access. i. No encroachments (house, bay windows, A/C units, landscaping etc.) shall be allowed in or above the drainage and utility easements. 5. Setbacks a. Twenty (20) foot side yard setbacks will only be allowed on back to back lots. b. Twenty (20) foot side yard setbacks shall be minimized to the greatest extent possible. i. For example, Lots 704, 761, 412, 128, 129, 115 and 116 etc. shall be revised. c. Front setbacks on Lots 237-239 shall be shown as 25 feet. 6. Tree Preservation and Landscape, Buffer and Screen Standards a. Detailed landscape berm plans and sections are required along CSAH 54. b. Landscape screening and buffers shall be installed along CSAH 54, I-35E and in between the townhomes and commercial. c. A landscape screen (planting, berm or fence) is not required between the townhomes and Street A. i. The end units of the townhomes facing Street A will be the "Tanager" elevation that provides a main entrance and higher aesthetic value. d. Attention shall be made to the location of landscape plantings, buffer and berms in regards to grading, storm sewer and utility location, catch basins, etc. e. Water re -use pump stations shall be viewed to determine if screening is required. f. The Tree Preservation Plan shall be revised to address Lots 132-135. 7. Lot Size a. Lot sizes for single family lots shall be continuous buildable land and at a minimum size of the Lot Width Product x 130 feet. i. Example: 1. 44 feet x 130 feet = 5,720 s.f. 2. 55 feet x 130 feet = 7,150 s.f. 3. 65 feet x 130 feet =8,450 s.f. 4. 75 feet x 130 feet = 9,750 s.f. b. Flexibility may be allowed during PUD Final Plan/Final Plat phases to allow for a lot depth of 120 feet only if a public value of creating open space or protecting a natural resource is achieved. c. The 100 year High Water Level shall not encroach into any yard. d. Wetlands and buffers shall not encroach into any yards. e. The required 10 feet drainage and utility easement above the HWL maybe included in the lot as part of the standard D&U easement. 8. Single Family Neighborhoods 2 a. Detailed house architectural plans, color renderings and material palette shall be submitted for all single family lots b. The developer shall provide a map highlighting the applicable single family lots abutting CSAH54, Street A and the public park. c. Homeowner Association documents shall be required with PUD Final Plan/Final Plat. 9. Townhome Neighborhood a. A separate plan set detailing the townhome neighborhood shall be required. i. Details on Sheet 43 are not for 32 foot wide townhome product. b. Detailed architectural plans and color renderings shall be submitted for all townhome building elevations. c. Homeowner Association documents shall be required with PUD Final Plan/Final Plat. d. Rear elevations shall include some vertical trim or element to break up the longer horizontal planes. 10. Parks and Trails a. Details on water fountains shall be required with PUD Final Plan. b. A Trail Phasing Plan shall be required with PUD Development Stage Plan c. A "trail corridor" shall be installed along one side of Street B in lieu of sidewalk to make a connection to the park. The trail could be bituminous or concrete. d. Trail location needs to be evaluated between Lot 135 and wetland. e. The Land Use Plan and Site Data shall be revised to show the open space area in the 44 foot neighborhood as the private park. 11. Wetlands and Buffers a. The lots surrounding Outlot A shall be evaluated to verify proper wetland buffers (10-25 feet) can be established outside of lots. b. Wetland area calculations differ from Sheet 23 and Wetland Permit Application. Please adjust accordingly. 12. Water Re -use a. Irrigation system for public park, berm area and townhome open space shall utilize stormwater re -use as recommended in the Watermark Water Re -Use Feasibility Study. 13. Floodplain a. The base flood elevation shall be determined by the applicant. b. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) will need to be obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to verify the floodplain is not impacted by development. 14. Sheet 3: Preliminary Plat Index Sheet a. Under Site Data, the number of Single Family Lot shall be 706 and add 1 line for Clubhouse lot to be consistent the Land Use Plan map. 15. Sheets 19-22: Site Plan a. The scale bar is incorrect. 7 ATTACHMENTS 1. WSB City Engineer Letters dated April 6, 2016 and May 4, 2016 2. Land Use Plan 3. Revised Site Plan dated April 27, 2016 4. Townhome Elevations A, B and C A WSB Building a legacy — your legacy. 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 Memorandum To: Katie Larsen, City Planner From: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer Date: April 06, 2016 Re: Watermark Plan Review WSB Project No. 2029-820 We have reviewed the Preliminary Plat for Watermark in Lino Lakes, MN prepared by Carlson McCain received on March 7, 2016. For reference please see notes on the Preliminary Plat enclosed, along with the following comments that should be responded to in writing by the applicant: GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL The preliminary grading, erosion and sediment control plans, dated March 4, 2016 and prepared by Carlson McCain have been reviewed and we offer the following initial comments: 1. No erosion and sediment control comments at this time, a further review will be completed once the construction plans for the applicable phase is submitted. 2. The applicant needs to provide project phasing detail or narrative, to address the construction staging, berm and trail construction, and utility installation coordination. 3. Roadway grades are to be increased or storm water catch basins are to be less than 400 feet apart. 4. Cul du Sac grades are to be a minimum of 1 percent grade. 5. Roadways are to have high points at intersections when within 100 feet of the intersection. 6. Review low floor, low openings, high water levels per city's stormwater management policy 7. Storm sewer utilities located in rear yards should be designed/constructed along rear lot lines where practical. Lot configuration could be modified to accommodate. 8. Percent grade of rear lot drainage swales required (2% desired — 1 % min.) 9. Consider adding rock filtration underdrains along rear lot lines with storm sewer to enhance water quality and reduce volume discharge. 10. Emergency overflow locations and elevations not shown for all ponds, wetlands and lake features. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\02029-820\Admin\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Madamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen April 06, 2016 Page 2 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The stormwater management for the proposed Watermark Development was reviewed against the proposed Northeast Drainage Area InfoSWMM model high water elevations from March 30, 2016 and enclosed (see Attachment 1). 1. Include water re -use system layout and water fountains in plans. The re -use pump stations should not be located near storm sewer outlets. 2. Normal and critical duration high water levels are provided (attached) — please review maximum water elevations versus proposed grading. The high water elevation may not encroach onto private property. 3. Stormwater modeling needs to be submitted based on the proposed phasing plan for development. 4. Emergency overflow elevations need to be shown on the plans. 5. Low floor elevations have been reviewed against the maximum high water elevations and structures with deficiencies in freeboard requirements are noted on redlined plans. 6. Many of the proposed ponds have more than four feet of bounce; ensure proposed plan species in this zone are tolerant of extended inundation. Plantings in this area may also require a full growing season at a moderated bounce levels to ensure establishment. 7. Drain tile lines need to be re-routed and all drainage rights must be maintained per Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103E. 8. Soil amendments for filtration at pond 300 to the adjacent wetland and pond 20 to outlot J. 9. It is recommended that rear yard filtration systems be considered. 10. A stormwater management plan has not been provided and will be required for final approval. 11. Provide details for outlet control structures and pond interconnections FLOODPLAIN The proposed project has been reviewed against the currently effective FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps, dated December 16, 2015, and we offer the following comments: 1. The project proposes fill of, and changes to, the effective FEMA floodplain boundaries and will require a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from FEMA. All existing floodplain shown on the property is approximate Zone A, however because the project is proposing to develop more than 5 acres, the developer will need to provide a detailed study for the Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) request with the final plat submittal, which would include establishing base flood elevations for the site. 2. A copy of the CLOMR application should be submitted with the final plat application. 3. The City will not issue building permits for lots affected by floodplain without an approved LOMR. WETLANDS 1. The project proposes 4.432 acres of wetland fill and 5.022 acres of wetland excavation with on -site mitigation for wetland impacts. On -site mitigation is proposed to be completed by creating 13.012 acres of new wetland, 4.842 acres of restored wetland, and 13.115 acres of created upland buffer. (Impact/Mitigation calculations taken from the KA02029-82044dn in\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen April 06, 2016 Page 3 Wetland Permit Application, Appendix A) Wetland impacts and mitigation appear to be in compliance with Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) standards and in compliance with Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Wetland Alteration rules. MnRAMs were completed for each wetland for sequencing discussions on impacts of wetlands. Wetland impacts associated with building houses will need a thorough explanation and sequencing discussion to obtain TEP approval. Based on our review, we offer the following comments: a. Based on construction phasing and mitigation, a review of the proposed hydrology should occur by the LGU prior to full build out to ensure proper hydrology requirements for wetland mitigation will occur before the entire project is completed. b. A wetland monitoring and management plan will need to be submitted as part of the replacement plan for WCA and RCWD Approval. Their wetland permit application states that supporting information regarding vegetation management/maintenance and the annual monitoring will be submitted under a separate cover. ENVIRONMENTAL 1. Based on this review the Watermark development is generally in conformance with the AUAR. 2. AUAR Mitigation Item 11.1. The Conservation Design Framework shows two greenways going North -South. The Watermark plan appears to show one corridor that is connected with a second less connected corridor. The City has reviewed the plan and has determined that it meets the intent of the Conservation Design Framework. 3. AUAR Mitigation Item 11.7. The AUAR requires surmountable curb for turtle and wildlife passage. The City Environmental Coordinator verified that this is not a Blandings Turtle site; however to accommodate wildlife passage approximately 90 percent of the roadways within the proposed development include surmountable curb. 4. AUAR Mitigation Item 11.8. The AUAR requires an eagle nest survey. There are not many trees on the site and thus it is not anticipated that there would be eagle nests. A site investigation by the City Environmental Staff was performed and found no eagle nest on the subject property. 5. AUAR Mitigation Item 11.10. The AUAR requires a rare plant survey to be completed in wetlands and other designated areas. City Environmental Staff performed the rare plant survey review and concluded that no rare plants were found on the subject property. 6. AUAR Mitigation Section 13 and 18 — Water Use and Wastewater. The plan is in conformance with the AUAR (per WSB memo dated March 16, 2016 regarding the watermain review). 7. AUAR Mitigation Item 19.1. The AUAR requires all underground tanks be removed. A Phase I and 2 Environmental Site Assessment has been completed for site. A storage tank in the basement of the residence on the northwestern corner of the site was noted. As part of development, tanks will need to be removed in conformance with State standards. 8. AUAR Mitigation Item 25.1. The AUAR requires a Phase 1 cultural resource study to be completed. This study has been completed and no sites were identified. The plan is in conformance with the AUAR. 9. AUAR Mitigation Item 27.2. The AUAR requires clustering, buffering, and/or screening. The plans show screening options between I-35 and the development. This is in conformance with the AUAR. KA02029-82044dn in\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen April 06, 2016 Page 4 10. The updated Noise Study, dated March P 2016 was reviewed. The following comments should be addressed by the applicant: a. The site that was shown in the wrong location on Figures 1.1, 2.1 and 2.2 has been revised with the updated study memo. WATER SYSTEM 1. Note the attached water system memo dated April 5, 2016 (Attachment 2) that outlines the system needs based on the proposed development and the City's comprehensive plan. 2. A 12 inch diameter watermain shall be looped on the northwest end of the plat. 3. The 16 inch diameter watermain shall be looped through the park. 4. Hydrants shall be installed next to the stormwater re -use system pumps. 5. Fire hydrant locations shall be reviewed by the City's Fire Division staff. 300 foot maximum hydrant spacing. 6. A hydrant shall be installed on Street F between Street G and Street C. 7. All hydrant leads shall be a minimum of 6 inches in diameter. 8. The dual 8 inch lines in Street U shall be separated as much as possible (opposite sides of the road). 9. The 16 inch trunk watermain loop to the east shall be installed under I35E when the adjacent phase of the development is constructed. This will be a City improvement project. Show on the plat documents as such. 10. A 12 inch watermain stub is to be extended under CSAH 54 at 77th Street for future looping. 11. An 8 inch water stub to the south shall be installed at the Townhomes (at the trail location). This will provide a future loop to the south parcel. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM 1. An 18-inch sanitary line shall be extended along Street A to CSAH 54 and along Street B to the roundabout, at maximum depth. An 8-inch sanitary line shall be stubbed under CSAH 54 to the west. 2. Please provide either sanitary system profiles or all pipe lengths and slopes so that invert elevations can be verified. 3. With the second phase of the development, assuming phase one has approximately 100 residential connections, the lift station No. 8 pump upgrade will need to be completed. This will be a City improvement project. TRANSPORTATION 1. The traffic study, dated February 13, 2015 and latest technical memo dated March 25, 2016 prepared by Spack Consulting still needs to be refined as detailed below. However, we generally concur that the development can be accommodated with the roadway system proposed. 2. The Watermark development access spacing was reviewed in coordination with Anoka County staff during the concept plan review stage. The access spacing is also in conformance with those outlined in the AUAR completed for this area. The access was KA02029-82044dn in\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen April 06, 2016 Page 5 laid out based on Anoka County access spacing guidelines and the following considerations: • South access: Goal to connect 21st Avenue to the west using the existing access at 73rd Street to minimize CSAH 54 access points. • Middle access: Within 100 to 200 feet of the access guidelines, located to avoid wetland impacts on the west side of CSAH 54. • North access: Rehbein Street was used verses 77th Street due to wetland impacts. Goal was to connect to existing intersections and minimize CSAH 54 access points. Anoka County requires that each access location meets County sight — distance requirements. The applicant will need to provide this analysis for approval by the County with the preliminary plat. 3. Anoka County requires left and right turn lanes on CSAH 54 at each new City street access. These include Rehbein Street, 73rd Street, and Street B. Cross sections for the turn lanes on CSAH 54 need to be included in the plans to verify they can be constructed within the existing/proposed right of way. Specifically the right turn lane at Street D. The applicant will need to have the preliminary design reviewed by Anoka County with the preliminary plat. 4. The applicant needs to provide clarification regarding the outbound lanes needed for City streets exiting onto CSAH 54. The Daily Traffic volumes shown in the update memo on the figure appear to be inconsistent with previous analysis. The traffic volume submittals summarized: o Original Study February 13, 2015 - 450 at Street D, 2970 at Street B and 1380 at Street A o March 9, 2015 revised site plan figure 4 - 1570 at Street D, 1850 at Street B and 1380 at Street A o March 27, 2015 update memo - 1870 at Street D, 1820 at Street B and 1430 at Street A o March 25, 2016 update memo - 1970 at Street D, 1930 at Street B and 1380 at Street A The applicant should respond to the following: a. Why did Street D and Street B increase from the 2015 updated memo to the 2016 update memo? b. Why did Street D increase by 100 vehicles when the internal approaches only went up 20 vehicles? c. Why did Street A decrease from 2015 update memo to the 2016 update memo? 5. The City's maximum cul du sac length is 500 feet from the centerline of the roadway to end of the right of way. There are a number of cul du sacs exceeding this length and they should be addressed by the applicant (Streets F,K,P,Q,L, and future V). 6. Street C exceeds the City's maximum block length of 1,500 feet. See comment below. 7. Street V should be a through roadway, within the ghost plat, and connect to Street C. 8. Direct driveway access on Street D should be removed between CSAH 54 and Street C, or a center median constructed. The roadway should be 36 feet based on the traffic KA02029-82044dn in\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen April 06, 2016 Page 6 volumes proposed. The lots on the south side could access of Street V and lot 126 could access off of Street C. 9. The traffic study should be updated to include an analysis of the planned roundabout at the intersection of Street B and Street E. 10. For streets exiting onto CSAH 54 the County and City required clear zones shall be met. The Landscaping Plan shall reflect this. 11. Street B medians are to have vegetation that is less than 3 feet in height. 12. A typical section for Street B between CSAH 54 and the Roundabout should be provided. 13. The applicant should consider extending the median between CSAH 54 and the Roundabout. This would improve safety and eliminate the median ends with signing. 14. A trail along Street B from CSAH 54 to the park should be included in lieu of sidewalk on one side of the roadway. 15. Street U shall be 20 foot wide on each side approaching Street A. 16. Street O shall be 20 foot wide on each side at the entrance median approaching Street A to match Street U. 17. Street B at the entrance median to Street A shall be 20 foot wide. 18. A detail for a 6 foot sidewalk is provided, however each typical section shows a 5 foot sidewalk. These should be changed accordingly. 19. Between development phases, temporary cul du sacs need to be installed to service the adjacent homes. PARK GRADING & UTILITIES 1. General proposed grades in the park appear to be suitable for development of the modified master plan with the following considerations: a. Grades in the general location of the proposed courts and playground shall be level as courts and playgrounds are built at a 1.0% slope. b. Trail grades are not to exceed 5% slope with a maximum 2% slope at all trail intersections and it appears this will be feasible according to the plans. c. The open lawn in the center of the park should have a 2% minimum and 2.5% maximum slope. 2. There are utility conflicts in the proposed location for the courts to include two storm lines and related structures. The applicant shall coordinate the location of these with the City's parks department. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 1. Required with final plat. PERMITS 1. Koch Pipeline permit to cross with roadway and utilities 2. FEMA Letter of Map Revision 3. NPDES Construction General Permit 4. Rice Creek Watershed Permit a. Rule C: Stormwater Management KA02029-82044dn in\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen April 06, 2016 Page 7 b. Rule D: Erosion and Sediment Control c. Rule E: Floodplain Alteration d. Rule F: Wetland Alteration e. Rule I: Drainage Systems 5. US Corps of Engineers Section 404 - Individual Permit 6. MDH for Water System 7. MCES and MPCA for Sanitary Sewer RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Consider modifying CL grades of Street A at 21" Avenue match to reduce high/low point undulation. 2. Add catch basin at intersection of Drive B and Street A (no valley gutters along Street A) 3. Add catch basins/storm sewer on Street M at station 2+70 4. Add catch basin at intersection of Street E and Street N 5. A more detailed review of grades in townhome area to follow 6. Adjust HP on Street S to 2+00 to reduce catch basin spacing 7. Move catch basins on Street Q to 2+50 to reduce catch basin spacing 8. Adjust HP on Street B to 36+00 to reduce catch basin spacing 9. Label % grades on all drainage swales (1% min. - 2% preferred) 10. Add catch basin on Street A at 9+50 11. Detailed grades needed for roundabout review 12. Add catch basins on Street E at 6+50 to reduce catch basin spacing 13. Add catch basin at intersection of Street E and Street N 14. Add catch basins on Street E at 14+00 to reduce catch basin spacing 15. Adjust low point on Street B to 11+75 to reduce catch basin spacing 16. Shift low point to 2+00 on Street K 17. Add catch basins to Street B at 21+30 18. Check drainage at the intersection of Street P and Street B 19. Add catch basins to Street C at 29+50 (no doubles needed at 28+00) 20. Average out grades on Street C 43+50 to 56+00 (or add CB's) 21. Add catch basins at the intersection of Street C and Street D 22. Shift high point to intersection of Street D and Street V 23. Review drainage at the intersection of Street D and Street W (CB needed?) 24. Review drainage at the intersection of Street C and Street H (CB needed?) 25. Shift high point to intersection of Street F and Street C 26. Add catch basins at intersection of Street G and Street H (4+50) 27. Shift catch basin at the intersection of Street F (6+25) and Street G 28. Shift high point to intersection of Street G and Street H (19+50) 29. Shift high point to intersection of Street F (13+60) and Street G 30. Air relief valves shall be located at all high points in the system. Please provide elevations for all watermains to evaluate air relief valve positioning. 31. There shall be a ten -foot horizontal and 18-inch vertical separation distance from all sanitary and storm sewer lines. 32. In addition to those valves already included in the plans, valves shall be added in the following locations: a. Along Street M; KA02029-82044dn in\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen April 06, 2016 Page 8 b. Along Street E between Street M and Street B; and c. Along Street C between Street I and Street F. The City's Utilities Supervisor shall review the valve locations. 33. Gate -type valves shall be used. 34. Class 52 Ductile Iron pipe shall be used. 35. All watermain shall maintain a minimum cover of 7.5 feet. 36. All joints shall be made of conductive materials. 37. The applicant is to provide the fire flow in gallons per minute required to serve the townhome area. If you or the applicant has any questions regarding these comments, please contact Diane Hankee at (651) 982-2430 or diane.hankee@ci.lino-lakes.mn.us. K:\02029-820\Admin\Docs\20160516 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx MODELED HIGH WATER ELEVATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED WATERMARK DEVELOPMENT, 3/30/2016 NW 896 898 Not Shown 899.5 898.9 899.5 1.5 P100 894 901 Not Shown - 903.4 904.3 904.3 3.3 Assumed 906 P1000 896 904.5 907.5 907.6 905.8 907.6 3.1 P10N 890 898.7 906.5 902.8 903.9 903.9 5.2 Not Shown - P1100 896 904.5 906.5 905.4 906.5 2 Assumed 909 P200 892 900.5 906.5 903.9 905.2 905.2 4.7 Not Shown - P20S 885 900 903.4 904.3 904.3 4.3 assumed 905 Not Shown - P300 896 901 904 904.3 904.3 3.3 Assumed 907 Not Shown - P400 894 901 905 904.3 905 4 Assumed 906 P500 892 899 906.5 902.8 903.9 903.9 4.9 Not Shown - P700 894 901 903.8 903.9 903.9 2.9 Assumed 906 Not Shown - P800 894 901 904.9 903.9 904.9 3.9 Assumed 906 Not Shown - W600 899 900.5 903.2 903.9 903.9 3.4 Assumed 906 Not Shown - W900 903 904 905.4 905 905.4 1.4 Assumed 906 ';J Building a legacy — your legacy. Attachment 2 Memorandum To: Michael Grochala, AICP Community Development Director City of Lino Lakes, MN From: Diane Hankee, PE WSB & Associates, Inc. Erin Heydinger WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: April5, 2016 Re: Mattamy Homes Watermain Review WSB Project No. 2029-82 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 The proposed municipal water system expansion to serve the Mattamy Homes development is sufficient and should be installed as recommended below. The Mattamy development is located west of 1-35E between Main Street and the extension of 77th Street E. The Mattamy Homes development was modeled based on the addition of 871 new users. The model determined watermain sizes and available fire flow. The Mattamy water system should include: • 16" main routed through the development. Extended from south to north, and east to west • 12" main to loop through the townhome area • 8" lateral mains throughout • Interconnect with the City of Centerville The model shows that fire flow is sufficient for the single-family residential area of the development, with calculated available fire -flow ranging from 1,450 to 3,100 gpm. The available fire flow for the townhome area was 2,000 to 2,700 gpm. The developer has yet to determine the required fire flow based on the size of the units and the materials to be used for construction. It should be verified that this range of fire flows is sufficient to serve the townhome area. The Model results conclude that the existing water system can adequately support the Mattamy homes development. However, as there will be additional development elsewhere within the City, additional supply and storage will be required. Options for increasing the City's water supply capacity include constructing a new ground storage reservoir (GSR) and drilling an additional well. This is also outlined in the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Detailed modeling results can be found in Appendix A of this memorandum; system -wide development capacity can be found in Appendix B. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\02029-820\Adm1n\Does\Water System\MEMO mgrochala Mattamy Water 040515.docx ;ij Building a legacy — your legacy. 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 APPENDIX A —WATER MODELING RESULTS: MINIMUM PRESSURES (psi) Explanation Two demand scenarios were evaluated: 1. The existing system with the Mattamy development; and 2. The existing system with the Mattamy development and additional development in the northeast area of the City. Demands were estimated using land -use data from the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. For each scenario, system additions were made. The system layouts evaluated were as follows: 1. No additions; 2. Adding Well 7 and a ground storage reservoir; and 3. Adding Well 7, a ground storage reservoir, and looping the system across 1-35E. Each scenario was modeled with the largest well out of service (firm capacity) as recommended by 10- State Standards. The model results show that the existing distribution system can support the Mattamy Homes area, but that additional infrastructure will be required as development occurs within the City. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\02029-820\Adnnnn\Docs\Water System\Appendix A - Modeling Results.docx ;ij Building a legacy— your legacy. 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 APPENDIX B — CITY OF LINO LAKES PRODUCTION AND STORAGE EVALUATION Design Requirements The City is served by five production wells, with a sixth well currently in production. It is recommended that the capacity of the production wells with the largest well out of service be equal to or greater than the maximum day demand. The City also has two elevated storage tanks. Storage tank capacity should be equal to the average day demand plus an additional volume for firefighting. Existing System Production The City currently utilizes wells to withdraw ground water for water supply purposes. Ten States Standards recommends that maximum day water demand is accommodated with the largest well pump out of service (designated as firm capacity). The City currently has five production wells, with Well No. 6 in construction. It is recommended that wells be able to supply the peak day demand at firm capacity. The City's peak day demand from 2013 to 2015 was, on average, 2,750 gallons per minute (3.9 MGD). A summary of the production capacity is shown in Table 1. Table 1: Lino Lakes Production Capacity Well 1 Flow (gpm) 675 Flow .. 972,000 2 625 900,000 3 1,200 1,728,000 4 750 1,080,000 5 1,100 1,584,000 6* 1,200 1,728,000 Total Flow* 5,550 7,992,000 Firm Capacity* 4,350 6,264,000 Peak Day Demand 2,750 3,960,000 Remaining Capacity (Firm Capacity minus Peak Day Demand) 1,600 2,304,000 *Well 6 is under construction —flow rates are estimates based on preliminary pumping tests Storage The City of Lino Lakes currently utilizes elevated water towers for water storage. There are a number of published design recommendations for water storage. The American Water Works Association recommends that system storage equal the average day demand with a "reasonable" fire -fighting reserve. The fire -fighting reserve varies from city to city. For this report, it was assumed that the City should be able to supply 1,750 gpm for 3 hours. This is consistent with ISO's recommendation for a system serving primarily built-up residential to light commercial. From 2011 to 2015, the City's average day demand was 1.39 MG. Table 2 outlines the City's storage capacity. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\02029-520\Adm1n\Docs\Water System\Appendix B - System Capacity.docx March 30, 2016 Page 2 Table 2: Lino Lakes Storage Capacity Tower 1 Capacity (gal) 1,000,000 2 1,000,000 Total 2,000,000 Average Day Demand 1,390,000 Fire Fighting Reserve 315,000 Remaining Capacity 295,000 Water Demand To determine the system's ability to support development, average day water demand, maximum day water demand, and water -use patterns were considered. The total annual pumping was divided by the number of residential connections to estimate the per unit demand on an average day. A similar calculation evaluated the per unit demand on the maximum day. The City's average day demand from 2013 to 2015 was 303 gallons per unit, and the maximum day demand was 911 gallons per unit. These values are used to estimate the capacity for development. Development Capacity To determine how many additional units can be supported on the existing system, both water storage and supply were considered. Results show that with the addition of Well No. 6, the water supply will be sufficient for approximately 1,650 average -use homes after Mattamy is connected, while water storage should be upgraded upon the addition of 104 average -use homes. Therefore, water storage will be the limiting factor in terms of development. Table 3 summarizes the predicted capacity after the Mattamy development is fully connected. Table 3: Development Capacity Availability Total Capacity Water Towers 2,000,000 gal ProductionWater 6,264,000 gpd Remaining Capacity 295,000 gal 2,304,000 gpd Mattamy Demand* 264,000 gal 793,000 gpd Capacity Available 31,000 gal 1,511,000 gpd Number of Additional Residential Units 104 units 1,650 units K:\02029-520\Admin\Docs\Water System\Appendix B - System Capacity.docx A WSB Building a legacy —your legacy. Memorandum To: Katie Larsen, City Planner From: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer Date: May 4, 2016 Re: Mattamy Watermark Plan Review WSB Project No. 2029-820 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We have reviewed the revised Preliminary Plat submitted on April 28, 2016 for Watermark in Lino Lakes, MN prepared by Carlson McCain. The revisions were primarily to address traffic and access in the north part of plat by Street D. The following are our review comments that should be responded to in writing by the applicant. These are in addition to the previous comments memo to Katie Larsen dated April 6, 2016: GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 1. The grading, erosion and sediment control preliminary plat documents need to be submitted with the proposed changes for review. We do not anticipate any significant changes to the proposed layouts with relation to grading, erosion and sediment control preliminary. 2. The surface water emergency overflow for lots 127 — 116 needs to be detailed with the addition of Street V access to Street C in consideration with the grades for the ghost plat. The objective is to avoid additional rear yard storm sewer in the future. A profile of Street V should be rough drafted to avoid replacing the roadways stubs and associated yard grading. This will help ensure drainage can be addressed in the low area between the two plats. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT l . The stormwater management design and calculations need to be updated and re- submitted with the proposed changes for review. We do not anticipate any significant changes to the proposed layouts with relation to the storm sewer system. 2. The side yard storm sewer on narrow lots needs to be coordinated with the building plans. No overhanging windows or window wells can be installed. A clear 20 feet needs to be provided. The applicant shall provide a summary of side yard storm sewer with pipe depths and a summary of how future access for maintenance will be accommodated. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com S:\CommwityDevelopmmt\Projeas\Plnning Cas Natermark (Mattamy Homes)\Staff Reports\20160511 PZ (PUD Dev Stage PP)\lb 20160504 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Mattamy.docx Ms. Katie Larsen May 04, 2016 Page 2 FLOODPLAIN 1. No additional comments with the revised submittal. WETLANDS 1. No additional comments with the revised submittal. ENVIRONMENTAL 1. No additional comments with the revised submittal. WATER SYSTEM 1. No additional comments with the revised submittal. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM 1. The 8-inch sanitary sewer line at Rehbein Street should be extended to the west side of CSAH 54. TRANSPORTATION 1. Verifying Street D traffic volumes from the traffic study, dated February 13, 2015 and latest technical memo dated March 25, 2016 prepared by Spack Consulting, still needs to be addressed by the applicant. 2. The cul du sac serving lots 132-135 needs to be included in the preliminary plat design for review for grading and traffic circulation. 3. Sidewalk shall be installed along the entire north side of Street D. 4. The right of way along Street D, lots 131/18/127/136, is 60 feet wide and should be wider to accommodate the higher level roadway, sidewalk and the blacktop trail. A minimum of 66 feet wide is recommended. 5. The trail between lots 436 and 437 needs to be within a 20 easement. 6. Lot 246 driveway access shall be off of Street W. PARK GRADING & UTILITIES 1. No additional comments with the revised submittal. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 1. Required with final plat. PERMITS 1. No additional comments with the revised submittal. S:\CommwityDevelopmmt\Projeas\Plnning Cases\Watermark (Mattamy Homes)\Staff Reports\20160511 PZ (POD Dev Stage PP)\lb 20160504 Engineering Ms. Katie Larsen May 04, 2016 Page 3 If you or the applicant has any questions regarding these comments, please contact Diane Hankee at (651) 982-2430 or diane.hankee@ci.lino-lakes.mn.us. S:\CommwityDevelopmmt\Projeas\Plnning Cases\Watermark (Mattamy Homes)\Staff Reports\20160511 PZ (POD Dev Stage PP)\lb 20160504 Engineering Ms. Katie Larsen May 04, 2016 Page 4 S:\CommwityDevelopmmt\Projeas\Plnning Cases\Watermark (Mattamy Homes)\Staff Reports\20160511 PZ (POD Dev Stage PP)\lb 20160504 Engineering 0 ~ C/') J O O J = O U O 0 = LiJ U (n Q J LIJ Q Q J W m W W o -------------------------- o F ���� O w I I I I w m W SOIL BORINGS WETLANDS BRAUN INTERTEC KJOLHAUG ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY 11001 HAMPSHIRE AVE. S. 26105 WILD ROSE LANE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55438 SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 (952)995-2000 (952)401-8757 MIA L MIA L k INTERSTATE HIGHWAY N0. 35 — -LOCATION MAP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------�- LEGEND 0 75' SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 177 0 65' SINGLE FAMILY/PREMIUM LOTS 54 0 65' SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 247 0 55' SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 144 44' SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 84 0 30' TOWNHOME UNITS 165 20TH AVENUE NORTH (CSAH SITE DATA TOTAL SITE AREA ±372.24 AC. 0 PARK TOTAL ROW AREA t54.34 AC. PUBLIC OPEN SPACE 20TH AVENUE NORTH ±5.46 AC. INTERNAL ROW ±48.88 AC. 0 PRIVATE OPEN SPACE WATER AREA ±66.79 AC. WETLANDS(REMAINING/MITIGATION)±23.07 AC. 0 PRIVATE OPEN SPACE RDWY LAKE ±24.19 AC. 0 LAKE (H WL) STORM PONDS ±19.53 AC. PARK AREA ±77.00 AC. STORM PONDS PUBLIC PARK ±5.38 AC. PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ±57.23 AC. 0 WETLANDS PRIVATE PARKS ±1.59 AC. (REMAINING/MITIGATION) PRIVATE OPEN SPACE ±9.43 AC. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE RDWY ±3.37 AC. 54) TOTAL LOT AREA f 174.11 AC. SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ±164,66 AC. TOWNHOME LOTS ±9.45 AC. TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS/UNITS 872 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 706 TOWNHOME UNITS 165 CLUBHOUSE LOT 1 MINIMUM HOUSE SETBACK DATA: FRONT 25 FT. SIDE (44') 6 FT. SIDE (55,65,75) 7.5 FT. SIDE CORNER 20 or 25 FT. REAR SETBACK 25 FT. 0 0 0 0 O O W J Q Q z J z m W Q ~ W z m W U W F-- 1 U, Q OWNER CONTACT RICK PACKER (952)898-6108 0 100 200 400 ( IN FEET ) 41100ft 1 Suit Pheasant Ridge Drive NE, Revisions: MATTAMY HOMES 1 Carlson I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak P.E. Drawn: C# WATERMARK Suite 100 � 1. Rev. Layout. 03/04/16 • environmental MN 55449 or report was prepared by me or under my Blaine, • direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 7201 Washington Avenue - Suite 201 LAND USE PLAN of • surveying Phone: (763) 489-7900 Licensed Professional Engineer under 9 Lino Lakes, Minnesota )McCain y g Fax: (763) 489-7959 the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 01/07/16 License #: 25063 Date: 01/07/16 Edina, MN 55439 / 1 www.carlsonmccain.com Save Date: 03/04/16 f:\jobs\4721 - 4740\4724 - lino lakes property\cad\survey\layouts\4724_watermark colored exhibit.dwg e e agi 366 \ 350 ' m`d'. \ \ " - - --,•,eau ILU1-t i / w''j 388 oua / 191 a 176 367aC "�y j 263 '\ i % 890 390 / 192 276 I 809.44E 2 � % 921. 264 /i/ / / 391 f RE 901.78 / I 909. '�/ p µ IE 908.29E i • • ry8 2 / as \. ,$• ,kE 21 FF E 907.79 9 \ 368 POND m e° H,NWG *RA, 3 901.78 175 IG-909.34 Z65 i" ✓ : • e \ \ / , / 2Q S'EON�REIE 275 - /t 266 ((���,yP77I ./�// alW\ Flo OUTLET / \ 267 y�y-8T ` • 't'r. \ CONTROL / \\ bps ,II 900.35 8•N .y %YE 93.31 10•W CJ 1 i / 262 \"�s \ E 901 020 \ STRUCTURE /�' 11 367 0 �N'��\ a \k� g900.35 8•E 174 274 1 RE 921.58 268 / �- j IE 900.91 369 e� 1\0'•5�4 / I I Nr� IE 909.04 269 /.� / s MgwEa a� .A I / ---�'�r�rNE z� zo 908.94 /�1i 1 �• 173 / IRE E 91 19 of 271 ./• / 270 261 \ al 370 \ \ 384i r mom\ aNme % 0 IE 898 273 E 910.30 / OUTLOT E �•,\ i l \�4 a N 435 913.13 SINGLE FAMILY 272 \ o*�"` % \ / IE892:05 oN 65', & 75' MIN. WIDE LOT 257 258 259 260I„i 371 r GaNaRE E E 892.05 1 255 256 ---- --m 14�J� ^m 372 %/ I�PNo / j 383 / DEWA 196 172� a 436 \ 254rGaU" --- STREE G I!� . --__ 373i 1' / i/ 1 1{ I \ 25' REAR SETBACK % 07 B _.-ss o 374 375 \ j' 382 / IE 894.03 \ 253 ,% m N a e Ac1,> '\- IE 893.981 171 IRE 913.57 \ 90. 97 I IE 891.80 \ IE aw.oe "\. 381 / / IE e91.7o 437 ---- DARAGE: 7ETBACKS ,yl IE 898.99 / 360 / 918.70 I, SI 5 PT. _ z5. fRyw1 55 Acre-uNE - FT. IE 894.46 / \ 1 BLDG PA ORNER: 20 OR 25 FT. 252 \�� \ / - IE e99.za 216 a 215 214 213 E�899-sz a e-� / / / 376 377 378 379 I �s:3�e 198 // 170 6o, 438 (SEE PLAN) \\ / . $ I �`---__-T�� I e9a9s s 218IE Z17 Dam IE ------- IE8899802 tOM 210� _- 439 25' FRON 251 900.05 NW 219 212 1 169 R/w \ @ ACK // 44! /� 4.91 e 2, ,' 220--------- S i 200 r/ �U \ E 900. 8P 0 sDEw221 ,---- DRN =E R .. '�'i /r Io - 447 >•� TYPICAL SERVICES SHALL BE: `�Ut- 201 168 v I B 440 SEWER: 4" PVC SCH.40 20 ,, OUTLOT F cm POND / ----- - CURB STOP TO BE PLACED 6 BEYOND / V_ 4 / 8 �. -\,` POND 167 MN US / '�. u5 f(ypNt i / _ _ \ I 11 I� R W 2 / 223 ,a ° ---------- - -- > i 249 / � - : v_ 208 205 204 � 203 coN1ROL vvv � ! Eaeaie 4 446 I - I- a > / / __r_- OUTLET / as i / STRUCTURE \ ! _ 890.89 55���� ECONTROL a LRt'E / \ \ STRUCTURE // -•/ \ \ / \ \ \----� I I I / A I _ bRr Osoiie a 166 I 442 / \\se>aq 226 OUTLOT F ` \ 1I 443 1611' 6 127 l\� /, RER-"'. EA olND _ _ .. i afi 164 I w i /i p 683 OU SIDE OFSS ° .� 228 t A 0 444 / 682 �� 1 I I 1248 90270 � � � c � � IE 900.0 NE � - -- - \ `� IE ase.oe i 247 / IE age. sw 229 �\ i 1 . \ . --------------------------------i N IE 897.98 681 --------- 246! e aoNGREE \•..; -- - - - - - - - - OUTLOT E 16 p R o• 3 ei i \ OU LOT E \ % _ - - - - - I 11 f I D45 12.20 68 -1 . �1DAcw I,u RE 912.20 A14 139 14,0 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 I 11 138 EIE 8a9sL7.2354 \ IE 895.25 --- .2-_F O- ,'aukosgw\hQ a , R 915.-32 150 \- \IIE E 11914.8 E� 88W88888...578989 181�D0W•-5E IEIE1 g -I�Ge-r137 679 E 901. 678 677676 675 o„maLuwOus 230 / RE --------- 161 j uI a I s' I - I 160 I 1102 I 242 bI 234: / \ ILLwE_. _ 1 I sD OUTL( fen �-II 2 22-----42-1_ 120 117 91155.5 892.75 I 1 _ i Z h i o� ARE / / \'� IE 892.85 �--- s ewnireE 158 159 ! 241 f I _ � 235 � I ;\ // 9088 126 � IE 898.15 898.0590.5 j r\ \� � IE 903.58 IE 903.2 � / / Tfo' OT J 913. / 80• I R \. ,X " IE 898.05 a j \� -� - '�' oB� ,n m � 1E. 9 � / / g 1 B" E 90 IE 901.85 IE p0 10•N .45 35 690 691 A 240 \, �'Bac j 235 j' i 1 j' \g 135 m 1� 127 / 115 � / 114 \� m-m ��� €1; IE 890.53 104 / I IE 887.03 IE 895.86 WE 9 IE 888.61 15^W 687 688 689 & 128 IE 901. - d fa 1, / U"c 6 OT A �' c �,_� z. m� IE il' j j 113 _ 112---- 111 ---€ 105-- 237 %i 134 ti u"f 987z a asi:oi W - - - - `` 239 I i/ / \\\ 110 107 POND 238 /// � I e88.78 �� L_ RaN. E eAG_ V" L �� i , _ 109 106 106 // v� 2s / BRIDGE B-B -� I / OUT \ / •� . • IR -__ _� -_----- \ AVIK ORE sz i IE BM17 POND 133' m E ' IM m _� aee za I\ -, � eRIDCE fnR 1G 'DIP srEEL cA / I 1 r / - ----------- I --- _. I POND - i / I .preen\Rv �csaEP�1H WER reA \ rl�'-E 2 nxoN1 - U�-IE 89 11 Se// sDcwuiE� isloewALHPNo IE 898.41 H N IE 89 01 N ! / i - COUTLET ONTROL\\s _ - - - s caucRE1E IE `111 132 IE 898.31 nSTRUCTURE / \ /131OUTLOT G RE 91 130 ((( I I IE 885.77 15•S,ERE 9o7 IDc sEioncK uHe �-'w liEnre iE i' ! I //( rbRNIE 885.35 snNG (C GRAIN E I ,RAI -I-s TRAIL T� __-_ __________--ears-_--�-?-�-�"r---�r�_ �__-__��-o_--_ �_.�_-_y.-_-__v_.--_ti a�==__'-_--_--_-'_.--_---'.---__'-r _ems__•_lam_ ___+-.__.__-__T�Oxf - `- - _-- lu H LANE / Y - - - - - i 12 THROUGH - TURN LANE 12' 1HR0JG LANE - S ----------- --- - __- 20TH AVENUE NORTH (C.S.A.H. N0. 54) _ GG Lr JACK/BORE ar GD Aa BGRE 2a• IE- ERIGGESTEEL faR ,6 DIR WN 51Ua Pa SANITARY SEWER B ARKS -_ - _ _ IE 887.41 __ - 1.MN/DOT GSID to io1 #92399 (0282 S) - - ' z Located Sou G Quadrant intersection _ - - of Interstat. te 35 an County Rd. 14 Elevation = 931. 7 (N VD 88) 2.MN/DOT GSID Ste 92391 (0282 L) - - Located along Wes aid of Interstate 35E, !---------- ---- i 0 25 50 100 1.4 miles North of C un y Rd 14, Elevation = 909.48 ( A 88) (IN FEET) ■/�pq■ 3890 Pheasant Ridge Drive NE, Revisions: T)McCainearlscm ,nvironm Blain 00 heportwai eared ylmeor ndermy PtlntName: BdanJ Kryso pawn: JJp MATgAMY HOMES 22 entai Blaine, MN 55449 orreport was prepared by me or under my 'yChanges WATERMARK • I •engineering phone: (763) 489-7900 direct supervision and that I am a tluly Bignakure: a oeslgnetl: BJK 2. a/v/16 -layout Changes 'surveying Fax (763) 489-7959 Licensed Professional Engineer under 7201 Washington Avenue Suite 201 SITE PLAN of WWW. catlsonmccaln-mi the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 12/18/15 Ueenae #: 25063 Date: iz/Cans Edina, MN 55439 Lino Lakes, Minnesota 45 sayn-aanmseco--H/.--Imo lak:: o 716-1 a 19�51 2� ,Oo- -.■■ vb.` II III f I III IIi11111lm Miami it mill l fill 1111711117� oil ire iaui� l ;;� � I� IICI�II , -- '19" mattamyHoMEsWWI .� all ■i 111 � II■■II � I ��i �■� Watermark Row Townhomes ©2016 Mattamy Homes Elevation A - Rear No Scale Elevation A - Architectural Facade Data Front Facade Gross Fagade Area 3,372 Garage Doors 585 Windows, Doors & Trim 1,811 Net Fagade Area 976 Siding 1 841 86% Board & Batten 1 135 14% Rear Facade Siding 1 1,068 58% Siding 2 1 760 1 42% Maxwell Side - Exposed Siding 1 485 77% Board & Batten 1 141 23% Maxwell Side - Not Exposed Siding 1 640 Tanager Side Siding 1 405 81% Board & Batten 1 92 19% rmaftamvune�rc I rr�ill�1.vi nt . ekk. 000� 0000� Aill r ar L! LII ■ ■■ ora it ■■ ■■■ �! j III -. 1■ ■ II[ I.I.M. Ld 1;1limil . hiaftaMYHOMEs —0— IE1lL�la LLl I iNlllliY i.. r iGill�fl 4111r1■ v�����.�ri■rlrn� ���irnl■irirl■irtl ICI Watermark Row Townhomes 02016 Mattamy Homes Elevation B - Rear No Scale Elevation B - Architectural Facade Data Front Facade Gross Fagade Area 3,086 Garage Doors 585 Windows, Doors & Trim 1,484 Net Fagade Area 1,017 Siding 554 54% Shakes 359 35% Stone 104 10% Rear Facade Siding 1 1,443 79% Shakes 1 384 21% Maxwell Side - Exposed Siding 1 485 77% Shakes 1 141 23% Maxwell Side - Not Exposed Siding 1 640 Tanager Side Siding 291 64% Shakes 136 30% Stone 27 6% rmaftamyHOME( w Watermark Row Townhomes 02016 Mattamy Homes TANAGER 'G' ALBANS 'G' JENNINGS 'G' NALSTEAD 'G' MAXXELL G' Elevation C - Front No Scale Elevation C -Tanager Side No Scale [m:a tfttgag m y H 0e�rc Elevation C - Maxwell Side (unexposed) No Scale Elevation C - Maxwell Side (exposed) No Scale Watermark Row Townhomes 02016 Mattamy Homes Ae- Elevation C - Rear No Scale Elevation C - Architectural Facade Data Front Facade Gross Facade Area 2,674 Garage Doors 585 Windows, Doors & Trim 1,450 Net FaIgade Area 639 Siding 445 70% Stocco Band 93 15% Stone 101 16% Rear Facade Siding 1 1,068 58% Siding 2 1 760 42% Maxwell Side - Exposed Siding 1 379 83% Stucco Board 1 781 17% Maxwell Side - Not Exposed Siding 1 471 Tanager Side Siding 270 87% Stucco Board 12 4% Stone 27 9% rmaftamy�oMEs Im STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: REQUEST: CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REVIEW DEADLINE: PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA ITEM 5B Katie Larsen, City Planner May 11, 2016 PUBLIC HEARING for Interim Use Permit for a Batch Plant for Arnt Construction (2209 Phelps Road) IU2016-001 Arnt Construction Company, Inc. Attn: Nick Arnt PO Box 549 Hugo, MN 55038 Complete Application Date: April 14, 2016 60-Day Review Deadline: June 13, 2016 120-Day Review Deadline: August 12, 2016 Environmental Board Meeting: NA Park Board Meeting: NA Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: May 11, 2016 Tentative City Council Work Session: May 23, 2016 Tentative City Council Meeting: May 23, 2016 BACKGROUND The applicant has submitted a land use application for an Interim Use Permit for a temporary batch plant to be located at 2209 Phelps Road (PID #24-31-22-42-0012). The Land Use Application references 2190 Phelps Road but Anoka County GIS has the subject site addressed as 2209 Phelps Road. The following staff report is based on the following plan sets: • Temporary Concrete Plant Site Plan prepared by EG Rud & Sons dated April 25, 2016 and received by the City on April 25, 2016 ANALYSIS In 2011, Arnt Construction received an interim use permit for a temporary batch plant with Resolution No. 11-60. The property address was listed as 2209 Phelps Road and the batch plant was located on the north-east quadrant of Phelps Road and Otter Lake Service Road near I-35E. The current request for a batch plant is also addressed as 2209 Phelps Road but will be located south of Phelps Road on the south-west quadrant of Phelps Road and Otter Lake Road. PCI Roads, LLC will be setting up a temporary concrete batch plant for a MNDOT road construction project on I-35E. The plant will be on site for 3 weeks starting June 6, 2016 to June 24, 2016 and concrete will be produced for 8 days. The remaining time is for assembly and disassembly of the equipment. Existing Site Conditions Arnt Construction currently operates their road construction/excavation business and stockpiles construction materials on the subject site. A portion of the stockpile will be removed to allow for set up of the batch plant equipment. Clearwater Creek/Judicial Ditch #3 runs along the south side of the property. CR 84/Otter Lake Road borders the property to the east and Phelps Road borders to the north. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan The site is guided for industrial use. The current construction operation and proposed temporary batch plant are consistent with industrial users. Transportation Plan Goal #2 of the Transportation Plan is ensure streets and roads are as safe as possible. The proposed haul routes are as follows: 1. I-35E north to Anoka County Road 14 east to Anoka County Road 84 south to the site. 2. County Road 84 (at Phelps Road) north to Anoka County Road 14 west to I-35E south to project. 3. Anoka County Road 84 (at Phelps Road) south to County Road J west to I 35E south to Project. 4. I-35E to County Road J east to Anoka County Road 84 north to plant site. Staff has concerns about excess construction traffic on CR 84/Otter Lake Road south of Phelps Road. The proposed routes #3 and #4 shall be eliminated. W A Site Performance Agreement shall be required to secure funds for any road repair needed due to the batch plant operation. Sanitary Sewer Plan No sanitary sewer is required for the batch plant operation. Water Supply Plan A goal of the water supply plan is to provide users affordable potable water that is safe and of high quality for daily consumption and fire demand. The site is served by a 16" watermain. Water use for the batch plant will be approximately 24,000 gallons and the owner will install a water meter to monitor usage. Zoning The property is currently zoned LI, Light Industrial. Per Section 1007.120 (11), Temporary Batch Plants are allowed as an Interim Use Permit. Current Zoning LI, Light Industrial Current Land Use Industrial Future Land Use per CP Industrial Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Direction Zoning Current Land Use Future Land Use North LI, Light Industrial Industrial Industrial South LI, Light Industrial Open Space Industrial East LI, Light Industrial Agriculture Industrial West LI, Light Industrial Industrial Industrial Setbacks The batch plant will be setback 80 feet south of Phelps Road, 150 feet west of CR 84/Otter Lake Road and 160 feet north of Clearwater Creek/JD 3. Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) The site is within the 2005 I-35E Corridor AUAR environmental review boundary. The temporary batch plant is a temporary operation consistent with the industrial Land Use Scenarios #1, #2 and #3. No negative environmental impacts are anticipated. Wetlands Wetlands are potentially located 160 feet to the south along Clearwater Creek/JD #3 on the boundary of the property but the temporary batch plant will not impact the wetlands or creek. The applicant shall receive approval from RCWD for the project as well. Floodplain The 2015 DFIRM indicates Zone A floodplain along Clearwater Creek/JD #3 but it will not be impacted by the temporary batch plant. FINDINGS OF FACT Per the LI, Light Industrial Zoning District, Section 1007.120 (11)(a), Temporary Batch Plants are allowed as an Interim Use Permit. Per Section 1007.017 Administration: Interim Use Permits: (3) General Standards. An interim use shall comply with the following: (a) New Uses. 1. Meets the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in § 1007.016 of this Ordinance. Due to the outstanding issues listed below, staff cannot determine if the proposed temporary batch plant meets the standards of a conditional use permit. 2. Conforms to the applicable performance standards of this Ordinance. Due to the outstanding issues listed below, staff cannot determine if the temporary batch plant conforms to the applicable performance standards. 3. The use is allowed in an interim use in the respective zoning district. Temporary batch plants are allowed as an interim use permit per the LI, Light Industrial Zoning District, Section 1007.120 (11)(a). 4. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. The interim use permit will expire on June 30, 2016 5. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. al The temporary batch plant will not impose additional costs on the public. A Site Performance and securities shall be required prior to set up. 6. The user agrees to any conditions that the City Council deem appropriate for permission of the use. The user shall agree to any conditions listed in the Council resolution and Site Performance Agreement. Per Section 1007.016 Administration: Conditional Use Permits: (2)(g) Standards. The Planning and Zoning Board shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall order the issuance of such permit only if it finds the following criteria have been met: 1. The proposed development application has been found to be consistent with the policies and recommendations of the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan including: a. Land Use Plan. b. Transportation Plan. c. Utility (Sewer and Water) Plans. d. Local Water Management Plan. e. Capital Improvement Plan. f. Policy Plan. g. Natural Environment Plan. Due to the outstanding issues listed below, staff cannot determine if the proposed temporary batch plant is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed development application is compatible with present and future land uses of the area. The proposed temporary batch plant is compatible with present and future land uses of the area. The temporary batch plant operation is temporary. Present land use is industrial. Future land use is industrial. A temporary batch plant is allowed with an interim use permit in the LI, Light Industrial District with conditions. 3. The proposed development application conforms to performance standards herein and other applicable City Codes. 5 Due to the outstanding issues listed below, staff cannot determine if the proposed temporary batch plant conforms to the performance standards of the City Code. 4. Traffic generated by a proposed development application is within the capabilities of the City when: a. If the existing level of service (LOS) outside of the proposed subdivision is A or B, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service more than one grade. b. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is C, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below C. c. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is D, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below D. d. The existing LOS must be D or better for all streets and intersections providing access to the subdivision. If the existing level of service is E or F, the subdivision developer must provide, as part of the proposed project, improvements needed to ensure a level of service D or better. e. Existing roads and intersections providing access to the subdivision must have the structural capacity to accommodate projected traffic from the proposed subdivision or the developer will pay to correct any structural deficiencies. f. The traffic generated from a proposed subdivision shall not require City street improvements that are inconsistent with the Lino Lakes Capital Improvement Plan. However, the City may, at its discretion, consider developer -financed improvements to correct any street deficiencies. g. The LOS requirements in paragraphs 1. to 4. above do not apply to the I- 35W/Lake Drive or I-35E/Main St. interchanges. At City discretion, interchange impacts must be evaluated in conjunction with Anoka County and the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, and a plan must be prepared to determine improvements needed to resolve deficiencies. This plan must determine traffic generated by the subdivision project, how this traffic contributes to the total traffic, and the time frame of the improvements. The plan also must examine financing options, including project contribution and cost sharing among other jurisdictions and other properties, that contribute to traffic at the interchange. h. The City does not relinquish any rights of local determination. Due to the outstanding issues listed below, staff cannot determine if traffic generated by the temporary batch plant is within the capabilities of the City and County transportation system. 5. The proposed development shall be served with adequate and safe water supply. Con The proposed temporary batch plant will require approximately 24, 000 gallons of water and that can be supported by the existing water system. 6. The proposed development shall be served with an adequate and safe sanitary sewer system The proposed temporary batch plant does not require service by sanitary sewer. 7. The proposed development shall not result in the premature expenditures of City funds on capital improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development. The proposed temporary batch plant shall not expend City funds. 8. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Due to the outstanding issues listed below, staff cannot determine if the proposed temporary batch plant will be detrimental to any persons or property. 9. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. The proposed temporary batch plant will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of natural, scenic or historic features. The existing wetlands and public ditch system will not be affected by the activities. No scenic or historic features exist in the area. Per Section 1007.046, Batch Plants: (3) Requirements. In addition to the General Standards contained within § 1007.017, Temporary Batch Plants are also required to comply with the following conditions and performance standards in order to obtain an Interim Use Permit: (a) The Batch Plant shall be located on the site so as to minimize the disturbance of surrounding dwelling units or commercial businesses. Arnt Construction currently operates their road construction/excavation business and stockpiles construction materials on the subject site. The surrounding properties are guided for industrial use. The current construction operation and proposed temporary batch plant are consistent with industrial users. (b) The Batch Plant shall maintain a 50 foot setback from any wetland. The temporary batch plant is located over 160 feet from any potential wetlands. 7 (c) The project intended to be served by the batch plant and a deadline for removal shall be clearly defined. The temporary batch plant will be used by PCI Roads, LLC for a MN/DOT I-35E project. The set up date is June 6, 2016 and shall be removed by June 30, 2016 (d) The Hours of Operation shall be clearly defined. Hours of operation shall be consistent with Section 901.03(4)(b): 7: 00 a. m. to 7: 00 p. m. Monday through Friday 9: 00 a. m. to 5: 00 p. m. Saturday No construction activity allowed Sunday and federal holidays (e) Access to and from the site shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to any site disturbance. Access to the site is from CR 84/0tter Lake Road to Phelps Road. Access has been reviewed by the City Engineer and Anoka County Highway Department. Securities will be required for road damage incurred. (f) A grading, erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to any site disturbance. The grading, erosion and sediment control plan are part of the MN/DOT plan set. These plans shall be submitted to the City for review prior to approval of the interim use permit. (g) A Storm Water Pollution Prevention plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to any site disturbance. The SWPPP is part of the MN/DOT plan set. The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City for review prior to approval of the interim use permit (h) A restoration plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to any site disturbance. A restoration plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to any site disturbance. (i) All applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements are satisfactorily met. The temporary batch plant has a permit from MPCA under the Industrial Storm Water Multi - Section General Permit MNR050000. SIC codes 3272 & 3531. A copy of this permit shall be submitted to the City. N. (j) All applicable Rice Creek Watershed District requirements are satisfactorily met. RCWD shall provide a letter waiving any permit requirements other than having the site included on MN/DOT SWPPP for SP 6281-47. (k) So as to maintain compatibility with the surrounding area and to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the public, the City Council may impose additional limitations, conditions or requirements as it deems necessary. Additional conditions will be detailed in the Council Resolution the interim use permit is approved. (1) The operator and property owner shall enter into a Performance Agreement with the City, and financial sureties shall be posted prior to any site disturbance. A Performance Agreement shall be drafted by the City and entered into by the applicant prior to setup and operation of the temporary batch plant. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the Interim Use Permit for a Batch Plant for Arnt Construction (2209 Phelps Road) due to the following outstanding issues: 1. Items listed in City Engineer letter dated May 4, 2016. 2. Grading, erosion and sediment control plans have not been submitted to the City. 3. A SWPPP has not been submitted to the City. 4. Property owner consent letter from Paul Miller has not been submitted to the City. 5. A letter from RCWD has not been submitted to the City. 6. Staff has concerns regarding the proposed internal haul routes on Phelps Road. 7. Existing deteriorated road conditions of Phelps Road. If these outstanding issues are resolved, the interim use permit may be approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall sign a Site Performance Agreement and deposit financial sureties with the City prior to set up and operation of the temporary batch plant. 2. The temporary batch plant shall begin set up on June 6, 2016 and shall be completely removed by June 30, 2016. 3. Hours of operation shall be consistent with Section 901.03(4)(b): 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday No construction activity allowed Sunday and federal holidays I 4. The approved haul routes are as follows: • I-35E north to CSAH 14/Main Street east to CR 84/Otter Lake Road south to Phelps Road. • CR 84/Otter Lake Road at Phelps Road north to CR 14/Main Street west to I-35E south to MN/DOT project. 5. No section of CR 84/Otter Lake Road south of Phelps Road shall be used as a haul route. 6. A water meter shall be installed to monitor water use. 7. No additional stockpile materials shall be hauled and deposited on -site during the temporary batch plant operations. 8. The remaining stockpile shall not be increased in size or height after the temporary batch plant is removed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Location Map 2. Aerial Map 3. City Engineer Letter dated May 4, 2016 4. Applicant Narrative with Batch Plant Photo 5. Temporary Concrete Plant Site Plan 10 w Q 2 H O N LU 0 LU w M w = 04 Q w MAIN ST o 70TH ST Temporary Batch Plant 2209 Phelps Road PHEL O 4 m m M01 n m m A v s� 500 1,000 2,000 MN, U I Site Location Map W E Feet ��PKES S Aerial Map N 0 100 200 400 cINALIAkFq 2209 Phelps Road W E Feet A WSB Building a legacy —your legacy. Memorandum To: Katie Larsen, City Planner From: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer Date: May 4, 2016 Re: Arnt IUP Batch Plant Plan Review WSB Project No. 2988-200 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We have reviewed the Temporary Concrete Plant Site Plan prepared by EG Rud & Sons dated April 25, 2016 and received by the City on April 25, 2016. The following are our review comments that should be responded to in writing by the applicant: GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 1. The applicant needs to provide a grading, erosion and sediment control plan for review. A project SWPPP shall be submitted. This is to include existing and proposed contours and a site restoration plan. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 1. The temporary batch plant does not require a storm sewer system. FLOODPLAIN 1. The temporary batch plant does not impact the floodplain. WETLANDS 1. The temporary batch plant does not impact wetlands. WATER SYSTEM 1. Non -applicable. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM 1. Non -applicable. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com SACommuniry DevelopmentTrojectsTlanning CaseMnat Construction-IUP Batch Plant (2016)\Staff Repons\20160511 PZ\3 20160504 Engineering Review Lino Lakes-Aant IUP.docx Ms. Katie Larsen May 04, 2016 Page 2 TRANSPORTATION 1. The applicant needs to provide the volume of truck traffic that will be a result of the project. 2. The truck access and site circulation requires a traffic control plan is required. The applicant shall provide information regarding Arnt Construction staff access and parking during plant operation. 3. The applicant proposed haul routes are as follows: a. I-35E North to Anoka County Road 14 East to Anoka County Road 84 South to the Site. b. County Road 84 (at Phelps Road) North to Anoka County Road 14 West to I 35E South to Project. c. Anoka County Road 84 (at Phelps Road) South to County Road J West to I 35E South to Project. d. I 35E to County Road J East to Anoka County Road 84 North to Plant Site. The haul route on CR 84/Otter Lake Road south to CR J (c and d) should not be allowed due to adjacent residential development. 4. The west section of Phelps Road has turned to gravel from bituminous due to construction traffic and the applicant needs to provide a plan to improve this roadway back to bituminous. The Otter Lake Service Roadway was also degraded from the previous 2010 IUP and needs to be addressed with this proposal. 5. The hours of operation shall be 7 am to 7 pm per City Ordinance. SITE PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT 1. A Site Performance Agreement is required and will include securities for public roadway repairs associated with this project. PERMITS The applicant is to provide the project required permits. a. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency b. RCWD - The applicant shall provide correspondence regarding watershed permits. If you or the applicant has any questions regarding these comments, please contact Diane Hankee at (651) 982-2430 or diane.hankee@ci.lino-lakes.mn.us. S:\CommwityDevelopmmt\Projeas\Plnning Cases\4mt Construction-R1P Batch Plant (2016)\Staff Reports\20160511 PZ\3 20160504 Engineering Review Li ARNT 'CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. P.O. BOX 549 OFFICE: 651 /426-1296 April 25, 2016 Ms. Katie Larson City Planner City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Ms. Larson: HUGO, MINNESOTA 55038 FAX: 651 /426-3760 RE: Lino Lakes, Minnesota I 35E Batch Plant PCI Roads LLC will set up a Batch Plant as shown on the drawing submitted earlier. The Batch Plant will occupy the site for a period of 3 weeks. They will produce concrete for eight days. The remainder of the time will be for Assembly and disassembly of the plant. The plant will be located on the South side of Phelps Road (2190 Phelps Road). Hours of operation are from 6:00am to 8:00pm. The plant will be set up on June 61h and be removed June 24, 2016. MN/DOT will include the Plant site as part of their SWPPP plan for Project SP 6281-47. The plant will be set up on a gravel area where we currently recycle Aggregate Base. The haul routes for the project are: I 35E North to Anoka County Road 14 East to Anoka County Road 84 South to the Site. County Road 84 (at Phelps Raod) North to Anoka County Road 14 West to I 35E South to Project. Anoka County Road 84 (at Phelps Road) South to County Road J West to I 35E South to Project. I 35E to County Road J East to Anoka County Road 84 North to Plant Site. These haul routes will be submitted to MN/DOT for inclusion on the maintenance and restoration of haul routes. No grading will be necessary on the site. The plant has a permit from MPCA under the Industrial Storm Water Multi -Section General Permit MNR050000. SIC codes 3272 & 3531. An Equal Opportunity Employer April 25, 2016 RE: Lino Lakes, Minnesota I 35E Batch Plant Page 2 The haul routes will be swept each day the plant is in operation. We will provide a letter from Rice Creek Watershed waiving any Permit requirements other than having the site included on MN/DOT SWPPP Plan for SP 6281-47. We have enclosed a picture of the plant. If you have any questions or need any further information please don't hesitate to call. Sincerel- Nicholas J. Arnt, P.E. NJA/map e(� Summit 7 r. 71 '"t W mr- , i `r • r - — r I T or r TEMPORARY CONCRETE PLANT SITE PLAN --for-- ARNT CONSTRUCTION --of-- 2190 PHELPS ROAD LINO LAKES, MN 55014 u nT« - Field survey was completed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. on 4/12/16. - No boundary work was done on the site at this time. - Curb shots are taken at the top and back of curb. - This survey was prepared without the benefit of title work. Additional easements, restrictions and/or encumbrances may exist other than those shown hereon. Survey subject to revision upon receipt of a current title commitment or an attorney's title opinion. LEGEND O DENOTES BOLLARD ❑ DENOTES CATCH BASIN X 952.36 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION ❑E DENOTES FIBER OPTIC BOX � DENOTES HYDRANT O DENOTES SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE x X DENOTES CHAINLINK FENCE > DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER » DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES CONCRETE SURFACE I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. BLAKE L. RIVARD Date: 4/25/2016 License No. 19421 910.88 MHSAN 910.86 910. I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. NICHOLAS J. ARNT, P.E. DJK & ASSOC., INC. Date: License No. 19857 VICINITY MAP_ PART OF SEC. 24, TWP. 31, RNG. 22 Fiesta u Canrun Grill D. iry Q.- 'u Cornmerce 0. w St "3 5 CNTY RD 14 Main St 00 Ir z Iidps Rd k� CPO CITY OF LINO LAKES ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA (NO SCALE) z 4 1dr3[h 5 a Kwi I: Tnp je iv ,9n Professional Land Surveyors www.egrud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361-8200 Fax (651) 361-8701 X X I x x X X -x - -- 910.05 0' -----------_ ��'________________VALLEY i 98 910 12 GUTTER-------- ------ 910 32 11 910 --� 909.88.. 909.94< -x 909.96 - - x410.08 - x91028 e .14 x910.02 910.05 910.07 910.14 910.35 9I0.10 909.94 910.49 910.42 TC-FLAT-ECONC 910.41 TC-E-TAPER-ECONC 910.03 EBIT-ECONC x910.29 410.5 - 91 Q.65 - 91Q70 -. ,°. °• -° 910.93a° 910.45 TC-FLAT-ECONC x910.02 910.45 910.80 910.81 910.89 910.98 TC-FLAT-ECONC 909.9 910.77 910.53 910.93 910.94Pm.°- TC-E-TAPER-ECONC 910.84 o m °° °° 911.01 /910.94 TC-B-TAPER-ECONC ci 911.06 FFE 4-- T m x910.07 x 910.20 909.75 rn m ro � x 909.75 o d a, rn 910.99 � TC-B-TAPER-ECONC 9, 9, 0 910.57 °° - 910.49 TC-E-TAPER-ECONC .-9L0.55 27 O=• - _e 909.44 -91 0.88- °^ - x 909.59 ° 910.50 ` ECONC-EBIT a. x909.87 a • 9kO; 3 x 909.56 909.43 910 $3 x 910.00 9,10.81l 910:8A 910.45 ECONC-EBIT s, 910.80 910.84 ° ° 909.17 °° x909.86 x909.14 '910.87 \G '910-.83 - 910.40 0 16 d ECONC-EBIT 00 9S cl � V 9 FOO�o) �O\ ^ cO� ^h 0JQ/ OTo9s �,O (vC' oo �G jP910,84 s, co 9 FUEL VCs'& 909.73 etgE'0� ° a, C ,CONTAINMENT REA909. CONC 908.90 909.36 911.15 ECONC 909.17 BIT 9S s 910.73 °. 910.43 x 909.86 0009 • W 91 - ° - ECONC-EBIT 909.10 xi �2 , 910.06 �� 9Fc Oti1(5, 9 O ° ECONC-EBIT x909.44 � xT 0 908.97 91 $3 p '. x 908.81 908J6 910 82 ° 909.91 910 84g ECONC-EBIT °p x 908.33 ° x 908.55 908.48 91085 n a °4 • -� - 909.64 ej 910 $2 ECONC-EBIT x908.04 91 Q.82 m 49, x908.27 91Q 83 .e . p O�`�2.: •°� 908.98 907.94 �00,,, 908.19 9.32 EBIT-ECONC a 907.54 9708 910,85.,. S 9, 91076 ° - -, °°a - 910.08 909.17 907.67 �s 910.69 910.72 0, ^� 909.14 ECONC-COR i �� o c; lb o "o I 4 x X X X X X X X X X 0 �000 909.84 �0 MHSAN T,q� 0)O 9q u` �� v 9 0 T Tc T 09 OO 'o °�T q� c^ PHELPS QOAD O 1 m �6`B2 u ,T F 909.43 909.84 909.35 908.92 909.25 909.21 908.50 907.94 909.20 909.00 �- 910.16 909.62 0 6 911.35 91L^38 • 9T1:65 ° ° - 1911.63 911.d35 S. C :A L °E a h . °-911.41 91L33° • ° ° ^°911.6d ° ° ° ,� �13.,65 • 911.40 909.98 910.31 910.66 911.24 � SCALE I I Hni ISF 1 INSTALL ROCK I CONSTRUCTION I ENTRANCE AS I REQUIRED I I L---------- J 906.98 FEN-CL-END / X / X X/905.72 / FEN-CL / X / X 905.51 /X FEN-CL X/X 906.00 FEN-CL-END E CREEK `OCAS\ON P GRAPHIC SCALE 30 0 15 30 60 I INCH = 30 FEET L INSTALL INLET A \ ��PROTECTION AS 9F 9�p A 906.60 �/ REQUIRED CB -FL/ r 907.32 907.35 g ,}g 907.20 x9oz81 x907.38 eo>49 908.15 i 908.17 908.29 x906.50 a°jV cpl& 4 O x906.31 906.36 FEN-CL cd 0 906.34 x FEN-CL ^ 0 0 o n � � I � , I . X I X • ro I0 906.16 m FEN-CL X X X ��I I 908.08 HYD O O� X -�p I $$$ 90qLl 5.82 FEN-CL � • X qJ o \ _ k J / k � Z I T O C 1 } 906.33 I / / FEN-CL � • 0 k o k 908.40 I / AlFEN-CL ^M / cl rn / } I� } 908.09 } FEN-CL / oa 907.26 907.31 FEN-CL FEN-CL / 907.50 / X FEN-CL-ENDx/ X / lb I I I NORTHI DRAWN BY: BAB JOB NO: 16261 DATE: 4/14/16 CHECK BY: BLR SCANNED ❑ 1 4/25/16 CITY COMMENTS BAB 2 3 NO. DATE DESCRIPTION BY 16261