HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/09/2017 P&Z PacketCITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING
Wednesday, August 9, 2017
6:00 PM
Council Chambers
AGENDA
Please be courteous and turn off all electronic devices during the meeting.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD WORK SESSION 6:00 PM
1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION
A. Potential Land Use Study Areas and Land Use Issues
B. Housing Chapter
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 7:30 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 12, 2017
4. OPEN MIKE
5. ACTION ITEMS
A. Houle Addition Final Plat
B. 6602 Pheasant Run -Variance Amendment
6. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Outlot C, Century Farm North 6th Addition -Discussion to Re -Plat from 12
Townhome Units to 4 Single Family Lots
B. 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.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM 1A & 1B
STAFF ORIGINATOR:
P & Z MEETING DATE:
Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
August 9, 2017
REQUEST: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion
CASE NUMBER: NA
APPLICANTS: City
REVIEW SCHEDULE: NA
BACKGROUND
Landform Professional Services will be presenting the following discussion items:
• Potential Land Use Study Areas and Land Use Issues
• Housing Chapter
RECOMMENDATION
Discussion item only.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Landform Professional Services Report dated August 3, 2017
1
2040
COMP PLAN
Date: August 3, 2017 for August 9, 2017 Meeting
To: Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board
From: Kendra Lindahl, AICP
Landform Professional Services
Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update
Lino Lakes 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update
On August 9, 2017 the Planning & Zoning Board will have its third work session on the Comprehensive
Plan Update. Topics will be:
Potential Land Use Study Areas and Land Use Issues—At the July 12th meeting, the Board
discussed a preliminary list of study areas and general policy issues for the land use plan. Since
that meeting, the same information was reviewed by the city's Economic Development Advisory
Committee (EDAC.) EDAC made some comments which have been added to the list, along with
the P & Z board comments from July 12th. We have also added staff/consultant recommendations
on each of the study areas and issues. The Board should discuss the recommendations and give
its direction for drafting the Land Use Plan maps and text.
Housing Chapter—The Housing Plan is Chapter 4 of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Please see
the separate memo and supporting materials, attached.
Also attached is a memo summarizing the results of a "Meeting in a Box" recently completed by the Chain
of Lakes Rotary Club. They completed a "SWOT" analysis similar to the exercise the City Council and
Advisory Boards did at the May 15th kick-off meeting.
Next meeting—On September 13th, the Planning & Zoning Board will discuss the Transportation element
of the Plan. Please remember that the this and future meetings, the starting time will change from 6:30 p.m.
to 6:00 p.m. The time from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. will be reserved for the Comprehensive Plan Update, with
the regular business meeting starting at 7:30 p.m.
Attachments:
• Potential Land Use Study Areas and Land Use Issues, August Update
• Housing Plan Memo dated July 31, 2017, with Attachments
• Summary, Chain of Lakes Rotary Club Meeting in a Box
Planning & Zoning Board
August 9, 2017
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Potential Land Use Study Areas, August 2017
Updates since July 12, 2017 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
Staff/Consultant Recommendations
Area
Location Description
Area (Acres)
Gross Net
Current Land Use Plan
2030 Build Out
Utility
Staging
Issue(s)
1-A
Hodgson Rd (CSAH 49)
& County Rd J (Ash St.)
56.25
51.61
Mixed Use &
Medium Density
Same
1A
• Reaffirm commitment to 2007 Master Plan
• Excerpts of Master Plan attached
• P&Z consensus: continue referring to 2007 Master
Plan
Recommendation: Continue references to 2007
Master Plan in 2040 Update.
1-B
Hodgson Rd (CSAH 49)
& Birch St (CSAH34)
1.84
1.84
Commercial
Commercial
1A
• Land use designation—possible change due to
access, size, surrounding land use.
• Potential mixed use classification to allow flexibility
for either office use or residential compatible with
surrounding townhome development
• P& Z consensus: continue commercial
classification, examine zoning classification for
compatibility with surrounding area
• EDAC comment: site seems to be better suited for
higher density residential based on access
Recommendation: Continue current Commercial
classification. Consider changes to plan or zoning
designations if suitable development plan submitted to
the City.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 9, 2017 Page 1
CITY O F
IN KE
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Area
Location Description
Area (Acres)
Gross Net
Current Land Use Plan
2030 Build Out
Utility
Staging
Issue(s)
1-C
South of 67th Street
between Ware Rd and
Holly Dr.
465.05
285.02
Low Density
(west)
Urban Reserve
(east)
Low Density
2A & 2B
(west)
3 (east)
• Review development staging and land use
concurrent with review of options for providing
sewer and water
• EDAC comment: splitting this area in two for
staging purposes makes sense in light of large
wetland that runs through the area
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations, consider staging with sewer plan review.
2-A
Sod Farms Area
415.88
381.87
Mixed Use; Low
Density,
Medium
Density, High
Density
Residential
Same
2A & 2B
• Review land use designations to determine if they
are still appropriate to meet city and landowner
goals
• P&Z consensus: illustrates need to be clear how
multiple land use designations within a parcel or
development will be interpreted
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations. Include guidance for interpreting land use
designations in Land Use Plan text.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 7, 2017 Page 2
�v
CITY OF
LNOL ICES
r OF
LCL KES
2 0 4 0
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Area
Location Description
Area (Acres)
Gross Net
Current Land Use Plan
2030 Build Out
Utility
Staging
Issue(s)
2-B
Lake Drive (CSAH 23)
Corridor
(300 ft. corridor on both
sides if road from Main
Street north to border
with City of Columbus)
76.39
75.29
Commercial &
Mixed Use at
Lake Drive/Main
Street
intersection;
small area
designated
Commercial on
west side of
Lake Drive near
Columbus
border; mostly
Urban Reserve
Commercial,
Mixed Use,
Medium Density,
and some Low
Density
1A & 1 B;
mostly 3
• Corridor of mixed land uses, residential structures
transitioning to commercial uses
• Inconsistencies between planning and zoning—
should non -conformities be eliminated?
• Small parcels with individual access to an arterial
street
• Community gateway
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations for 2030 and full build out; except,
consider change to commercial for existing non -
conforming business uses on west side of CSAH 23
across from Area 2-C. Implementation will review
zoning classifications for consistency with plan. Enforce
access guidelines to prohibit new driveways. Consider
development staging with sewer plan review.
2-C
Waldoch Farms parcels
158.58
113.61
Urban Reserve
Mixed Use, Low
Density
3
• Landowner may wish to develop sooner than
currently planned
• Sewer capacity will need to be carefully considered
• EDAC comment: utility extensions should be
considered to allow Waldoch farms to expand
commercial use
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations, consider staging with sewer plan review.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 7, 2017 Page 3
CITY OF
LNOL KES
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Area
Location Description
Area (Acres)
Gross Net
Current Land Use Plan
2030 Build Out
Utility
Staging
Issue(s)
2-D
Decker property, 614
Pine Street
PID 05-31-22-12-0002
9.26
7.41
Urban Reserve
Low Density
3
• Landowner requests sewer and water extension
and Medium Density use before 2030
• P&Z consensus: single parcel may not be Targe
enough for higher density designation
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations, consider staging with sewer plan review.
3-A
North of Main Street,
West of 20th Ave.
180.23
140.93
Low, Medium
and High
Density Various
Same
2A,2B
• Reaffirm land use designations
• Within AUAR area
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations; consider staging with sewer plan review.
3-B
Nadeau Properties
6651 & 6677 20th Ave
31.81
31.68
Low Density
Low Density
2A
• Landowners request Medium Density designation
to be consistent with abutting properties
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations and staging. Low Density is consistent
with abutting property to west and south. 20th Ave. is a
good divide/transition between Medium and Low
Density areas.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 7, 2017 Page 4
�v
CITY OF
LNOL ICES
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Area
Location Description
Area (Acres)
Gross Net
Current Land Use Plan
2030 Build Out
Utility
Staging
Issue(s)
4-A
Wilkinson Lake/ Cedar
Lake Area
603.86
395.00
Mixed Use,
Medium & High
Density south of
Ash St; Low
Density north
and west of Ash
St,; Urban
Reserve south,
west and
northeast of
Cedar Lake
Same, except
land in Staging
Area 3
designated low
density with
approx.. 40
acres Medium
Density at Holly
Dr. & CR J
1A, 1B,
2A, 2B, 3
• Examine development staging and utility plans for
this area; sewer to be extended through White
Bear Township
• Landowner of 6198 Holly Drive, (Noren property,
approx. 66 acres) requests staging for
development prior to 2030
• EDAC comments: Ash Street and Centerville
Road intersection need improvement; current state
hinders development. Access to 35E needs to be
upgraded to full interchange.
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations. Work with White Bear Township to
determine sewer capacity and consider staging with
sewer plan review. Examine intersection and access
issues as part of Transportation Plan review.
5-A
East of I -35E
557.09
498.55
Urban Reserve
Commercial,
Industrial,
Medium Density
3
• Stage for development before 2040?
• Reexamine residential use on Build Out Land Use
Plan
• Within AUAR area
• EDAC comments: support staging utilities for
development; support removal of medium density
designation north of 80th Street and east of I -35E
Recommendation: Continue existing land use
designations, except delete Medium Density north of
80th St & east of I -35E. Consider staging with sewer
plan review.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 7, 2017 Page 5
�v
CITY OF
LNOL KES
C1TYi
OF
LN'+L
KES
2040
l -OMP PI. AN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Land Use Policy Discussion Items, August 2017
#
Description
2030 Plan
Notes
LP -1
Mixed Use Development
"The purpose of this category is to accommodate a
mix of residential, retail and office uses Residential
development may include higher density housing
options." (Table 3-2, page 3-11)
• Category needs clarification. How must "mixing" occur? Within each
site or development project? This may be difficult for small parcels.
• Can this category be used to allow flexibility for commercial OR
residential uses?
• Should there be different approaches for different areas of the
community?
Recommendation: Land use Plan should give guidance on Mixed Use
category and include goals for each Mixed Use area including
residential/commercial split, similar to current plan (see pages 3-16
through 3-18 and Table 3-4.)
LP -2
Industrial Land Use
"The purpose of this category is to accommodate
manufacturing, processing, warehousing, and
research and development uses." (Table 3-2, page 3-
• Can a single industrial classification respond to city's desire for
business park/corporate campus areas versus more traditional
industrial areas with outside storage and/or distribution uses?
11)
• Should there be different classification(s) for high visibility areas or to
ensure compatibility with adjacent uses?
Recommendation: consider splitting industrial use into two
classifications, one for existing areas allowing a full range of industrial uses
and a new "Business Campus" classification for large, high -visibility sites.
Emphasize employment over warehousing; higher standards for design.
Planned uses may include some commercial to support the business and
employment base.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 7, 2017 Page 6
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
#
Description
2030 Plan
Notes
LP -3
City Role in Development
• What is the city's role in development? Should it be more active in
promoting or facilitating development consistent with planning goals?
Or should the city be a more passive participant in the development
process?
Recommendation: Implementation Section of Economic Development
Plan (Chapter 5) provides some guidance; revisit this question when
updating that Chapter.
LP -4
Unsewered residential
Existing residential neighborhoods designated "Urban
• Need to be clear about whether these areas are eligible for extension
neighborhoods (P&Z
Reserve" in several locations are surrounded by urban
of public sewer and/or water service and under what circumstances.
Comments)
land use designations and/ or areas staged for
• Plan should allow for extension of public sewer to individual lots when
development before 2030. (Example: Maple Lane
feasible and/or necessary to solve public health problems, without the
neighborhood.)
need for complicated amendments to the Plan.
Recommendation: Include criteria in appropriate plan text (Land Use
and/or Sewer Chapters) to allow some flexibility for sewer extensions
without the need for Plan amendments.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 7, 2017 Page 7
�v
CITY OF
LNOL ICES
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
#
Description
2030 Plan
Notes
LP -5
Residential Densities
• Residential densities must average at least 3 units/acre to meet
regional policies (same as 2030 plan.)
• Plan must guide sufficient land to accommodate city's share of
regional affordable housing need from 2021-2030 (515 units.)
Recommendation: Ensure that land use plan continues to meet the 3
units/acre goal. If necessary, adjust the Mixed Use category to
accommodate the minimum number of affordable units by:
• Increasing the proportion of land designated for residential compared
to commercial uses;
• Increasing the density of residential uses within Mixed Use areas;
• Designating additional Mixed Use sites; or
• Some combination of the above.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
August 7, 2017 Page 8
�v
CITY OF
LNOL ICES
2040
COMP PLAN
Date: July 31, 2017 for August 9, 2017 Meeting
To: Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board
From: Anne Hurlburt, Planner
Landform Professional Services
Subject: Housing Plan Update
Lino Lakes 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update
The Housing Plan is Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan. At the August 9th meeting, we will review the
existing plan, update the Board with the latest information on housing in Lino Lakes, and discuss issues for
updating this part of the plan to 2040.
2030 Housing Plan Chapter—A housing plan is a required Comprehensive Plan element under the
Metropolitan Land Planning Act. The 2030 Housing Plan is attached. It includes Goals and Policies; a
Housing Profile that addresses market trends, housing conditions in Lino Lakes and nearby communities;
and, sections on Life -Cycle Housing and Housing Diversity, Senior Housing and Affordable Housing. The
last section is Housing Implementation Strategies and Recommendations.
2040 Housing Plan Requirements—Minnesota Statutes Section 473.859 Subd. 2.(C) states as follows:
"A land use plan shall also include a housing element containing standards, plans and
programs for providing adequate housing opportunities to meet existing and projected local
and regional housing needs, including but not limited to the use of official controls and land
use planning to promote the availability of land for the development of low and moderate
income housing."
Housing needs include "affordable" housing, which is defined as housing that is affordable to low -and -
moderate income families, making no more than 80% of the area median income (AMI) for both rental and
ownership housing. In 2017 the area median income for a household of four is $90,400. A family of four can
earn up to $68,000 to qualify for affordable housing at 80% AMI. This translates into a maximum affordable
home price of $236,000.
Cities are asked to acknowledge their share of the region's need for affordable housing at three levels of
affordability: less than 30% AMI, 31-50% AMI, and 51-80% AMI. Attachment 2 provides more details on
the 2017 affordability limits for both ownership and rental housing.
The Metropolitan Council has calculated Lino Lakes' share of the region's need for low and moderate
income housing for the decade of 2021-2030 to be 515 new units. In comparison, the goal for 2011-2020
was 560 units at all levels of affordability.
The city is expected to add 1,700 new households between 2021 and 2030. The need for affordable units is
about 30% of the total. The Metropolitan Council's Affordable Housing Production Survey found that
56.42% of Lino Lakes' existing housing stock was affordable in 2017 (all units below 80% AMI.)
Planning & Zoning Board re: Housing Plan 1
August 9, 2017
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update
The following table shows the number of units needed from 2021-2030 by affordability level.
Affordable Housing Unit Needs for Lino Lakes, 2021- 2030
Threshold
# Housing Units
At or below 30% AMI
284
31 to 50% AMI
197
51 to 80% AMI
34
Total Units
515
To accommodate its share of the region's affordable housing need, the City is asked to demonstrate that
it has guided residential land at densities sufficient to create opportunities for construction of affordable
housing. For the 2040 plan updates, the Metropolitan Council has provided two options:
Option 1: Guide sufficient land at minimum residential densities of 8 units/acre to support the total
allocation of affordable housing needs (in Lino Lakes' case, 515 units or 64 acres.)
Option 2: Guide sufficient land at minimum densities of:
• 12 units/acre to support the allocation of affordable units at less than 50% AMI (481 units
or 40 acres) AND
• 6 units/acre to support the allocation of affordable units at 51-80% AMI (34 units or 5.66
acres)
For the 2030 plan, all land guided for residential development at net densities of 6 units/acre was
considered to be available for affordable housing. The new guideline increases the density to 8 units/acre
(Option 1) but allows flexibility if communities plan for some density higher than the minimum (Option 2.)
Housing Data and Trends—The Metropolitan Council collects data on housing needs in the region and
provides data required to complete local comprehensive plans. Two documents are attached. The first, the
"Existing Housing Assessment", contains the minimum data required in the Housing Assessment portion of
Lino Lakes' plan. The second, the "Community Profile" for housing, provides some additional data that the
City may use to help identify its housing needs.
Issues for Housing Plan Update—We have identified the following issues for the update of the Housing
Plan.
• One of the goals for the Comprehensive Plan update is to streamline the document, make it more
user friendly, and emphasize graphics and bullet points rather than large blocks of text. The
housing chapter presents some good opportunities to do so.
• The current plan overlaps in some ways with the land use plan, such as repeating goals and
policies. We can eliminate some of the redundancy.
• The current plan's housing assessment data compares Lino Lakes with three nearby communities
(Blaine, Hugo and Forest Lake) and also compares the western and eastern parts of Lino Lakes
with each other. We should consider whether these comparisons are valuable and whether they
should be continued in the plan update. It may be desirable to compare the city information with
Planning & Zoning Board re: Housing Plan 2 c IT Y OF
August 9, 2017 IN KE
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update
the County or Region. Most of the comparisons of the western and eastern parts of Lino Lakes did
not reveal significant differences, except for the age of the housing stock (see Chart 4-1, page 4-3
of current plan.)
• As it is updated, some specific information will need to be added to the housing assessment, such
as the status of contracts for existing subsidized units.
• The implementation strategies will need to be tied more directly with the affordability needs and
the three "bands" of affordability. Cities are asked to be more specific about how public programs,
fiscal devices and other specific actions could be used to meet the housing needs, including in
what circumstances and in what sequence they would be used.
• To be consistent with regional policies, cities are asked to consider all recognized tools to address
their housing needs, plus any additional local tools they may have at their disposal.
• The Metropolitan Council's guidelines include minimum requirements for housing plans, but cities
can and do go beyond these to meet their own needs. Some parts of Lino Lakes' plan that are
specific to the community are:
o A discussion of the need to balance community housing needs with environmental
protection (see page 4-8)
o Implementation policies and strategies intended to help maintain existing housing stock
and neighborhoods (see page 4-12)
• As the future land use plan is updated, the City will need to evaluate the residential densities
allowed and the areas planned for development to ensure that sufficient land will be available to
accommodate the city's projected growth for all types of housing. The city is expected to plan for
development at an average density of no less than 3 dwelling units/net acre.
• The land use categories of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan provide for the following density ranges:
2030 Land Use Category
Density Range
Net Acres*
Low Density Residential
1.6 to 3.9 Units/Acre
746.3
Medium Density Residential
4.0 to 5.9 Units/Acre
185.1
High Density Residential
6.0 to 10.0 Units/Acre
162.1
Mixed Use (Residential Portion Only)
8.0 to 15.0 Units/Acre
78.1
Total
1,171.5
* Source: 2030 Land use Plan, Appendix B, Residential Density Worksheet
• In the 2030 Plan, the land designated High Density Residential and Mixed Use together provided
enough more than enough land to accommodate the affordability goal of 560 units.
• Only the Mixed Use category (78.1 acres) would meet the 2040 minimum density of 8.0 units/acre.
The amount of remaining land has not yet been calculated. A preliminary review indicates that
there may be enough land to meet the 2040 goal, which would require 64 acres.
Planning & Zoning Board re: Housing Plan 3
August 9, 2017
2040
COMP PLAN
Lino Lakes 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update
• If necessary, the Mixed Use category can be adjusted to accommodate the minimum number of
units by:
o Increasing the proportion of land designated for residential compared to commercial uses;
o Increasing the density of residential uses within Mixed Use areas;
o Designating additional Mixed Use sites; or
o Some combination of the above.
Attachments:
1. 2030 Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4: Housing Plan
2. 2017 Affordability Limits for Ownership and Rental Housing, Metropolitan Council
3. Map, Owner -Occupied Housing by Estimated Market Value, 2016
4. Existing Housing Assessment for City of Lino Lakes, Metropolitan Council
5. Community Profile for Lino Lakes, Housing, Metropolitan Council
Planning & Zoning Board re: Housing Plan 4
August 9, 2017
Chapter 4: Housing Plan
Introduction
The condition, affordability, and availability of housing affect the social and economic health of
every city. As a developing community, Lino Lakes has an excellent opportunity to provide a
variety of housing options to meet the needs of all its current and future residents throughout
their lives. Through the Comprehensive Plan and Visioning processes, participants identified the
need for a greater variety of housing options within the community, which currently consists
mainly of single family detached homes. In response, the City developed a Land Use Plan that
identifies areas for high density housing (6.0 to 10.0 units/net acre, medium density housing (4.0
to 5.9 units/net acre), low density housing (1.6 to 3.9 units/net acre), and mixed use areas that
will incorporate a mix of commercial areas with higher density housing options. This will
accommodate a wider variety of housing types including senior housing, live/work units, and
multi -family in a variety of styles from rental, condo and townhomes. Single family options will
range from entry-level single family, move -up for growing families and "executive housing" to
meet the needs of a changing population. This shift to provide a more diverse housing supply
supports future economic development objectives by retaining existing residents and attracting
new residents from all social and economic backgrounds, and is an essential component for
sustainable growth. These areas will provide much needed housing options for the city's work
force, young professionals, families, and senior residents.
The purpose of the Housing Plan is to establish plans and programs to meet the existing and
projected housing needs in Lino Lakes and to develop new strategies to promote the
development of low and moderate income housing, which the City is required to provide for. The
plan will guide the community to integrate housing into land use, transportation, economic and
other decisions, as well as provide direction for the private sector to participate in the creation of
affordable housing and life -cycle housing opportunities.
This Housing Plan satisfies the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and
stipulations of Chapter 473.859, Subd 2(c) and Subd 4 of the Minnesota State Statues. The plan
will contain background information on current housing supply and related statistics, an
assessment of current and future housing needs, and future housing strategies to meet these
needs.
Goals and Policies
During the Visioning and Comprehensive Plan processes, participants developed new goals and
strategies for housing development in the community. The complete set of goals and strategies,
which provided a general guide for the development of this chapter, is listed in Chapter 3, Land
Use Plan.
Those that are particularly related to housing in Lino Lakes are presented below:
Goal 3: Ensure housing development is compatible with existing and adjacent land uses
and provides accessibility to key community features and natural amenities.
Rationale: Accessibility to the most attractive features of Lino Lakes is important to the citizens
of our community.
4-1
Policies:
1. Link trails to parks, lakes, and schools.
2. Ensure commercial development and mixed-use areas are appropriately dispersed
throughout the city.
Goal 5: Improve availability of affordable and life -cycle housing.
Rationale: Lino Lakes, as a developing city, is expected to accommodate the projected housing
needs, entry level through retirement, of the community's population.
Policies:
1. Work with developers to identify innovative strategies for providing entry-level and life
cycle housing.
2. Use redevelopment tools to revitalize aging residential properties, made possible by
various federal, state, local government, and non-profit programs.
3. Provide expanded opportunities for housing ownership made available by various federal,
state, local government and non-profit agencies.
4. Provide for and designate appropriate areas for high-density and mixed-use
development.
5. Strive to integrate affordable housing in all residential land use districts.
Goal 6: Enhance opportunities for senior housing.
Rationale: As Lino Lakes continues to grow and develop, it must also accommodate the
housing needs of a growing aging population.
Policies:
1. Develop partnerships with non-profit and private sector groups who assist in the creation
of senior housing.
2. Coordinate development of housing with retail accessibility (restaurants, shops,
groceries).
Goal 11: Maintain existing housing stock to insure a high-quality environment in all
residential neighborhoods.
Policies:
1. Promote the improvement of the existing housing stock, and to encourage the
rehabilitation or redevelopment of substandard housing
2. Encourage in -fill housing where appropriate.
Housing Profile
Regional Housing Market Trends
Housing markets can vary greatly from one community to another within a large metropolitan
region such as the Twin Cities. The forces that determine what type of housing gets built, how
much housing gets built, and where that housing gets built can change dramatically from decade
to decade or even year to year, often resulting in vastly different development experiences for
individual communities. Nonetheless, metropolitan regions are, by definition, interconnected
4-2
places. Any long-term projections of the housing market at a local level must first be viewed with
an understanding of historical housing market trends at the metropolitan level.
Regional demographic and construction trends associated with the Twin Cities housing market
since 1960 are summarized in Table 4-1.
Housing Conditions in Lino Lakes and Nearby Communities
Age of Housing Stock
In 2000 Lino Lakes had the youngest housing stock compared to its developing neighbors, with
nearly 50% of its homes being built in the previous decade and nearly 90% having been built
since 1970 (Chart 4-1). Forest Lake, being a small freestanding community prior to
suburbanization, has the largest proportion of housing stock more than 30 years old at roughly
31%. Blaine began suburban -style development in the 1960s and has had consistent growth
each decade since. Therefore, much of its housing stock is spread somewhat evenly over several
decades.
Despite Lino Lakes' relatively young housing stock, the neighborhoods west of the Chain of Lakes
Regional Park contain a significant number of homes that are more than 30 years old. Nearly
20% of the homes in these neighborhoods were built before 1970. This contrasts with the
neighborhoods east of Chain of Lakes Park, which have less than 10% of their housing stock that
was built more than 30 years ago.
Chart 4-1. Age of Housing Stock
Pct. of Housing Stock
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
I
i
Age of Housing Stock
as of 2000
Lino Lakes: Lino: W of Park Lino: E of Park Blaine
Total
Source: 2000 US Census
1
1
Hugo Forest Lake
• 1990s
• 1980s
❑ 1970s
❑ 1960s
• 1950s
• Pre 1950
4-3
Table 4-1. Regional Housing Market Trends
Decade
1960s
Gain in
HHs
133,366
Gain in
Units
132,559
Level of Pent -Up
Demand
Slight pent-up demand
by end of decade.
Impact of Age Distribution
Strong growth in the number of school-
aged children increases demand for
affordable single-family homes among
young families. Strong growth in
college-age persons increases
demand for rental housing.
Where Development Occurred
Vast majority of homes built at the
developing edge, which is adjacent to
the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Important
Developments/Milestones
16 -County metro area surpasses 2
million people. Interstate freeway
system is introduced.
Lino Lakes Experience
Lino Lakes is a rural
community about 10 miles
from the developing edge in
Roseville and Maplewood.
1970s
179,890
188,718
Slight oversupply of
housing by end of
decade.
Strong growth in number of younger
adults results in strong demand for
rental housing and very affordable
single-family homes.
Sharp increase in number of units
built in developed areas, but also
sharp increase in units built in
exurban areas to serve the needs of
younger buyers who want single-
family homes but can't afford to be
close to the metro core.
Interstate freeway system is mostly
developed making once
rural/exurban areas more
accessible.
Lino Lakes begins to
experience some traditional
suburban style development
as the developing edge
expands to nearby Arden
Hills, Shoreview, and
Vadnais Heights.
1980s
178.688
198.146
Significant oversupply of
housing units by end of
decade.
Very strong growth in the age groups
skewed toward single-family homes.
Significant growth beginning to occur
among age groups in the highest
income years.
More homes built at the developing
edge than previous decade. Sharp
decline in the rural/exurban areas,
likely the result of increased supply
containing costs for closer -in units
and a fuel crises in the early part of
the decade.
Mortgage interest rates hit record
highs in the early part of the
decade.
Lino Lakes begins period at
the edge of contiguous
development as adjacent
communities to the south
are nearly built out or have
strong growth management
policies (i.e. North Oaks).
1990s
183,969
161,591
Oversupply of 1980s
leads to less construction
in the 1990s, which
results in huge pent-up
demand by end of
decade, especially since
the number of in-
migrants to the region far
exceeds projections.
Absolute decline in the age groups
skewed to renting; age groups skewed
toward single-family housing account
for all the population growth.
Homebuilding rebounds in the
rural/exurban areas of the region.
16 -county metro area surpasses 3
million people. In the core 7 -county
region, 67,500 are consumed for
125,000 units, which is 1.85 units
per acre. This compares to the
1980s when the ratio was 3.3 units
per acre or the 1970s when it was
3.7 units per ac
Lino Lakes experiences
development commensurate
with being located at the
developing edge. Hugo and
Forest Lake to the east and
north also begin their
periods of being at the
developing edge.
2000-
2005
108,380
133,508
Pent-up demand at end
of 90s leads to rush
among builders to build
more units, which results
in current oversupply.
Strong growth spread among most
age groups; young age groups
rebound (Baby Boomlet) and seniors
grow substantially as well. Age
groups in the peak earning years (45
to 64) grow as well.
Tremendous growth in rural/exurban
areas, but also a strong rebound in
the developed core as rising land
prices and demographics create a
market for "urban" style living.
Mortgage interest rates hit record
lows in the early part of the decade.
Pace of construction in Lino
Lakes drops below that of
1990s even though
construction throughout the
metropolitan area far
exceeds that of the 1990s.
Household Tenure
There is very little rental housing in Lino Lakes or any of its rapidly developing neighbors (Chart
4-2). As of 2000, more than 96 percent of Lino Lakes' households were in owner -occupied units.
Forest Lake was the only community with fewer than 90 percent of its households in owner -
occupied units. This is largely because Forest Lake developed initially as a freestanding
community that regularly constructed rental housing to meet the needs of a small but growing
employment base.
Even when Lino Lakes is analyzed as two distinct areas (west or east of the Regional Park), there
is no significant difference in the prevalence of renter -occupied housing. Well over 90 percent of
both areas of Lino Lakes consist of owner -occupied households.
Chart 4-2. Household Tenure
Pct. of Households
4858 Total
100% Households
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Household Tenure (2000)
1969 Total
Households
2889 Total
Households
15898 Total
Households
2125 Total
Households
5433 Total
Households
Lino Lakes: Total Lino: W of Park Lino: E of Park
Source: 2000 US Census
Blaine
0 Owner occupied • Renter occupied
Hugo
Forest Lake
Units in Structure
Single family homes dominate the housing stock in Lino Lakes and Hugo (Chart 4-3). The
historical development pattern of Blaine and Forest Lake, however, has created a slightly more
varied housing stock with respect to the type of units in those communities. In Blaine, nearly 15
percent of the housing stock are mobile homes, which were developed predominantly in the
1960s and 1970s when Blaine was beyond the developing edge of the metro area. Forest Lake,
in contrast, initially developed as a freestanding community that has regularly built apartment
buildings to meet the needs of a growing employment base, which is reflected in the 15 percent
proportion of its housing stock that are located in buildings of 10 or more units.
Similar to tenure, there is very little difference between the areas of Lino Lakes that are west and
east of the Chain of Lakes Park. Both areas are comprised mostly of detached, single family
homes, which account for over 90 percent of the housing stock.
4-5
°
96 /o
g4%
98%
95 °/v
91%
78%
M
M
Lino Lakes: Total Lino: W of Park Lino: E of Park
Source: 2000 US Census
Blaine
0 Owner occupied • Renter occupied
Hugo
Forest Lake
Units in Structure
Single family homes dominate the housing stock in Lino Lakes and Hugo (Chart 4-3). The
historical development pattern of Blaine and Forest Lake, however, has created a slightly more
varied housing stock with respect to the type of units in those communities. In Blaine, nearly 15
percent of the housing stock are mobile homes, which were developed predominantly in the
1960s and 1970s when Blaine was beyond the developing edge of the metro area. Forest Lake,
in contrast, initially developed as a freestanding community that has regularly built apartment
buildings to meet the needs of a growing employment base, which is reflected in the 15 percent
proportion of its housing stock that are located in buildings of 10 or more units.
Similar to tenure, there is very little difference between the areas of Lino Lakes that are west and
east of the Chain of Lakes Park. Both areas are comprised mostly of detached, single family
homes, which account for over 90 percent of the housing stock.
4-5
Chart 4-3. Units in Structure
Pct. of Housing Stock
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
4927 Total
Units
Units in Structure (2000)
1993 Total
Units
2934 Total
Units
16170 Total
Units
2193 Total
Units
5594 Total
Units
Lino Lakes: Lino: W of Lino: E of Park Blaine
Total Park
Source: 2000 US Census
Hugo
Forest Lake
E l Mobile Home
❑ 10+ Units
o 3 to 9 Units
• Tw inhome
• Single -Family
Pattern of Recent Construction
Although owner -occupied, single family homes have dominated the development landscape in
Lino Lakes and its neighbors over the last three decades, recent trends suggest that various
types of multi -family product are becoming much more prevalent. In the six years between 2000
and 2005, roughly half of the new units constructed in Blaine, Hugo, and Forest Lake were either
townhomes or multi -family units (Chart 4-4). This is a huge departure from the previous three
decades when roughly 90 percent of the units built were single family homes. Much of this
change can be attributed to demographic shifts, in which older households are downsizing from
single family homes to maintenance free, attached dwellings. Also, younger households, who
normally rent their housing, were able to afford modest forms of owner -occupied housing during
the early 2000s because mortgage interest rates were at historically low levels. Furthermore, land
costs driven by rapid development and increased commute times have converged at the
developing edge of the metro area to make townhomes the affordable entry-level product when
20 years ago it might have been a modest detached single family home.
Despite increased development of multi -family homes in Blaine, Hugo, and Forest Lake during
the last six years, there has been minimal development of multi -family homes in Lino Lakes.
When looking at the entire City, nearly 80 percent of the homes built between 2000 and 2005
were single family homes. Moreover, the only type of multi -family housing that was built during
this time was townhomes. By analyzing the areas of the City west and east of the Regional Park,
there is a slight difference in the prevalence of townhomes. West of the park, nearly one-third of
the units built between 2000 and 2005 were townhomes, whereas only 15 percent of the units
were townhomes in the areas east of the park.
4-6
Chart 4-4. Distribution of New Units by Type
Pct. of Units Permitted to be Built
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Distribution of New Units by Type (2000-2005)
1163 New 416 New 747 New 4607 New 2068 New 1608 New
Units Units Units Units Units Units
■
■
Lino Lakes: Lino Lakes: Lino Lakes: Blaine Hugo Forest
Total W of Park E of Park Lake
Source: M etro po litan Council; City of Lino Lakes
❑ Multifamily
• Tow nhouse
❑ Single -Family
Housing Demand in Lino Lakes
Significant growth is expected to occur through 2030 in southeastern Anoka County and
northwestern Washington County as this area is currently the developing edge of the northeast
sector of the Twin Cities metropolitan region. Over the next 25 years, most of the growth in this
area will likely occur in neighboring Blaine, Hugo, and Forest Lake, as these communities contain
significant tracts of undeveloped land that will conceivably be developed and marketed to the
largest and most active segments of the market. Depending on appropriate densities and
accessibility of individual developments to goods and services, Lino Lakes certainly has the
potential to absorb a portion of this growth.
The Metropolitan Council forecasts that Lino Lakes will grow by approximately 2,200 households
between 2000 and 2010, by 1,500 households between 2010 and 2020, and by another 1,500
households between 2020 and 2030.
Life -Cycle Housing and Housing Diversity
Life -cycle housing is defined as housing that meets the needs of the community in all age ranges
and affordability levels. To accommodate this range in housing options, the City's housing supply
should be diverse and consist of a variety of styles and price ranges to serve all residents. The
Metropolitan Council has developed certain generalizations concerning each age group and its
respective housing needs. This information is important in terms of developing a plan to provide
a variety of housing to meet the needs of these different age groups and maintain a strong and
vital community.
Usually, people between the ages of 0 and 19 are students living with their parents. Those
between the ages of 20 and 24 are often renters and do not often become first time home-
buyers until they reach the ages of 25 to 34. First-time homebuyers (25-34) and move -up renters
often prefer to purchase modestly -priced single family homes, townhomes, or rent upscale
apartments.
4-1
People aged 35 to 49 often are in their peak earning years and can afford to buy a larger home
with more amenities, referred to as move -up housing. Empty nesters are usually between the
age of 50 and 64 and many of them may decide to downsize to a smaller housing unit, as with
younger seniors, (between the ages of 65 to 74). This choice may include renting a multi -family
unit, purchasing a lower -maintenance multi -family housing product such as a condominium or
townhome, or purchasing a home in a retirement community. Older seniors (74 and above) may
begin to require some level of assisted housing.
These generalizations make fairly broad assumptions concerning where a person may chose to
live during various points in a lifetime. These generalizations are sufficient to identify the variety
of housing choices necessary to allow residents the option of living in Lino Lakes their entire
lives, and to provide the opportunity for their children to do the same.
Senior Housing
Currently, the City of Lino Lakes contains one senior housing development, Cottages of Willow
Ponds, an affordable rental project completed in 1996. The City's Economic Development
Authority provided Tax Increment Financing for the project. The development is located on Elm
Street, and includes 12 buildings of four units each, for a total 47 units and one shared common
area. Vacancies within this senior housing development have been very limited since its
completion.
As the community ages there will be an increase in demand for smaller, low maintenance
housing in the community. This demand might be accommodated through a variety of townhouse
styles or condominiums in mixed use settings. Empty nesters are a particularly active group on
the younger end of the senior age range and locating developments near some of Lino Lakes'
natural amenities will be enticing to this group. As part of the implementation of the
Comprehensive Plan, the City will cooperate with developers or other agencies to assess senior
housing needs in the community.
Affordable Housing
Housing Cost
The cost of housing is an increasing concern throughout the Metropolitan region. Housing costs
directly influence one's ability to rent or purchase a home in the community, and can also affect
the ability of local employers to find workers. The cost of housing is influenced by the cost of
land, labor, materials, community regulations and fees and interest rates. In Lino Lakes, the large
supply of land benefits the community in terms of relatively lower costs. However, as municipal
services are expanded, fees for development will increase. These fees, although paid by the
developer initially, are included in the cost of the unit.
Concern over the rising costs of housing affects businesses. Many employers view affordable
housing as a benefit to the city, as most workers desire to live in the same community where
they work or in a nearby community. With the substantial increase in employment anticipated for
Lino Lakes in the next 20 years, affordable housing for workers will be a critical issue.
Balancing Community Housing Needs with Environmental Protection
Protection of the city's natural resources has been, and will continue to be, a critical factor in
development and growth decisions. However, balancing community housing needs with
environmental protection measures is challenging for many communities. The City of Lino Lakes
has effectively used conservation subdivision techniques to preserve valuable natural resource
areas in recent years. However, because land costs for common open space areas are passed on
4-8
to residents of that particular conservation subdivision, the costs of residential units within
conservation subdivisions are very high, significantly exceeding guidelines for affordable housing
costs in the metropolitan area. Typically these units are only available to residents earning very
high incomes; therefore young families and those who work in Lino Lakes are often unable to
purchase homes in conservation developments. To create more affordable opportunities within
conservation subdivisions, funding options through land trusts or non-profit organizations may be
pursued that would allow the City or a non-profit organization to directly purchase open space
areas created in conservation subdivisions. This would reduce costs for residents within
conservation subdivisions, increasing the affordability of these units. Density bonuses may also
be used as an incentive to developers to provide more affordable housing units within
conservation subdivisions, as allowing for additional units on a site may make a conservation
development more financially feasible.
Other efforts to reduce the environmental impacts of residential development, such as green
building techniques, can also increase development costs, which are then passed on to residents.
This can make the provision of affordable housing units within green buildings difficult. As with
conservation subdivisions, density bonuses may be used to increase the financial feasibility of
residential developments that incorporate green building techniques. Funding options are
available to increase the affordability of green building developments. The Minnesota Green
Communities program, a collaboration of the Greater Minnesota Housing Fund, the Family
Housing Fund, and Enterprise provides funding to support the production of "green" affordable
housing.
Livable Communities Act
The Minnesota Legislature created the Livable Communities Act (LCA) in 1995. The LCA is a
voluntary, incentive -based approach to encourage communities to provide affordable housing
opportunities. Lino Lakes is a participant in the program. When the program was created,
benchmarks were established and negotiated by each community to determine owner/renter mix,
affordable ownership, affordable rental, and density goals These goals established housing
guidelines for the period between 1996 and 2010. With these benchmarks, the Metropolitan
Council created a grant program to help assist communities with the cost of developing
affordable housing programs. These grants are highly competitive among participants, and
historically they have been awarded annually.
2020 LCA Goals
The Livable Community benchmark and goals expire in 2010. As part of the 2030 Regional
Development Framework, the Metropolitan Council estimates that approximately 50,000
additional affordable housing units will be needed in the region between 2011-2020. The
Metropolitan Council will be working with communities to adopt new agreements in 2011 for the
next ten year planning cycle. In order to determine new benchmarks and goals for individual
communities, the Metropolitan Council conducted a study "Determining Affordable Housing Need
in the Twin Cities 2011-2020". With this new plan the Metropolitan Council has changed its
definition of affordable housing from current definition of 80 percent of area median income to
60 percent of area median income. The study then developed a method for allocating affordable
housing to all communities within the region based on the following four criteria:
• Household Growth Potential
• Ratio of local low-wage jobs to low-wage workers
• Current provision of affordable housing
• Transit Service
4-9
Based on its analysis, the Metropolitan Council's new affordable housing goal for Lino Lakes is to
create 560 new affordable housing units between 2011 and 2020, which represents 35 percent of
forecasted household growth. Based on the 2030 future land use map and the minimum
proposed residential densities (i.e., 6 units per acre for high density and 8 units per acre for
selected mixed use areas), the City has the capacity to accommodate the affordable housing
goal.
The level of affordability is important to understand when assessing the amount of current
affordable housing and the price point for new units to meet this goal. According to Metropolitan
Council 2OO7Affordability Limits, the area median income for the seven -county Minneapolis -St.
Paul (MSP) area adjusted by HUD to be applicable to a family of four is $78,500 in 2007. Eighty
percent of the median household income is $62,800; 60 percent is $47,100 and 50 percent is
$39,250. Applying an interest rate on a 30 -year fixed-rate home loan of 6.2 percent for 2007 and
other payment factors to the 80 percent area median income, yields an affordable purchase price
of $206,800 in 2007. According to Anoka County Assessor's data there are 779 homesteads, or
13 percent of total 2007 households, that fall under this 80 percent purchase price limit in Lino
Lakes. The price point for an affordable home at 60 percent of area median income drops to
$152,000. There are currently only 82 existing homesteads, or 1 percent of total 2007
households, in Lino Lakes at or below $152,000 (Anoka County assessor's data/GIS).
It is the new 60 percent measurement that will be required for the potential affordable housing
units anticipated between 2011-2020 in Lino Lakes. Achieving this new affordability goal will be
very difficult without the funding tools that have in the past been offered by the Metropolitan
Council and other agencies.
Future Affordable Housing
To provide for affordable housing in the community, the City is taking the appropriate regulatory
measures within the Comprehensive Plan by guiding areas for higher density housing and
including policies to integrate affordable housing in all residential land use districts. These
regulatory measures represent one of the City's most effective tools for the development of
affordable housing. To meet affordable housing goals, the City has planned for potential new
growth with a variety of residential land use types and densities for the development of life -cycle
and affordable housing across the city.
The city's future land use plan can accommodate the goal of 560 High Density and Mixed Use
units at a minimum density of 6 units per net acre by 2020. While the City is doing its part in
creating a regulatory land use plan to guide areas for higher density housing, which is where
most affordable housing will likely occur, barriers to development of affordable housing still exist
in Lino Lakes and the region. Some of these barriers are beyond the City's control, including the
following:
• Steady increases in land prices and construction costs.
• Physical limitations of land due to wetlands, poor access, poor soils that would increase
the cost of land development or construction.
• State, county and local tax structures.
There are some significant barriers to construction of new affordable housing, and the above list
includes just a few of these barriers. Despite these difficulties, the provision of affordable housing
is an important effort that cities undertake. The most effective role Lino Lakes will have in the
provision of affordable housing is its regulatory tools, including land use and zoning regulations
that do not impede the construction of affordable housing. Many of these tools can be used to
encourage developers. Flexibility, through the use of the Planned Unit Development (PUD)
process, may be provided to encourage the construction of affordable housing.
4-10
Acknowledging the regional housing goals established by the Metropolitan Council does not
commit the City of Lino Lakes to provide funding for housing. The City will continue to
investigate means to pursue the goals in its comprehensive plan. However, this should not be
interpreted as a commitment to use City funds to overcome the financial obstacles to life cycle
and affordable housing.
Housing Implementation Strategies and
Recommendations
The following Housing Action Plan identifies efforts Lino Lakes will pursue to create opportunities
to maintain the existing housing stock, and to provide increased housing options for future
residents. These strategies are based on goals and strategies for Community, Neighborhood and
Residential development developed by the Citizen Vision Committee. The strategies are designed
as a resource tool for specific measures the City can effectively undertake and enforce while
others are designed as tools to encourage developers to incorporate affordable housing into
future development. As future subdivisions are proposed, the City will use these resources and
implement the strategies in working with developers to create new affordable housing
opportunities. Many of these items are things the City itself can do, while others will occur
through partnerships the City will seek to provide for and maintain housing quality and increase
affordable housing opportunities.
To ensure housing development is compatible with existing and adjacent land uses
and provides accessibility to key community features and natural amenities (Goal 3),
the City will:
• Offer incentives to developers who provide for affordable housing units while conserving
environmentally sensitive sites, such as density bonuses, expedited permitting processes,
or reduced fees.
• Pursue funding opportunities to increase the affordability of housing units within
conservation subdivisions.
• Pursue funding opportunities to incorporate green building techniques within affordable
housing developments.
• Encourage innovative low impact development to preserve open space or natural
features.
• Ensure that all new housing, including high density, adheres to the highest possible
standards of planning, design and construction feasible.
• Promote development of neighborhoods that incorporate housing in a range of densities
and affordability limits in close proximity to shopping, services, daycare, and medical
services. Safe access to parks and schools, and the ability to walk, bike or have access to
transit should be part of the design.
To improve the availability of affordable housing and enhance opportunities for
senior housing (Goals 5 and 6), the City will:
• Seek housing developers to work cooperatively with the City to construct affordable
units.
• Create an incentive based program or Residential Planned Unit Development Ordinance
that includes density bonuses for construction of affordable housing. This allows an
increase in density, beyond the underlying zoning, if the development includes affordable
housing.
• Participate in the Livable Communities Act Local Housing Incentives Program.
4- I I
• Activate and utilize powers and tools of the City Economic Development Authority and/or
a City Housing and Redevelopment Authority to make funds available for the creation of
new affordable housing.
• Develop policies to use Tax Increment Financing to fund activities that increase new
affordable housing.
• Utilize techniques, such as land trusts to maintain long-term affordability for any new
affordable housing unit.
• Support and actively promote Anoka County's 1st Time Homebuyers programs to assist
new homeowners entering the market for existing homes.
• Partner with, support and market programs offered by the County, State, MHFA, Federal
Government and non -profits to fund the development of affordable housing.
• Cooperate with developers or other agencies as appropriate to assess senior housing
needs in the community.
• Allow the creative use of site planning or PUDs that provide flexibility for development
containing affordable housing such as a reduction in lot size, setbacks, street width, floor
area and parking requirements, and consideration of reduction in City fees.
• Update the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance to reduce impediments to
affordable housing.
• Use the land use plan as a tool to provide a variety of residential land uses in a range of
densities, concentrating higher density opportunities along major transportation and
transit corridors and around future job centers.
• Periodically review land use regulations to determine the effectiveness of current
ordinances in encouraging additional affordable units as well as encouraging
modifications to keep the existing housing stock desirable and livable.
• Streamline permitting and development processes to ease the rehabilitation or
improvement of existing homes and reduce unwarranted cost impacts on the price of
entry-level homes.
• Work with the Anoka County HRA to meet the community's life -cycle and affordable
housing needs.
To maintain existing housing stock to ensure a high-quality environment in all
residential neighborhoods (Goal 11), the City will:
• Support and actively promote housing rehabilitation programs for existing owner -
occupied homes and rental buildings or units. This includes promotion of all county and
state programs and non-profit programs.
• Utilize the city's website, newsletter and other sources for promotion and advertising of
housing programs.
• Continue enforcement of the Housing Maintenance Code to maintain existing housing
stock.
• Study the feasibility of establishing a program to require a property inspection and
disclosure report before residential property changes hands.
• Maintain City rental licensing program and enforcement efforts.
• Promote programs that encourage maintenance of existing house including a housing
remodeling fair, neighborhood watch programs, city beautification programs, city wide
clean up programs, etc.
• Develop a list of available resources and providers of in-home services to older adults
and those with special needs.
4-12
METROPOLITAN
G O U N C I L
Metropolitan Council - metrocouncil.org
2017 AFFORDABILITY LIMITS FOR
OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL HOUSING
Livable Communities Act Grants
What is affordable housing?
The Metropolitan Council's 2040 Housing Policy Plan defines affordable housing as housing that is affordable to low- and
moderate -income families.
Who qualifies for affordable housing?
For 2017, the affordability limit is 80% of the area median income for both rental and ownership housing. In 2017, the area
median income (AMI) for a household of four is $90,400. Under these limits, a family of four can earn up to $68,000 to
qualify for affordable housing. For details on how this is calculated, see the History of Median Income, below.
To implement the Livable Communities Act in 2017, the Council will use the following amounts as the upper limits for
affordable rental and ownership housing.
Rental housing
Rents include tenant -paid utilities.
2017 Rental Housing
# Bedrooms 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI
Efficiency $474 $791 $949 $1,265
1 Bedroom $508 $848 $1,017 $1,356
2 Bedrooms $610 $1,017 $1,220 $1,627
3 Bedrooms $705 $1,175 $1,410 $1,880
4 Bedroom $786 $1,311 $1,573 $2,097
Ownership housing
For owner -occupied housing, the income limit includes principal, interest, property taxes and home insurance.
Assumptions include:
• Fixed -interest, 30 -year home loan
• Interest rate of 4.375%
• A 29% housing debt -to -household income ratio
• A 3.5% down payment
• A property tax rate of 1.25% of the property sales price
• Mortgage insurance at 0.85% of unpaid principal
• $100/month for hazard insurance
2017 Home Ownership
Household Income Level Affordable Home Price
80% AMI ($68,000) $236,000
60% AMI ($54,240) $185,000
50% AMI ($45,200) $151,500
30% AMI ($27,100) $85,000
In 2017, applying an interest rate of 4.375% on a 30 -year fixed-rate home loan and the standard mortgage assumptions
listed above to the 80% AMI amount for a family of four ($68,100) yields an affordable purchase price of $236,000. This
compares to a 2015 limit of $240,500 and a 2016 limit of $235,000. The purchase prices affordable at these income limits
have increased for 2017 compared with 2016 because of increasing interest rates and an increase in the region's Area
Median Income.
History of area median income
Through 2010, the Council identified a purchase price ceiling for owner -occupied homes based on what a family of four
with an income at or below 80% AMI could afford at prevailing interest rates. For affordable rental units, the limit was
maximum monthly rents affordable for households at 50% AMI.
From 2011 through 2014, the Council used 60% AMI as the income limit for both rental and ownership costs.
This level was consistent with the funding criteria preference adopted by the Metropolitan Housing Implementation Group
(MHIG) in 2001 and was a commonly -used threshold for affordability in federal, state, and local housing programs.
The table below lists the household incomes at the current and previous levels of area median income, as calculated by the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Please note that due to constraints and adjustments used in HUD's
calculations, the income limits shown here do not necessarily equal the area median income multiplied by the given
percentage.
HUD's Area Median Income for a family of four for the Minneapolis -Saint Paul -Bloomington Metropolitan Statistical
Area
AMI 2017 2016 2015
Area Median Income $90,400 $85,800 $86,600
80% of Area Median Income $68,000* $65,700* $65,800
60% of Area Median Income $54,240 $51,480 $51,960
50% of Area Median Income $45,200 $42,900 $43,300
30% of Area Median Income $27,100 $25,750 $26,000
*The 80% of Area Median Income limit is capped at the U.S. national median family income
Owner -Occupied Housing by Estimated Market Value
Lino Lakes
METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL
Ham Lake
•
i • - I •'
• • • 1 I =0.
• •• • I Forest
• I Lake
• • • • •
•
1
w /+ '
• • • J •
I
• • • • • 1- e
• • kol • • •
• i • • .. ! • I •••
•
•i • •� r �_• t- •
•I
i.
Columbus
•
•
Blaine r •4 ••
/ I
'
•• ,
•
1I+ •
•
i a • ,• I Hugo
i�) I I
_� i Centerville I
I®
Imo}
i
• •
•
•
•
w Circle
Pinesal
eV' , v •
w•
•
•
T•S
t
444
•
•1
r� • - 1 I � I. ••
• io
,.
• ".t`i,s0
• s.
Vii` I• ,,,,,
• I •• 44.
•
. I
• I !-
•
•
•
•
• • •I ID
•Z ee, e
`
i
�White . 1-111-47
1 4. 4Bear Twp4 .•
rye , r ----------- - -------------- • i --®• —-------- '-----� •(------------ '—
1
qi
s Shoreview -( -- North
•
+� ., 3. - 1 .••� Oaks IJ
r 4s) L.
. 1:444,
•
1-17 County Boundaries
L- — i City and Township Boundaries
Lakes and Major Rivers
Street Centerlines
Owner -Occupied Housing
Estimated Market Value, 2015
$238,500 or Less
$238,501 to $350,000
• $300,001 to $450,000
• Over $450,000
1 inch = 0.9686 miles
Source: MetroGlS Regional Parcel Dataset, 2015 estimated market values
for taxes payable in 2016.
Note: Estimated Market Value includes only homesteaded units
with a building on the parcel.
Publicly subsidized
units: All others
{s
`Th. a
sem'_.
52L
•
• real
EXISTING HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CARVER
11011111rdlor
:r,
LOCAL PLANNING
HANDBOOK
CITY OF LINO LAKES
An Existing Housing Assessment is the first step in identifying current housing needs for your community.
This information meets the minimum data requirements for your Existing Housing Assessment. You are free
to copy and paste this table directly into your Housing Element, recreate it using the same data, or
incorporate it into a table with additional or alternative data using reliable sources. This table is not a
comprehensive picture of your community's housing stock, but a solid starting point to identify and address
your existing housing needs. Please contact Council staff if you have any questions.
Total housing units 1= 6,546
Table 1 Affordability 2
Units affordable to households with
income at or below 30% of AMI
Units affordable to households
with income 31°A) to 50% of AMI
Units affordable to households
with income 51 % to 80% of AMI
129
349
2,204
Table 3 Type 1
Table 2 Tenure 3
Ownership units Rental units
6,019
527
Single-family units
Multi -family units
Manufactured homes
Other housing units
6,213
238
95
0
Table 4 Publicly Subsidized Units 4
All publicly
subsidized units
Publicly subsidized
senior units
Publicly subsidized units
for .eo.le with disabilities
106
0
0
106
Table 5 Housing Cost Burdened Households 5
Income at or below 30% of AMI
Income 31 % to 50% of AMI
Income 51 % to 80% of AMI
286
238
398
' Source: Metropolitan Council
2 Source: Metropolitan Council staff estimates based on 2014 and 2015 MetroGlS Regional Parcel Datasets (ownership units), 2008-
2012 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data from HUD (rental units and household income), and the Council's 2014
Manufactured Housing Parks Survey (manufactured homes).
3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau,2010-2014 American Community Survey five-year estimates; counts adjusted to better match the
Council's 2014 housing stock estimates
4 Source: HousingLink Streams data, available online at http://www.housinglink.org/streams
Housing cost burden refers to households whose housing costs are at least 30% of their income. Source: U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 2008-2012 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, with counts adjusted to better match
Metropolitan Council household estimates August 2016
LOCAL PLANNING
HANDBOOK
Metropolitan Council
390 Robert Street North
Saint Paul, MN 55101
metrocouncil.org
Main: 651.602.1000
TTY: 651.291.0904
Public Information: 651.602.1500
public.info@metc.state.mn.us
METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL
METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL
CENSUS, FORECASTS &
ESTIMATES
COMMUNITY PROFILES
REPORTS, ANALYSIS &
METROSTATS
DOWNLOAD DATA
About Us News & Events Data & Maps Publications & Documents Doing Business Council Meetings Contact Us Em
COMMUNITIES PARKS TRANSPORTATION
COMMUNITY PROFILES
Community Profile for Lino Lakes
WASTEWATER & WATER
HOUSING PLANNING
Each chart in the Community Profiles can be saved in JPEG, PNG or PDF formats or printed as a standalone page. To
save as an image, right -click on the chart and select a format option. Once the "capturing data process is over, review the
saved charts on the CHART EXPORTS tab. Click the "save" button for any chart export listing you wish to save. Please
note that the data source is not included in the saved images.
Please Contact Us by Clicking Here
Select another area:
Lino Lakes
https://stats.metc.state.mn.us/profile/detaiLaspx?c=02395725
COPY PROFILE URL TO CLIPBOARD
OVERVIEW PEOPLE ECONOMY AND JOBS INCOME AND POVERTY HOUSING COMMUTING LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT .15
Housing Type
Housing Units Permitted
New Affordable Housing
Housing Tenure and Vacancy
Homeownership
Median Housing Value
Median Gross Rent
Count of Existing Home Sales by Price
Households Experiencing Housing Cost Burden
Census 1990
Census 2000
Estimates 2010
Estimates 2016
Housing Type in Lino Lakes
0
1,400 2,800
F' Single -Family Detached
F Duplex, triplex and quad
Manufactured Home
4,200 5,600
F Townhomes (single-family attached)
F Multifamily (5 units or more)
F Other (Boat, RV, etc.)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census and Metropolitan Council Housing Stock Estimates.
Download chart data
Back to top
7,000
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
I
i
New Housing Units Permitted by Lino Lakes
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
allo Single -Family Detached
Lilo Duplex
Bl]n Multifamily (3 units or more)
B11 Townhomes (single-family attached)
din Duplex, triplex and quad
On Multifamily (5 units or more)
Note: Between 2003 & 2004 housing unit type definitions changed: Duplex category was expanded to include duplex, triplex and quad, ar
the definition of multifamily changed from 3 or more units to 5 or more units.
Source: Metropolitan Council Residential Building Permit Survey.
Download chart data
Back to top
200
175
150
125
100
75
50
25
Select data to chart:
Owner -occupied ' Renter -occupied
Affordability of New Units Added by Lino Lakes
Owner -occupied: Affordable
Olin Rental units: Affordable
o`b
cv
ryo
ryo ryo
1
OE Owner -occupied: Over Affordability Threshold
011o Rental units: Over Affordability Threshold
Source: Metropolitan Council Affordable Housing Production Survey.
Download chart data
Back to top
7,000
5,600
4,200
2,800
1,400
0
Housing Tenure and Vacancy in Lino Lakes
Census 1990 Census 2000
Census 2010 ACS 2011-2015
En Owner -occupied Renter -occupied Oa Vacant
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census and American Community Survey.
Download chart data
Back to top
Select any comparisons to include in the chart.
I] County ID Twin Cities Region (7 -county)
] Compare another place
95.5%
81.2%
67.8%
Census 1990
[On Lino Lakes
Anoka County
] Minneapolis -St. Paul MSA
Homeownership Rate in Lino Lakes
96.4%
83.4%
Census 2000
din Anoka County
94.255
81.9%
•
70.0%
90.8%
80.0%
68.3%
Census 2010 ACS 2011-2015
[tio Twin Cities Region (7 -county)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census and American Community Survey.
Download chart data
Back to top
Select any comparisons to include in the chart.
Q✓ County ]Q Minneapolis -St. Paul MSA
O Compare another place
$92.1 $83.5 $88.3
Census 1990 (1989 dollars)
0[]o Lino Lakes
Anoka County
Median Housing Value in Lino Lakes
(in $000s)
$162.7
$131.3 $141.2
$284.5
$223.1
$239.1
11
$259.6
$187.6
$213.9
Census 2000 (1999 dollars) ACS 2006-2010 (2010 dollars) ACS 2011-2015 (2015 dollars)
du Anoka County DDo Minneapolis-St.Paul MSA
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census and American Community Survey.
Download chart data
Link to inflation calculator
Back to top
Select any comparisons to include in the chart.
O✓ County ]✓ Minneapolis -St. Paul MSA
❑ Compare another place
Anoka County
•
$615
$498
$479
Census 1990 (1989 dollars)
OIL Lino Lakes
Median Gross Rent in Lino Lakes
$747
$649
$641
$1,137
$870
$842
$1,123
$971
$931
Census 2000 (1999 dollars) ACS 2006-2010 (2010 dollars) ACS 2011-2015 (2015 dollars)
Bus Anoka County OIL Minneapolis-St.Paul MSA
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census and American Community Survey.
Download chart data
Link to inflation calculator
Back to top
Under $100
$100 to $124
$125 to $149
$150 to $174
$175 to $199
$200 to $249
$250 to $299
$300 to $499
$500 to $999
10
Select data to chart: 2015 v
Count of Existing Home Sales by Price in Lino Lakes
(in $000s)
14
17
23
40
46
7
52
Source: Certificate of Real Estate Value, Minnesota Department of Revenue.
Download chart data
Back to top
76%
57%
38%
19%
0%
Percent of Households Experiencing Housing Cost Burden in Lino Lakes
18%
66%
59%
16%
19%
18%
Census 1990 Census 2000
30%
1
29°/o
1
56%
25%
23%
490/0
ACS 2006-2010 ACS 2011-2015
din All households experiencing cost burden 01 Owner households experiencing cost burden
IL Renter households experiencing cost burden
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census and American Community Survey.
Use caution when comparing 1990 and 2000 data (which include only some households) to American Community Survey data (which
include all households). See the metadata for more information.
CITY0F
IIN L' KES
2040
COMP PLAN
Summary of Meeting Results
Chain of Lakes Rotary Club
Meeting in a Box, July 26th 2017
S.W.O.T. Discussion
Lino Lakes 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update
1. What are Lino Lakes' greatest strengths? What makes the City a great place to live? Please list
at least 5 things you think make Lino Lakes great. (Strengths can refer to the community, the
people, public facilities, natural resources, character, governance, etc.)
• Parks & trail
• City Hall staff
• Opportunities to get involved
• Natural areas/open space
• Retail opportunities
• People volunteering to help the community grow—Rotary, etc.
• Parks and trails investment
• Location
• Safety
• Security
• Community
• Park system
• Trails
• Friendly people
• It's a neighborhood community—people get to know their neighbors
• It's save; no crime
• Parks & trails
• Proximity to Minneapolis, airport & St. Paul
• Great neighborhood
• Safe community
• Better commercial areas from 15 years ago
• Expanded trail system
2. What are Lino Lakes' weaknesses? Where does Lino Lakes fall short from your perspective?
What is missing that could better reflect the community vision?
• Deteriorating road system
• Complacency- Lino is great, continue investing
Chain of Lakes Rotary Club
Meeting in a Box, July 26th 2017 Page 1
• No civic center
• Other than YMCA there isn't a meeting social area (Community Center)
• Pockets of poverty
• People don't know difference between Centerville, Circle Pines, Lexington, etc.
• Lack of a commercial center
• Staff/council relationship
3. What are the greatest opportunities in the community? What things do we do well already, but
could do better? What areas do we fall short in that we could be better at? Where are the greatest
opportunities for the community?
• Continue focus on growing commercial/retail businesses. This will allow city to maintain
services, tax rate
• Growth of commercial business in area
• Higher taxes
• Finish retail area—legacy
4. What are the threats that stand in the way of achieving the opportunities or maintaining our
strengths? What threatens the community or city from achieving their goals?
• Poor economy
• Council/charter arguing—stalemate
• Price of gas at $4-$5 per gallon could keep people from work—lack of jobs
• Lack of funds to improve
• Taxes
• Not maintaining high level of public safety
Chain of Lakes Rotary Club
Meeting in a Box, July 2017 Page 2
CITY •
LNOL" KES
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES
DATE
TIME STARTED
TIME ENDED
MEMBERS PRESENT
MEMBERS ABSENT
STAFF PRESENT
: July 12, 2017
. 6:32 P.M.
. 9:08 P.M.
: Dale Stoesz, Lou Masonick, Perry Laden, Paul
Tralle (Chair), Neil Evenson, Michael Root, Jeremy
Stimpson
: None
: Michael Grochala, Katie Larsen, Diane Hankee,
Mara Strand, Joe Widing
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Chair Tralle called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:32
p.m. on July 12, 2017.
II. APROVAL OF AGENDA
The Agenda was approved as presented.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Mr. Masonick made a MOTION to approve the June 12, 2017 Meeting Minutes with
amendment. Motion was supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6 - 0.
IV. OPEN MIKE
Chair Tralle declared Open Mike at 6:33 p.m.
There was no one present for Open Mike.
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:33 p.m. Motion was supported by
Mr. Stoesz. Motion carried 6 - 0.
V. ACTION ITEMS
A.
Public Hearing: All Seasons Rental/ SS Properties Addition Preliminary Plat,
Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 2
Katie Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report.
The applicants, Scott and Shelly Carlson, own All Seasons Rental located at 7932 Lake
Drive. They have purchased the vacant 1.3 commercial parcel to the south with the intent
to construct a new 7,740 square foot commercial facility.
The Land Use Application is for the following:
• Preliminary Plat
• Rezoning from R -X, Rural Executive to GB, General Business
• Conditional Use Permit
o Commercial Planned Unit Development
o Small Engine Repair
The proposed 7,740 s.f. facility is located on the south end of the site with a potential
6,700 s.f. future addition. The existing two buildings will be demolished. The current
access off Lake Drive will be relocated to the north approximately 25 feet. It will be
gated and used only for deliveries approximately 2-3 times per month. Two driveways
will ingress/egress from Kelly Street. A 1,040 s.f. storage building will be located on the
north end of the parcel. The existing concrete ready -mix operation will remain in the
northeast corner of the site. The existing stormwater pond on the east side will be
expanded and a new infiltration pond will be constructed on the west side along Lake
Drive. Seven foot high security and screen fencing are proposed around the site. The
parking lot will have curb and gutter and will be bituminous paved. A 15 foot trail
easement exists along Lake Drive. This will remain in place but no trail improvements
are required with this project.
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat, rezoning and conditional use permit.
Staff addressed questions of the Board.
• Mr. Root asked about the trail easement boundaries and where the trail easement
runs to the parking lot.
• Ms. Larsen stated that the easement does not conflict with the parking lot.
• Mr. Root asked about the south side of the building and the signage and permits
for the wall sign. In addition, he asked if a sign would be permitted and if there
was a monument sign proposed.
• Ms. Larsen stated that there has not been a sign plan permitted, but that the
proposal would be allowed a wall sign on every facade aside from the side
abutting the residential property. She also stated that they are allowed a
monument sign as well.
• Mr. Evenson asked about the fences and if the security fence is a chain link that
one could see through. He then asked if you could see it at all.
• Ms. Larsen said that if the privacy fence is put in on the edge of the property then
landscaping needs to be on the outside of the fence and that for the security fence,
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 3
the landscape buffer is only required between a residential and commercial
property.
• Mr. Evenson stated that he was not sure that one could see a fence.
• Ms. Larsen agreed and stated it is a difficult question and that Mr. Larsen had a
good point.
• Mr. Evenson stated that he thought that the fence on the east side of the lot would
squeeze the home in. He also commented that the business has been a good
neighbor.
• Mr. Stimpson stated that he likes this type of development and that other business
should look more like this. He also stated that the Lake Drive access can be
difficult to get in and out of. He stated that his main comment is around the
fencing and moving the privacy fence over to where the security fence is
proposed. He asked about the irrigation and the stormwater pond and the fence
placement with regards with irrigation.
• Ms. Larsen stated that [the applicant] does not have to irrigate the pond area, but
if the area is sodded there would need to be irrigation. She stated that staff would
have to take a look at possibly adding an extra irrigation pipe for landscaping and
gathering more information on past practices.
• Chair Tralle asked if those who are building the house adjacent to the proposal are
here tonight. They were not present at the meeting.
• Mr. Masonick asked if there was a fence line between the old and new property
that currently exists.
• Mr. Carlson, the applicant, stated that there is one there today.
• Mr. Stoesz asked what hours of operations were permitted in the area.
• Ms. Larsen stated that there are no limits on hours of operation for commercial
properties.
• Mr. Laden asked how visible the accessory building is to both Lake Drive and
Kelly Street.
• Ms. Larsen stated that if the privacy fence was built that most of the building
would be obscured by the privacy fence, but the top of the structure would still be
visible.
• Mr. Laden stated that he recommends that the materials or color be consistent
with the primary building if it is visible. He also wanted to clarify the materials on
the proposed elevations and the labeling on the elevations.
• Ms. Larsen agreed that the elevations needed to be amended.
• Mr. Laden asked about if the garbage area needed to be integral with the primary
building.
• Ms. Larsen stated that there needs to be more looked at, but agreed that the area
should be moved.
• Mr. Laden stated he was concerned with fence materials on Lake Drive.
• Ms. Larsen stated that it was a security and chain link fence which would be
permitted under code, but the slats would not be.
• Mr. Laden asked if the City will be requiring landscaping on the street side of the
fence on Lake Drive.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 4
• Ms. Larsen stated that landscaping was not shown on the street side of the fence.
She also stated that she was concerned with a security fence abutting Lake Drive.
• Mr. Laden asked if there were any comments from the County about moving the
access to Kelly Street.
• Ms. Larsen stated that the County has yet to submit comments.
• Mr. Laden stated he would be concerned as Kelly Street is a residential street.
• Ms. Larsen Stated that Kelly has no outlet and would not likely be used by
commercial customers.
• Mr. Masonick asked if the property to the north is a church.
• Ms. Larsen stated that it was a multi -tenant commercial building and not a church.
• Chair Tralle asked if the rental trucks would be stored inside.
• Mr. Carlson, the applicant, stated that they would not be stored inside. He also
stated that concrete area would be outside and is what requires the security fence.
• Chair Tralle stated that he is ok with a chain link fence on Lake Drive. He also
stated that he has no issues with it being a steel sided building. He stated that if
the applicant were to change to go where the security fence is presently he is
concerned about the storm pond and the possibility of children next door and the
safety with them. He asked how much of the property is going to be paved in the
rear of the proposed building.
• Ms. Larsen stated that she also has concerns and questions with what is going to
be installed behind the building in regards with pavement and sod placement.
The applicant came forward to speak.
Scott Carlson, 7932 Lake Drive Lino Lakes, MN.
• Chair Tralle asked about the fence.
• Mr. Carlson stated that the barbed wire does not mean a lot to them in light of the
comments, but they do want to have fencing on the Lake Drive side. He stated
that he does like the idea of moving the fence on the other side of the drainage
pond. He wants to look good in the community and is ok with other fencing
materials. He stated that he just does not want open access into back yard of
property.
• Chair Tralle asked about the accessory building and if Mr. Carlson is ok with
changing materials or colors.
• Mr. Carlson stated that they are flexible with the color and materials of the
accessory building as long as the size is maintained. He stated that there would be
little visibility from either street, but would be open to other materials.
• Chair Tralle stated that the proposed building is a great looking building.
• Mr. Stimpson asked about the monument signage.
• Mr. Carlson would like to use the current sign on the property that would be
relocated. He also stated that for wall signage that there would be signs on the
south and west elevations.
• Mr. Laden asked about lighting in the parking lot.
The architect for the project came forward to speak.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 5
Jerry Anderson, PO Box 310 Forest Lake, MN.
• Mr. Anderson stated that there are only 2 parking lot light poles, one that is
centered on the west side of the parking lot and one that is centered on the south
edge of the site. The remainder is lit by box lights. All lights are downward facing
on 22 foot poles.
• Mr. Anderson stated that the berms on the west side would not be necessary and
serve no purpose. He stated that they would be detrimental to the operation of the
business. He stated that the pond in that area is more of a rain garden and will see
little standing water. He also stated that he was ok with moving the fence across
the pond. In addition the trash area is brick walled, an extension of the building
and is a feature incorporated with the entire site. He also stated that he was happy
to make the fence placement change from the outside of the pond to the inside as
recommended by staff.
• Ms. Larsen asked about the parking lot screening on Lake Drive and the proposed
outdoor display area. She stated that staff did not write the report with an outdoor
display area being used and would not be allowed as is.
Chair Tralle declared the Public Hearing open at 7:33 p.m.
Katherine Beemer, 925 Kelly St. Lino Lakes, MN.
• Ms. Beemer asked where the rental trucks will be located on the property. She
also stated that traffic makes it difficult to get off of Kelly Street on to Lake
Drive.
• Mr. Carlson stated that the trucks would be located in the rear of the lot and that
they ask for Penske to limit the amount of trucks on the property. If there are
extras they would be located in the rear of the building.
• Mr. Laden asked if the trucks would be considered outdoor storage.
• Ms. Larsen stated that they are accessory use and are allowed as 25% of floor area
for outdoor display area.
• Chair Tralle said that the truck storage is not that big of an issue and that the
proposal would be an improvement over what is currently there. He thinks that
Kelly Street is the appropriate street for ingress and egress for the business.
• Mr. Laden asked about the number of parking stalls being proposed.
• Ms. Larsen stated that the proposal currently exceeds the parking requirements
and could use some of the spaces for the storage of the rental trucks.
• Ms. Larsen stated that a stipulation that rental trucks be only kept in parking stalls
facing Lake Drive rather than Kelly Street.
• Mr. Stoesz asked if the ponding in front is needed on the site.
• Ms. Hankee stated that they do need both ponds to meet the requirements for
storm water management requirements.
• Ms. Larsen stated that staff did not have any issues with the location of the ponds.
• Mr. Anderson said that the ponding was already approved by the Rice Creek
Watershed and could not be changed without re -approval from the Watershed.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 6
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m. Motion was
supported by Mr. Stimpson. Motion carried 6 - 0.
• Mr. Evenson asked if there were garage doors on the rear of the building.
• Mr. Carlson stated that there are no garage doors on the rear, but if the garbage
was on placed on the rear of the building that there would be conflicts with
customer movements through the site.
• Mr. Evenson stated that he has no problem with where it is on the drawing. Mr.
Laden and Mr. Stoesz concurred.
• Mr. Carlson stated that the business does not generate much trash and would not
be visible from either Lake Drive or Kelly Street.
• Mr. Masonick stated that if the fence was on the west of the pond the applicant
would not have to insure the pond.
Mr. Evenson made a MOTION to recommend approval of the preliminary plat, rezoning
and conditional use permit. Motion was supported by Mr. Root. Motion carried 6 - 0.
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Kendra Lindahl, Landform Professional Services, presented the staff report.
Results of June 22, 2017 Open House
• Approximately 40 citizens attended the Open House. A summary report is
attached.
Results of Community Survey
• The online survey was closed on June 23, 2017 and had 476 respondents. A report
summarizing the results is attached.
Potential Land Use Study Areas and Land Use Issues
• Staff has identified a preliminary list of land use study areas. These are specific
locations that should be reviewed as part of the Land Use Plan update.
• Several landowners also have requested that the City consider specific changes to
the status of their property. Possible changes might include the future land use
designations or utility staging.
• Attached is a table listing potential land use study areas, along with a map
showing the areas by planning district. The table includes some data about each
area (size, current planning status, utility staging) and a bullet list of issues or
questions. For each study area, we have also provided a more detailed map with
the 2030 Land Use Plan and an aerial photo with the GIS wetland layer. For Area
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 7
1-A, some additional materials are provided (an excerpt of the 2007 Master
Planning Study for Hodgson Road & CRJ.)
Staff Addressed questions of the Board.
Site lA — Hodgson Road and County Road J
• Mr. Stoez doesn't think the master plan should be included in the comprehensive
plan as it is too specific and limiting for the site.
• Mr. Laden thinks that graphics and vision is good, but clarification that the plan is
more of a concept should be included as well.
• Chair Tralle agrees with Mr. Laden and doesn't see any reason to alter what is
already in place.
• Mr. Laden stated that mixed use needs to have better defintion of what it is or
what the city wants to see.
• Chair Tralle stated that the 3 businesses on Hodgson Rd. want nothing to do with
the vision in the master plan.
Site 1B — Hodgeson Road and Birch Street
• Mr. Laden stated that he would like to see it continue to be commerical. The site
is highly visible and that residents are asking for more commercial and taking
away spaces guided for commercial use would be a mistake.
• Chair Tralle asked if it was owned by the town home development.
• Mr. Stimpson stated that ownership has changed and is no longer owned by the
developers of the town home development.
• Mr. Laden stated that the developer wanted more commerical at one time, but was
stopped in the past by the City.
• Mr. Stimpson stated that his only concern would be the access being a right in,
right out only on to Birch Street from the commerical property.
• Mr. Grocahala stated that is currently zoned for neighborhood business. He stated
that the original proposal was denied and rezoned to neighborhood business.
• Mr Laden stated that the site could be opened up to full commercial with more
auto heavy use.
• Mr. Grochala stated that when the original project was denied the site was also
zoned from Limited Business to Neighborhood Business which is more restrictive
to auto use.
• Mr. Root stated that access is a challenge and that it is zoned for business and
that's why its still open. He also stated that there is still plenty of land north of
Birch Street for commercial use.
• Chair Tralle asked what would give the most versitable zoning without making it
a drive through.
• Ms. Lindahl stated that they are talking use and the comprehensive plan and that it
could be zoned 3 different ways that would apply for a commerical use.
• Mr. Grochala stated that there is more interest in residential than commerical for
the site.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 8
• Mr. Stoez asked if it can be split in half by keeping north side commerical and
making the south side residential.
• Ms. Lindahl stated that nothing is stopping anyone from proposing a good use on
the site.
1C — South of 67th Street from Ware Road to Holly Drive
• Mr. Root asked about the preserve conservation area and if this area would be an
extension of that. He asked if the idea is to move this area forward in staging.
• Mr. Grochala stated that the area could be split into 2 districts with one half [east
side] moving into a sooner sewer staging district. The area would only be roughly
60 units and guided for low density development.
• Mr. Laden asked if it is directed by the Met Coucil.
• Mr. Grochala stated that the Met Council has no system here and municipalities
have taken the lead.
• Mr. Masonick asked if 62nd Street has sewer capacity for houses on it.
• Mr. Grochala stated that sewers 62nd Street does have sewer and water.
• Mr. Stoez asked that why Red Maple Lane is marked the way it is on the land use
map.
• Mr. Grochala stated that it is currently zoned urban reserve and that going to be
pushed out to 2040 for sewer service. He also stated that if there is enough interest
the staging could be moved up in time.
2A — Sod Farms Area
• Chair Tralle asked if it was one of the ecological development proposals.
• Mr. Grochala stated it was going to be similar to the lakes development [in
Blaine] and that the reason it was guided the way it was was on account of a
future collector road. He also stated that this plan has begun to reemerge. He
stated that densities will likely be averaged out over the entire area and asked if
any member had any issues with the current design.
Mr. Laden asked why the checkerboard design of the proposed land use.
Mr. Grochala stated that they did not want to have 160 acres of mixed use as it
has the highest allowed density.
• Chair Tralle stated that a lot of the sites so far have had work done already and
with no development why change what's there.
2B — Lake Drive Corridor North of Main Street
• Mr. Grochala explained the nature of the business mix along the corridor that do
not currently fit zoning classifications and future land use guidance.
• Mr. Stoez asked what Columbus has zoned along Lake Drive.
• Mr. Grochala stated that Coumbus is zoned all commercial along Lake Drive.
• Mr. Laden stated he thought that all of Lake Drive would end up commercial.
• Mr. Grochala said that there is a lot of conflicting land uses along the corridor that
makes it becoming all one or the other difficult.
• Ms. Lindahl stated the biggest concern is to limit access onto Lake Drive and
turning conflicts for vehicles.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 9
2C — Waldoch Farms Area
• Chair tralle stated that they just added 100 space parking lot and that he doesn't
think that they would be putting up houses on the site soon.
• Mr. Grochala stated that they have looked to add housing to rear side of the
property. The farm is moving into a commercial operation and away from
agriculture. They are looking to move the property up staging wise. Previously the
staging was pushed back in the previous plan and might get pushed up in the
forthcoming comprehensive plan.
• Ms Lindahl stated that this area is another sewer phasing issue area more than a
future change in land use issue.
2D — Decker Property 614 Pine Street
• Ms. Lindahl stated that the study area was created at request of the land owner.
• Catherine and Jason Decker 614 Pine Street, Lino Lakes MN.
• Mr. Decker stated that he has talked with adjouning property owners to the east
and that they are interested in possibly selling and developing their land in
conjunction with him. He also stated that they are looking for sooner sewer and
water hookups to accommodate development.
• Mr. laden asked if Mr. Decker is talking about grouping multiple parcels together.
• Mr. Decker stated that there is interest between three adjacent property owners
about coming together to sell for development.
• Chair Tralle stated that the city will look into a potential of development.
3A — North of Main Street West of 20th Avenue
• Ms. Lindahl stated that the intention is to reaffirm guided land use from the
previous comprehensive plan.
• Mr. Grochala stated that the area is 2025 and 2030 development area, but with it
being adjacent to the Mattamy development that possibly these parcels would be
pushed up in the utility staging for drainage purposes. He also stated that this is an
area with higher amenties and higher density.
• Mr. Stoez asked if the proposal would be to change it to mixed use.
• Mr Grochala stated that the idea is to look more at staging and reaffirming current
land use guidance.
• Chair Tralle asked if the Mattamy site is still being looked at.
• Mr. Grochala said that Lennar is looking at the site and that he expects an
application coming in the next week.
3B — Nadeau Properties (6651 & 6677 20th Avenue South)
• Ms. Lindahl stated that this is another property that has been submitted at the
owners request. She stated the request was to increase the guided density to
medium from low density.
• Mr. Laden asked what the property owner is requesting.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 10
• Mr. Grochala stated that they are looking at Northpointe and they also owned
Northpointe previously.
• Mr. Laden asked what the density of Northpointe is currently.
• Mr. Grochala stated that it will be medium density when all phases are completed,
but currently the development would fall under a low density designation.
• Ms. Larsen stated that the owners were also looking at utility staging.
• Ms. Lindahl stated that it is important to sit down with landowner for areas such
as this.
4A — Wilkonson Lake / Cedar Lake Area
• Ms. Lindahl stated the main reason for the focus of this area was sewer capacity
and staging questions.
• Mr. Root stated that there was comments about Cedar Lake and asked if Cedar
Lake is part of this area.
• Mr. Grochala said that there is an opportunity to do restoration of Cedar Lake in
the future and that it is currently more of a wetland than a lake. He continued that
that it would be challanging to do a restoration. He also stated that there has been
strong interest in development in the area and straightening the s -curves on Ash
Street. North Oaks Development Company is interested in that as well and in
developing their land in the area. This opens opportunities in moving stagin
around.
5A — East of I -35E and North of Main Street
• Mr. Grochala stated that the residential was added during the AUAR and that if it
is changed then the staging does not matter as much. If it were all guided
commerical and industrial then it can be moved to the first staging area.
• Mr. Laden asked if changing it changes the AUAR.
• Mr Grochala stated that it would not neccesariliy change the AUAR as it had 3
different scenarios and its possible to spread uses around within he AUAR.
Mr. Stoez asked if this area would help pay for the interchange at Main Street and
I -35E
Mr. Grochala stated the area is out of the area for assessment.
Additional Comments:
• Mr. Stoez asked if Lake Drive by Trappers is being proposed for any changes.
• Staff replied no.
• Mr. Evenson asked how do you fix the land use by Orange St. with small lots and
septic tanks.
• Mr. Grochala said the plan is to get sanitary would be to possibly extend it from a
site to the south on Main Street, but it is also possible to come from Lake Drive.
He also stated it is a long term project.
• Mr. Laden asked if there is any opportunity for a community septic system.
• Mr Grochala stated that there is no real room for that in the area.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 12, 2017
Page 11
• Mr. Grochala asked are we a city of "make it happen" or "let it happen" in regards
to the development. Does the city want to aquire and clear for development.
• Mr. Root stated that the area by city hall has had little happen with extensive city
invovlment.
• Mr. Laden stated that the city has had a more passive role traditionally. The city
should take more of a role in marketing land.
• Mr. Stoez stated, about the 49 Club site, to go ahead to put sewer in and pre fund
improvements and that development could pay back investment within 20 years.
• Ms. Lindahl presented a proposed change of the start time for the Planning and
Zoning Board from 6:30 to 6:00 to allow for time to discuss the comprehensive
plan before other items.
• Chair Tralle asked why not just start at 6pm with comp plan and move to other
items after, without making offical time for the rest of the items.
• Mr. Grochala staed that having a fixed starting time for applications and public
hearing gives those participating in that a firm time.
• Mr. Stoez asked if staff was going to meet with the Charter Commission.
• Mr. Grochala replied that they are not.
B. Project Update
Ms. Larsen stated that council approved the previous plans that were approved by
Planning and Zoning Board in the previous hearing. She stated that Eagle Liquors is
progressing and the United Properties development had its final walkthrough.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Evenson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 9:08 p.m. Motion was
supported by Mr. Stimpson. Motion carried 6 - 0.
Respectfully submitted,
Joe Widing
Community Development Intern
DRAFT MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 5A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner
P & Z MEETING DATE: August 9, 2017
REQUEST: Houle Addition Final Plat
CASE NUMBER: FP2017-008
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
REVIEW DEADLINE:
GRH Contracting
Attn: Guy Houle
1221 Birch Street
Lino Lakes, MN 55038
Same
Complete Application Date:
July 21, 2017
60 -Day Review Deadline:
September 19, 2017
120 -Day Review Deadline:
November 10, 2017
Environmental Board Meeting:
N/A
Park Board Meeting:
N/A
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting:
August 9, 2017
Tentative City Council Work Session:
September 11, 2017
Tentative City Council Meeting:
September 11, 2017
BACKGROUND
The applicant, Guy Houle, GRH Contracting, has submitted a land use application for
final plat. The proposed development is a 1 lot and 1 outlot single family residential
subdivision located at the north end of Ruffed Grouse Road. The development contains
one 30.72 gross acre parcel and is called Houle Addition.
This staff report is based on review of the following information:
The following staff report is based on the following information:
• Revised Civil Plans and Preliminary Plat prepared by Kaskaskia Engineering
Group, LLC dated 7/21/17
1
• Final Plat prepared by Kaskaskia Engineering Group, LLC received July 21, 2017
Previous Council Actions:
• July 10, 2017: Resolution No. 17-63 approving Preliminary Plat
ANALYSIS
Subdivision Ordinance
Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code
The parcel is guided low density residential and zoned R -1X, Single Family Executive.
The final plat is compliant with the comprehensive plan, zoning and subdivision
ordinance. The final plat substantially conforms to the approved preliminary plat.
Blocks and Lots
The final plat contains Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A. The preliminary plat has been
revised and the contiguous buildable land area better defined.
Streets and Alleys
Lot 1 (future single family) has frontage along Ruffed Grouse Road that has 60 feet of
platted right-of-way. Outlot A has frontage along CSAH 34/Birch Street. No street
improvements are required.
Easements
Standard drainage and utility easements at least 10 feet wide have been provided along all
lot lines. The wetland has been protected by an drainage and utility easement that
includes a 10 foot buffer extending outward from the delineated wetland boundary.
2
Required per
R -1X
Lot 1
Outlot A
Min. Lot Size
(contiguous buildable land)
12,825 s.f.
20,381 s.f.
(0.47 acres)
1,136,590 s.f.
(26.09 acres)
Gross Lot Size
NA
201,870 s.f.
(4.63 acres)
1,136,590 s.f.
(26.09 acres)
Min. Lot Width
90 feet (interior lot)
915 feet
NA
Min. Lot Depth
135 feet
220 feet
NA
Streets and Alleys
Lot 1 (future single family) has frontage along Ruffed Grouse Road that has 60 feet of
platted right-of-way. Outlot A has frontage along CSAH 34/Birch Street. No street
improvements are required.
Easements
Standard drainage and utility easements at least 10 feet wide have been provided along all
lot lines. The wetland has been protected by an drainage and utility easement that
includes a 10 foot buffer extending outward from the delineated wetland boundary.
2
Wetland Conservation Act regulations as administered by Rice Creek Watershed District
(RCWD) requires a conservation easement and wetland buffer over the wetlands. These
documents shall be recorded separately.
Storm Water Management and Erosion and Sediment Control
Per the submitted Grading and Utilities Plan Sheet 5, land disturbance is 9,632 square
feet which is under the 10,000 square foot threshold for erosion control. A rock
construction entrance and silt fences are proposed on site. No stormwater management
facilities are proposed and drainage appears to occur on site. RCWD and the City
Engineer will review and comment on plan.
Utilities
Sanitary Sewer
An 8" PVC sanitary sewer main along Ruffed Grouse Road will serve Lot 1. There is an
8" sanitary plug at the end of the main.
Watermain
A 6" DIP watermain along Ruffed Grouse Road will serve Lots 1. There is a 6"
watermain plug at the end of the main.
Public Land Dedication
The Park, Natural Open Space, Greenways and Trail System Plan do not indicate a future
neighborhood park within the area. The City is requiring cash in lieu of land dedication
for the new lot.
Park Dedication Fees
Total # of Lots =
1
x 2017 Park Dedication Fee
$2,575
= Total Due
$2,575
Tree Preservation
The goal of tree preservation is to minimize unnecessary loss of habitat, biodiversity and
forest resource and to replace removed trees in areas where tree cover is most critical.
Several trees have been removed from the entire site prior to submittal of the land use
application. The Grading and Utility Plan, Sheet 05 identifies 2 trees on Lot 1 and that
these trees are not being impacted. A tree inventory is not required for Outlot A since no
development is proposed.
3
Landscaping
Plan sheet 05 indicates one (1) boulevard tree (maple tree). This satisfies the boulevard
tree requirement.
Building Requirements
A building permit is required for the construction of the single family home. City staff
will be review the permit and structure for compliance regarding setbacks, floor area,
garage and design and construction standards.
Comprehensive Plan
Houle Addition is consistent with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan in
regards to resource management, land use, housing, transportation and utilities.
Density and Land Area Calculations
The following chart implements Met Council's formula for calculating net density.
Gross Area (acres)
30.72
Wetlands & Water Bodies
22.12
Public Parks & Open Space
NA
Arterial ROW
NA
Other (Wetland Buffer)
TBD
Net Area (acres)
TBD
# of Units
1
Gross Density (units/acre)
TBD
Net Density (units/acre)
TBD
The subject site is guided low density residential development and allows for 1.6 to 3.9
units per net acre. Although information regarding the wetland buffer is needed verify
consistency, it appears Houle Addition meets the land use goals of low density residential
development by creating a 1 lot subdivision on a 4.63 gross acre parcel.
Wetlands
A Wetland Delineation Report was completed by Jacobson Environmental, PLLC on
May 23, 2017 and is currently under review by RCWD. Since no future development is
4
to occur on Outlot A, a delineation is only required on Lot 1. A WCA Notice of Decision
shall be required prior to City Council approval of the final plat.
The site is located within in the RCWD Wetland Management Corridor (WMC). RCWD
is requiring a conservation easement and wetland buffer a minimum 25' wide on Lot 1
and a minimum 50' wide on Outlot A. These documents shall be recorded separately.
Floodplain
The 2015 DFIRM indicates Zone A floodplain on both Lot 1 and Outlot A. The plan
sheets have been revised to indicate a RCWD floodplain base flood elevation (BFE) of
886.87. Grading and house construction do not appear to impact the floodplain.
Shoreland Management Overlay
The site is located in a Shoreland Management Overlay district of Wards Lake. This lake
is a classified as a Natural Environment Lake and has an 883.7 OHWL elevation. A
setback of 150 feet from the OHWL is required for all primary and accessory structures.
Section 1102.07(2)(a) does however, allow for the following exception:
"Placement of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site,
structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Where structures exist on
the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building site, structure setbacks may be
altered without a variance to conform to the adjoining setbacks from the ordinary high
water level, provided the proposed building site is not located in a shore impact zone."
The plans show the 883.7 OHWL and staff understands this elevation has now been field
surveyed. The OHWL setback of 6697 Ruffed Grouse Road is 56.3' and the OHWL
setback of 6690 Ruffed Grouse Road is 92.1'. The average setback is 74.2'. The 75'
shore impact zone is the more restrictive and shall be the applicable setback.
The Grading Plan indicates 2.31% impervious surface coverage which meets the allowed
30% impervious surface coverage of the shoreland ordinance.
Development Agreement
A Development Agreement has been drafted by the City and shall be executed by the
City and the developer and recorded by the developer.
Title Commitment
The title commitment shall be updated within 3 months of recording the final plat.
Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
Since there are no stormwater management facilities being constructed with this
5
development, a stormwater maintenance agreement is not required.
Conditions of Resolution No. 17-63 Approving Preliminary Plat
The following conditions of have been addressed (strikethrough) or have not addressed as
indicated below.
-1- Comments from City Engineer Letter dated June 7, 2017 shall be addressed. See
revised letter dated August 3, 2017.
2, Comments from the Environmental Coordinator letter dated June 9, 2017 shall be
addressed. See revised letter dated August 2, 2017.
3. General Comments:
a. Any future subdivision and development of Outlot A shall require full
preliminary and final plat review and approval.
b. No principal or accessory buildings shall be constructed on Outlot A.
e CSAH 10 shall be renamed CSAH 34 on all plan sheets.
4. Sheet 03-04, Preliminary Plat:
a The lot area (contiguous buildable land) shall be recalculated and correctly
shaded to exclude the delineated wetland boundary plus 10 foot
buffer/easement.
13, Both sheets shall show building setbacks (front, side and rear) m-asured to
the lot line.
c. Sheet 04 shall include the density chart with correct area calculations for
each line item.
The entire delineated wetland boundary shall be shown on the preliminary
plat, especially on Lot 1, Block 1.
e: Both sheets shall be revised to show the drainage and utility easements
including a 10 foot buffer extending outward from the entire delineated
wetland boundary.
f- A separate plan sheet shall be submitted showing any required
conservation easements.
g- The 883.7 OHWL shall be field surveyed and shown on the plans.
1} The actual house setbacks to the OHWL of 6697 Ruffed Grouse and 6690
h The average of setback line of theses adjacent houses shall be shown on
the plan.
j The 75 foot shore impact zone shall be clearly marked on the Preliminary
Plat Plan Sheet 0"l and Grading and Utilities Plan Sheet 05.
lc, The Upland Boundary label shall be renamed Contiguous Buildable Area.
h The Contiguous Buildable Area shall be shown and calculated 10 feet
outward from the delineated wetland boundary.
im The civil plans and house plans shall be revised to meet the accurately
calculated average setback.
a, On the Preliminary Plat Plan Sheet 04, it shall be included under Notes
that all structures (decks, accessory structures etc.) shall meet the required
OHWL setback.
6
5: Sheet 05, Grading and Utilities:
The applicant shall clarify what this is and where it is located.
b, The Upland Lot Area (42,603 s.f.) does not match the data provided on
e Staff has concerns the tree west of the house may be damaged during site
grading.
The applicant shall indicate tree protection measures on the plan.
6 Landscape Plan:
a A separate Landscape Plan shall be submitted showing the location and
tree species for one (1) boulevard tree.
7. Wetlands:
a. A WCA Notice of Decision shall be submitted to the City.
b. All plans and final plat shall be revised to reflect the WCA approved
delineated boundary.
c. The entire wetland boundary on Lot 1 shall be delineated and shown on
the plans.
If required by RCWD, the WMC 50 foot buffer area and the proposed
WMC buffer area shall be provided on a separate plan sheet.
Floodplain:
a The applicant shall provide written documentation from RCWD the 887.6
BFE is correct.
If correct, this should be listed under "Notes" on the plan sheets.
19, The applicant shall verify the floodplain will not be impacted.
FINDINGS OF FACT -FINAL PLAT
The Planning and Zoning Board shall consider the final plat and the Community
Development Department shall forward the Planning and Zoning Board
recommendations to the City Council. The following requirements shall be met before
consideration of the final plat by the Planning and Zoning Board:
1. The final plat shall substantially conform to the approved preliminary plat and
phasing plan.
The final plat substantially conforms with the preliminary plat.
2. For plats that consist solely of individual single family residential lots, final plat
applications for subsequent phases shall not be approved until building permits
have been issued for 40% of lots in the preceding phase. This division applies
only when the preceding phase consists of 40 or more lots; and
This is a 1 lot single family residential subdivision and will be platted in one (1) phase.
3. Conditions attached to approval of the preliminary plat shall be substantially
fulfilled or secured by the development agreement, as appropriate.
7
The conditions of the preliminary plat have been substantially fulfilled. Outstanding
conditions listed below need to be addressed prior to release of the final plat mylars.
Securities will be required with a Development Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the final plat for Houle Addition subject to the following
conditions:
1. All comments from City Engineer letter dated August 3, 2017 shall be addressed.
2. All comments from Environmental Coordinator letter dated August 2, 2017 shall
be addressed.
3. A Development Agreement has been drafted by the City and shall be executed by
the City and the developer and recorded by the developer.
4. General Comments:
a. Any future subdivision and development of Outlot A shall require full
preliminary and final plat review and approval.
b. No principal or accessory buildings shall be constructed on Outlot A.
c. All plan sheets shall note the correct revision date.
5. Wetlands:
a. A WCA Notice of Decision shall be submitted to the City.
b. All plans and final plat shall be revised to reflect the WCA approved
delineated boundary.
c. The entire wetland boundary on Lot 1 shall be delineated and shown on
the plans.
d. The applicant shall provide separate recordable documents for the
Conservation Easement and WMC Buffer Declaration as approved by
RCWD and the City.
6. Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD):
a. The applicant shall provide a copy to the City of the RCWD permit
application prior to Council approval of the final plat.
b. A RCWD permit is required prior to any site grading or home
construction.
7. Sheet 03, Preliminary Plat:
a. Under Notes, #2 shall be revised from 30' to 10'.
8. Sheet 04, Preliminary Plat:
a. Density chart shall be revised to include under "Other" the area of the
wetland buffer.
b. The legend indicates a shaded area for "Contiguous Buildable Area" but
the plans do not show the same shading. Please revise.
9. Sheet 08, Conservation Easement:
a. The area (s.f.) of the delineated wetland shall be shown.
b. The area (s.f.) of the wetland buffer shall be shown.
i. The wetland buffer is measured from the delineated wetland
boundary to the conservation easement.
8
10. Final Plat
a. A WCA Notice of Decision approving the delineated wetland boundary
shall be provided to the City prior to recording the final plat.
b. An updated title commitment (within 3 months) shall be provided.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Site Location Map
2. Aerial Map
3. City Engineer Letter dated August 3, 2017
4. Environmental Coordinator letter dated August 2, 2017
5. Revised Preliminary Plans and Preliminary Plat received July 21, 2017
6. Final Plat
9
vIARSHAN LAKE
OHWL 8831-3
IRM BFE 8187
F.1-BFE 887
GEORGE
WATCH.
LAKE
CENTERVILLE LAKE
OHWL 885.0
FIRM BFE 888
FIS BFE 887.9
RICE LAKE
OHWL 883.1
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887
RESHANAU LAKE
OHWL 883.5
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887
SHERMAN
:411111►�
a I:: I LI: I 1
■
IS
11
Houle Addition
I.
mill �i
/iiiiim uuu ►o �� "V".
►„//11``,.11111111111111 ►� '�
.._ dQ111111 ! �I ►�! �.��
Illi
CEDAR LAKE
OHWL
892..9
111 % ■ '1
M 1"""' AMELIA LAKE
_,OHWL 908.1
FIRM BFE 910
I_� FIS BFE 910.2
CIT`
11N(
Site Location Map
w
N
S
E
0 1,000 2,000
4,000
Feet
0
C I T E
Aerial Map
Houle Addition
E
0
200
400
800
Feet
WSB
Building a legacy— your legacy.
Memorandum
To: Katie Larsen, City Planner
From: Ed Youngquist, WSB
Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer
Date: August 3, 2017
Re: Houle Addition
Plan Review
WSB Project No. 010154
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
We have reviewed the Preliminary Plat documents dated May 15, 2017 for the Houle Addition
development in Lino Lakes, MN prepared by Kaskaskia Engineering Group, LLC. The
following are our review comments that should be responded to in writing by the applicant.
All plans, specifications, and construction activities shall reference the latest version of the City
General Specifications and Standard Detail Plates for Street and Utility Construction dated
November 2016, the 2013 CEAM, and the 2016 MnDOT Standard Specifications.
Engineering
• Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control
The Houle Addition development proposes replatting Outlot D of Pheasant Hills Preserve
into one residential lot and an Outlot (A). No additional public right of way or streets are
proposed. Grading of the house pad is specific to the proposed house. Erosion control
measures include a rock construction entrance at the end of Ruffed Grouse Road and silt
fence around the perimeter of the disturbed area (house pad grading).
Comments:
4, The applicant shall list the total area to be disturbed.
2. The applicant shall denote and label required buffer distances from surface
waters/wetlands.
- The applicant shall use the City's current standard plate for silt fence detail.
4. Show silt fence location on grading plan.
• Environmental
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
S:\Community Development \Projects\Planning Cases\Houlc Addition \ Staff Reports \20170809 PZ (FP)\a3 Pre Plat Review - Houle Addition.docx
Ms. Katie Larsen
August 3, 2017
Page 2
There are existing wetlands and lakes on and adjacent to the proposed plat of Houle
Addition. The proposed plat is also within the City's Shoreland district.
Comments:
. .. ! :: . established on the plans? The OHW should be
located/verified in the field.
2. The building setback from Ordinary High Watcr is 150 feet or thc average of the
neighboring structures. The average setback based on neighboring structures was
previously established as 80.55 feet. The submitted plan shows the proposed house
encroaching on this setback. The applicant shall revise the plan to remove the proposed
house from the OHW setback of 80.55 feet. Existing structure re -measured.
- Please edit the comment in the erosion control notes to read "all slopes 3:1 or steeper, to
be sodded".
• Stormwater Management
The Houle Addition development proposes the creation of a single family lot at the end of
Ruffed Grouse Road. The proposed development is located within 1000 feet of a public
water (Wards Lake) and is in excess of one acre.
Comments:
1. Per the Rice Creek Watershed District Rule C, a stormwater management plan is
required. — not required
• Water Supply
The Houle Addition development is proposed to be served by municipal water. A 6 inch
diameter watermain extension was constructed as part of the Pheasant Hills Preserve
development.
Comments:
4,
extension, including curb stop at thc right of way line.
•
• Sanitary Sewer
The Houle Addition development is proposed to be served by municipal sanitary sewer. An
8 inch diameter sanitary sewer extension was constructed as part of the Pheasant Hills
Preserve development.
Comments:
S:\Community Development \Projects\Planning Cases\Houle Addition \ Staff Reports \20170809 PZ (FP)\a3. Pre Plat Review - Houle Addition.docx
Ms. Katie Larsen
August 3, 2017
Page 3
4, Provide a utility plan that details the service connection to the existing 8" sanitary sewer
extension.
2- The applicant shall use the City's current standard plate for sanitary sewer service detail.
• Transportation
The Houle Addition development proposes the creation of a single family lot at the end of
an existing street (Ruffed Grouse Road). No additional right of way or public streets are
proposed.
1. No additional comments offered.
• Floodplain
There is floodplain on the parcel. The plan sheets indicate a RCWD floodplain base flood
elevation (BFE) of 887.6. The 2015 DFIRM indicates Zone A floodplain on both Lot 1 and
Outlot A.
Comments:
1 The applicant shall verify the low floor and low openings of the proposed house and
verify the elevations are in compliance with the 2 foot separation from the 100 year high
• Clarify if the line labeled RCWD Floodplain is the 100 yr high water level? This
line is similar to the FEMA Zone A (areas subject to the inundation by the 1
percent annual chance flood event).
• Based on the soil borings, the highest groundwater elevation observed was 882.8.
2. Show the FEMA Zone A. If encroached by development, a LOMR may be required.
• Wetlands and Mitigation Plan
A wetland delineation was provided for the boundary surrounding the proposed house. The
site is within the City's wetland preservation corridor.
Comments:
A wetland delineation and report is needed over the entirety of Lot 1, Block 1.
2. The applicant shall submit the wetland delineation approval from the LGU (RCWD).
3. Please show, on the grading plan, wetland buffers and drainage easements over the
buffers and wetlands. Please reference easement section below.
• Drainage and Utility Easements
A 10 foot drainage and utility easement is shown along the front line (right of way) of Lot 1,
Block 1 Houle Addition. The plat also shows a drainage and utility easement following the
wetland delineation around the sides and rear yard.
S:\Community Development \Projects\Planning Cases\Houle Addition \ Staff Reports \20170809 PZ (FP)\a3. Pre Plat Review - Houle Addition.docx
Ms. Katie Larsen
August 3, 2017
Page 4
Comments:
1. A conservation easement and signage may be required over delineated wetlands. RCWD
may require additional easement.
2 Provide a drainage and utility easement to cover 10 feet beyond the approved delineated
wetlands contained within the proposed Lot 1.
• Development Agreement
The Houle Addition development will require a development agreement.
• Grading Agreement
A grading agreement is not applicable.
• Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
A stormwater maintenance agreement may be required. not required
• Permits Required
The following permits may at minimum be required as part of the development construction.
1. NPDES Construction General Permit not required
2- Rice Creek Watershed Permit
a. Stormwater and Erosion Control. not required
3. City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Grading if grading is not done in conjunction with
Building Permit for home construction.
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:\Community Development \Projects\Planning Cases\Houle Addition \ Staff Reports \20170809 PZ (FP)\a3. Pre Plat Review - Houle Addition.docx
Memo
Environmental
C 1 T
To: Katie Larsen
From: Marty Asleson
Date: August 2, 2017
Re: Houle Addition Final Plat Comments for Environmental
Environmental has the following comments about The Houle Addition, Final Plat:
1. With RCWD requiring a Conservation Easement and Signs along the Easement, the City should
have coordinate points for the signs that are placed. The Coordinates should be for each point in NAD
83, Anoka coordinates in feet.
2. The Final plat is still reporting Miami fine sands in their Hydrology and soil summary. Lino Lakes
does not have that soil profile anywhere. It's either Dundus or Hayden fine sandy loam.
• Page 1
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
PRELIMINARY PLANS
for
PLAT, GRADING, STREETS, UTILITIES
for
HOULE ADDITION
LINO LAKES, MN
PREPARED FOR:
GRH Contracting
4417 Channel Lane NE
East Bethel, MN 55092
Contact: Guy Houle
Phone: 612-210-3854
PREPARED BY:
•
Kaskaskia
Engineering Group, LLC
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
2550 University Avenue West, Suite 161S
St. Paul, Minnesota 55114
615.337.5652phone
618.233.5977 fax
www.kaskaskiaeng.com
LICENSE NO.
Minnesota. Professional Design Firm
688435000021
INDEX:
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
1
2
3-4
5
6
7
8
COVER
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
PRELIMINARY PLAT
GRADING
NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT AND DETAILS
RESOURCE INVENTORY
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
//A
Ce1tervklle
Pd e3[I11,r 11, D
9
GenLOr SI
DOL
Mair+ s1
PF 7
BFrch St
L L,
(NOT TO SCALE)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Preliminary Plans
for
PLAT, GRADING, STREETS,
AND UTILITIES
for
HOULE ADDITION
LINO LAKES, MN
Date: 5/15/2017 Sheet: 1 of 7
LAST PLOTTED: 7/21/2017 9:03 AM OPERATOR: SCA
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
w
J
0
c
a)
T
E
0
LL
a)
Es
in
100
ai
0.1
CC
0
o
M
a0
Z o
ao
_C N
O N N
(n
C \ a)
0
owe
Z0C
� Q)
-c-cCSI
N
\
W
O
O
N
0o N
U)
N 89°41'31"
`--The Southwest corner of
the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4,
Sec. 28, Twp. 31, Rge. 22
MINITY MAP
Not to Scale
/
\
•
•
Edge Of Wetland
Delineated By Jacobson \
Environmental in April, 2017 \
\
Retaining Wall and—
Fence Falls 1.5' •
North of Property
915.53
E 1315.53
PDO & R -1X (Planned Development 1 6.3'
and Single Family Executive) I 1
Zoned : PSP (Public Semi -Public)
S 89°42'27" W 1314.92
,---Ordinary High Water
Elevation: 883.7
Floodplain
•
// Elev=886.87
7
4
c ssgsa'
Lc)
SF
V
DATE
1
<<5.)•
SHEET NO. 02 OF
A
PROJECT NUMBER
17-1042
nto
(,G'
4,�I
77A.H.1
a
NO.10
1
l
l-G'
J
1
1
k tx
Section 27, & 28 Township 31, Range 22
Anoka County, MN
0 100
200
HORIZONTAL: 1"=100'
LEGEND
wL / 1
1
.`ccA \
House
House
E i. E PT 1 0 v inIv
00'
/�\
> // N 4)
1 0 /
I� N
/
/ / / �0O��0 / /
/ / / / / / Cr \ / /
Na 0
/ / / 8 / / �Se /
/ / / / / / /� / \ /
1 / \
L
EXISTING LIGHT POLE
EXISTING SIGN
EXISTING POWER POLE
EXISTING GUY WIRE
® CB EXISTING CATCH BASIN
EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE
C) EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE
K4 EXISTING GATE VALVE
• FOUND IRON MONUMENT
O SET MONUMENT
EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER
CO EXISTING MANHOLE
O EXISTING WATER METER
CI EXISTING GAS METER
Z EXISTING HAND HOLE
® EXISTING TELEPHONE BOX
® EXISTING GUAR POST
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
s�1 EXISTING SOIL BORING
• NOTES
WL
502
502
DD
E
G
SF
W
D
DD
SF
PROPOSED SETBACK LINE
EXISTING RETAINING WALL
EXISTING WETLANDS EDGE
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING BURIED ELECTRIC
EXISTING GAS LINE
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING TREELINE
EXISTING WATERLINE
EXISTING SILT FENCE
1) The area of the property is 1,338,460 sq. ft. or 30.72 acres
2) Wetlands were located as shown on the drawing
3) The property lies in flood zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance
floodplain) and zone A (areas where no base flood elevations are determined) as designated on
Flood Insurance Rate Map Community Panel Number 27003C 0365 E, Anoka County, Minnesota,
published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency effective date December 16th, 2015.
4) The flood plain elevation of 886.87 was provided by the Rice Creek Watershed District.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve, Anoka County, Minnesota
EXCEPT that part of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve being in the West One-half of the Northwest One -Quarter,
Section 27, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of the West One-half of said Northwest One -Quarter, Section 27; thence
North 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds West along the East line of said West One-half, Northwest One -Quarter,
Section 27, a distance of 57.73 feet to the Southeast corner of said Outlot D for a point of beginning of the tract
to be described; thence North 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds West, along the East line of said Outlot D, a
distance of 910.02 feet; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 580.47 feet; thence
South 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel with the East line of said Outlot D, a distance of 548.90
feet; thence North 89 degrees 22 minutes 49 seconds East, parallel with the South line of said Northwest
One -Quarter, Section 27, a distance of 416.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel
with the East line of said Outlot D a distance of 370.14 feet to the Northerly right-of-way line of C.S.A.H. No. 10
(Anoka County Right -of -Way Plat No. 11); thence North 85 degrees 24 minutes 36 seconds East along said
right-of-way line a distance of 28.66 feet; thence continuing along said right-of-way line along a curve concave to
the North (which has a radius of 3879.72 feet, a delta angle of 02 degrees 00 minutes 31 seconds, and an arc
length of 136.02 feet) a chord bearing and distance of North 86 degrees 24 minutes 53 seconds East, 136.01 feet
to the point of beginning.
And EXCEPT the North 1100 feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserver, Anoka County Minnesota
And EXCEPT the South 400 feet of the North 1500 feet of the East 600 feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve,
Anoka County, Minnesota
/
/
• BENCHMARK
Top Nut of Hydrant (NAVD 88)
Located at the end of Ruffed Grouse Road
as shown on the survey.
Elev.= 897.26 feet
IN BASIS OF BEARINGS
For the purposes of this survey the West line
of Outlot D, of PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE,
according to the plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota is assumed to bear N 00'44'55" W
-The South Line of the North 1100 feet
/ of Outlot D
S 89°19'39" W
719.23'
_-Anoka County Reference Monument on
/ the E. Line of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 28,
\( Twp. 31, Rge. 22
--- WETLAND
\�\\ � C-6\ lit//88 -
WL
WETLAND - \\\\ ��� 8��wL kt
400.00 \ 9
The Southeast corner of the NE 1/4 of--'
the NE 1/4, Sec. 28, Twp. 31, Rge. 22
"'Do � R
i \ \ �9/e - 6A/
' \ \ -,-?7, -7,,
C / \ Fkeo4/t00, � J /oh
7
/ / \
/
1 r\
\J
�
r�r`I. n /
1=5L_‘._/._.r\ `r /
/7
/
/
/
/
O N
_C N
4 -CI;
0 (7)
- M
o
� a
_c
O N
U
•C
- U)
(0
/ PARK 4 z
A�
eF ('c/
opi2//y F/7eo,
/
N
r\ keo
/
4�0)/op�e/*?
t
\
•
LLJ
S 00°54'46"
/ \
•
3
/ / \
/ L /
4
/
/ 5 /
/
6
/
7
•
I30
I
—
I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me
or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land
Surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota.
Ronal • P. Alwin
DATE 7-21-17 LIC. NO 17765
8\\�\\�\�����\ N
\899\� \ 7 \
\ \ r9r07, - I
NII N��----_---___ ___7- � _---9e--'___,/
WETLAND
T) 1_I 1- A (7.-"%-\ IC I T
1 1 L_/—\ .2/—\ 1 N 1
N 89°2A9�E \ 9:80 •
il\"ly ential) 6'v
rn \\\\ \ \\\\\V")
0
c
cg
o
O O
L
0
O Q
C 0
<
•
Zoned :
N 00°54'46" W
)\A44,..
,(C3;,\ _\\;
(
1
I�
I
7 /
I I 1 I I
I I I L_L_`:
r\I ITI r\-1- r\
V I L_\J 1 V
Edge Of Wetland As Delineated___'
By Peterson Environmental•
Consulting, Inc. On Nov. 15, 2000
WETLAND
` ,-Ordinary High Water
/
Elevation: 883.7
\
.'-\
•
•
•
\ •
•
••
0
d
z
Zoned : PSP (Public Semi -Public)
—600'—
E., r r 1 .. � 1
,- D ,. cI 1 1 ..
/ — The South Line of the North 1500
feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills
Preserve, Anoka County, MN
S 89°19'39" W 600.01
0
0
--- WETLAND
1M
S 89°22'49" W 580.47
Zoned : R-1 (Single Family Residential)
F)1_1E A I\IT
1 1 L_ /—\ `: /—\ I N 1
CN
O
•
Shore Impact Zone \
1
I\
cp
)
9
J
N \ _�
0 `-The South line of the lJ/0/
of Sec. 27, Twp. 31, Rge. 22
0
1_1 1 I I
1 11L_L_.' 1 1\L_.'L_1\V L_
rm I IT1 r\T r\
\J V 1 L_\/ I LJ
_Parallel with the South line
of the Northwest Quarter
N 89°22'49" E
416.00'
Od,05/
\2.S.A.K.( NO,_ 34j
7���
L _ r
7
898 1
J
a)
0
O
0
0
Na52,9,a66•
S 01°00'55" E
M „8S,00.1.0 N
(0
0
0
N
/-The Northerly
/ right-of-way line
of C.S.A.H. No. 10.
The Southeast
corner of said
Outlot D. \ r,
7
z
M
N
1-2
PREPARED BY:
cd a
o
UbtO
Ct *51)
'V W
LICENSE NO.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
688435000021
bA
•
U
ct
Aa4
4417 Channel Lane NE
REV.
DATE
DES CRIP
A
SHEET NO. 02 OF
A
PROJECT NUMBER
17-1042
SHEET TITLE:
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
PROJECT TITLE:
PLI D°
P4 4
4.1
DRAWN SCA
SHEET
02
CHECKED
RPA
SHEET NO. 02 OF
07 SHEETS
PROJECT NUMBER
17-1042
LAST PLOTTED: 7/21/2017 9:03 AM OPERATOR: SCA
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
tJ
J_
100
a;
rn90
o 15
o
a 0
Z 13 0
a) co. a)
t N •c
9-
O N
O
a)
(1)
ow -0
Z o
DO- N
N
•
LLJ
in O
O
N
O N
O
U)
LOT 1
City Setback
Line
hio`
f
\•
Zoned : PSP (Public Semi -Public)
S 89°42'27" W 1314.92
Edge Of Wetland Asa_ tit4,. CP
Delineated By Jacobson \
201,870 sq. ft Environmental in April, 2017 \
4.63 acres
BLOCK
N 89°41'31"
`--The Southwest corner of
the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4,
Sec. 28, Twp. 31, Rge. 22
14CINI TY MAP
Not to Scale
915.53
E 1315.53
PDO & R -1X (Planned Development 16.3
and Single Family Executive)
`.
•
/ 1 _Elevation: 883.7
4 �\ -RCWD Floodplain
4 \ i' Elev=886.87
/
�\
i-- �`)/--4--�`1
,-- 219.9
,f ---Ordinary High Water
\
r v 0 r p T l n Al
I I v IV
O
N
N
/
(1,�1
C")l</G V///V/V
1
DATE
DESCRIP
G.
S
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
C.S.A.H.,
N0.10
1 ^
X11 NI �4'\
1
i
Section 27, & 28 Township 31, Range 22
Anoka County, MN
0 100
200
HORIZONTAL: 1"=100'
1 LEGEND
Municipality
Proposed Utilities:
r
1
.f
L
Owner / Developer
Guy and Joseph Houle
1221 Birch St.
Lino Lakes, MN 55038
(612)210-3854
Engineer & Surveyor
Kaskaskia Engineering Group
2550 University Avenue West
Suite 161 S
St. Paul, MN 55114
(651)337-5652
City of Lino Lakes
Sewer: City Utilities (available)
Water: City Utilities (available)
Ci EXISTING LIGHT POLE
EXISTING SIGN
O EXISTING POWER POLE
EXISTING GUY WIRE
® CB EXISTING CATCH BASIN
EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE
Q EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE
K4 EXISTING GATE VALVE
• FOUND IRON MONUMENT
O SET MONUMENT
EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER
�O EXISTING MANHOLE
0 EXISTING WATER METER
cM EXISTING GAS METER
Z EXISTING HAND HOLE
® EXISTING TELEPHONE BOX
® EXISTING GUAR POST
\ EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
s61 EXISTING SOIL BORING
• ZONING SUMMARY ■
Current Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Current use:
Proposed use:
R -1X Ord. 02-08
R-1 X
Not being used
Residential
WL
502
502
E
D
DD
G
SF
w
D
DD
SF
EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve, Anoka County, Minnesota
PROPOSED SETBACK LINE
EXISTING RETAINING WALL
EXISTING WETLANDS EDGE
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING BURIED ELECTRIC
EXISTING GAS LINE
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING TREELINE
EXISTING WATERLINE
EXISTING SILT FENCE
CONTIGUOUS BUILDABLE AREA
/
House'
HOULE ADDITION
-The South Line of the North 1100 feet
/ of Outlot D
S 89°19'39" W
719.23'
--�-Anoka County Reference Monument on
the E. Line of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 28,
->\\\ Twp. 31, Rge. 22
\\\\\ \ \ \\ - — --
‘
_
A\ \ --k
\ \ \ 1. - =__ ._ ___- /-___ __,. \ - - - \ 1 / / N N 2 ) \
\-4 \ \\*\\ --1) \\-\.)- \\ -) \ ----- ) \ \
\\ --- A/2
K ,---)
"--,f / j / \ ) l \ \ '
i \ \�--,-____---=—. --_-=--___-_—__-____-_— .--- ..--- yz,
—----__7- C //
--_____-_,---.......----„ ____.------- ..--- ----- .-- v
,----- �_._ �- — —2
\i ____-- 7 //
WETLAND ---/
400.00
The Southeast corner
the NE 1/4, Sec. 28,
of the NE 1/4 of--/
Twp. 31, Rge. 22
)_
r�
/ / w\ S6,
/
/
\ / /
/
/
■ BENCHMARK
Top Nut of Hydrant (NAVD 88)
Located at the end of Ruffed Grouse Road
as shown on the survey.
Elev.= 897.26 feet
■ BASIS OF BEARINGS
For the purposes of this survey the West line
of Outlot D, of PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE,
according to the plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota is assumed to bear N 00°44'55" W
•LOT SUMMARY
Lot 1 201,870 sq. ft.
Outlot A 1,136,590 sq. ft.
Contiguous Buildable Area (Lot 1) 20,381 sq. ft.
Total 1,338,460 sq. ft.
EXCEPT that part of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve being in the West One-half of the Northwest One -Quarter,
Section 27, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of the West One-half of said Northwest One -Quarter, Section 27; thence
North 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds West along the East line of said West One-half, Northwest One -Quarter,
Section 27, a distance of 57.73 feet to the Southeast corner of said Outlot D for a point of beginning of the tract
to be described; thence North 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds West, along the East line of said Outlot D, a
distance of 910.02 feet; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 580.47 feet; thence
South 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel with the East line of said Outlot D, a distance of 548.90
feet; thence North 89 degrees 22 minutes 49 seconds East, parallel with the South line of said Northwest
One -Quarter, Section 27, a distance of 416.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel
with the East line of said Outlot D a distance of 370.14 feet to the Northerly right-of-way line of C.S.A.H. No. 10
(Anoka County Right -of -Way Plat No. 11); thence North 85 degrees 24 minutes 36 seconds East along said
right-of-way line a distance of 28.66 feet; thence continuing along said right-of-way line along a curve concave to
the North (which has a radius of 3879.72 feet, a delta angle of 02 degrees 00 minutes 31 seconds, and an arc
length of 136.02 feet) a chord bearing and distance of North 86 degrees 24 minutes 53 seconds East, 136.01 feet
to the point of beginning.
And EXCEPT the North 1100 feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserver, Anoka County Minnesota
And EXCEPT the South 400 feet of the North 1500 feet of the East 600 feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve,
Anoka County, Minnesota
=PROPOSED PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Lot 1 and Outlot A, HOULES ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota
• NOTES
/
/
/
or 4.63 acres
or 26.09 acres
or 0.47 acres
or 30.72 acres
L
/T(•It A
LiL_\Jvr\ `1-
\ 8
/7
•
3
/
1
/
/
PARK 4
Poo
oda
"S'1?)
\ 9ie F
' //iy Fnea
°Y.) lc
/ \
t N
4- ▪ ai
o 17)
N
a
O N
U •
c a)
–N
2▪ 4.
'1) �
H Z
\
/
/
/
/
0
w
S 00°54'46"
�O \
5`eo.
4
\
ti
•
1
1) The property lies in flood zone X (areas determined to be outside the
0.2% annual chance floodplain) and zone A (areas where no base flood
elevations are determined) as designated on Flood Insurance Rate Map
Community Panel Number 27003C 0365 E, Anoka County, Minnesota,
published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency effective date
December 16th, 2015.
2) The Contiguous Buildable Area is 30' outside the wetland boundary and
consist of 20,381 sq. ft. for Lot 1.
3) The flood plain elevation of 886.87 was provided by the Rice Creek
Watershed District.
4) Per the Shoreland Ordinance the setback from the OHWL is 75' minimum
or the average of adjacent houses. The adjacent houses are at 56.3 and
92.1 with the average being 74.2. So the 75' minimum must be held.
5) The Property ID Number is 27-31-22-23-0010
6
I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me
or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land
Surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota.
Ronal
P. Alwin
DATE 7-21-17 LIC. NO. 17765
/
7
��- WETLAND
---- � wt
WL
•
30
WETLAND --
1) I_I I-- /\ (7"---A-Th
I r
1 I L_ /\ . /\ I \1 I
N 89°2 9,E�7\ 9:80
N 00'54'46" W
Zoned :
Z N
O N
c
a) ai
E 0)
C
6_
o • c rn
o o a)
3 N
0 t
•
O cn U
c0 0a)
QU (n(n\
/ \
/
/
\\\\ \\
S1e coyly\R�sis(entlal) i�
O'\\\\\ \ ,-Ordinary High Water
\\\ \ \ 1 ` \\� \ Elevation: 883.7
� I IL L� \
\ \\ \ � \ --75-ft Shore Impact
•
\
•
Zone
\\\\\\ -\'___\\\4,
I III I (•...
\
••
•
•\
E) f) r-^ rE)\ /r-
('\ I 1-1-1 p- -r r\
UV 1 L_\J 1 V
•
\
•
I\ L_ L_ I\ V L_ 11
Edge Of Wetland As Delineated___'
By Peterson Environmental
Consulting, Inc. On Nov. 15, 2000
OUTLOT A
1,136,590 sq. ft.
26.09 acres
WETLAN D
7
O
0
to
O
0
osz
0
O
O
z
Zoned : PSP (Public Semi -Public)
\
\
•
\
\
•
I
600' —
r s, /v r [) T 1 n Al
L /• L I I 1 v Iv
\ The South Line of the North 1500
feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills
Preserve, Anoka County, MN
S 89°19'39" W 600.01
H
O
O
d
0)
c0
ILC)
---- WETLAND
S 89°2249" W 580.47
Zoned : R-1 (Single Family Residential)
I_I E- A^ A N 1m
N I
r
T) D D\ /I
1 \L_`: L_1 \ V L_
/r\ 11 r 1 r\ r r1
\J V 1 L _ \_/ 1 L)
--- Parallel with the South line
of the Northwest Quarter
N 89°22'49" E
416.00'
Buildbble Are
1Q sq. Y
\ —
C:).. `-The South line o- f the IVr1\
of Sec. 27, Twp. 31, Rge. 22
Imo\
i2.S.A.0 NQ Aj
/M 2_ tet
J
N $;'2 03-
S 01 `00'55" E
0
V)
z
M „85,00.10 N
0
0
N
-The Northerly
/ right-of-way line
of C.S.A.H. No. 10.
The Southeast
corner of said I
Outlot D.
Zoned : PSP (Public Semi—Public)
PREPARED BY:
g
e'9
en
agi
LICENSE NO.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
6$$4350000211
0
L.)
rz4
4417 Channel Lane NE
Ch
120
ct
REV.
DATE
DESCRIP
SHEET
03
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
03 OF
06 SHEETS
SHEET TITLE:
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PROJECT TITLE:
4-1
DRAWN
BY:
SCA
SHEET
03
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
03 OF
06 SHEETS
17-1042
LAST PLOTTED: 7/21/2017 9:03 AM
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
10
• Density Table
Gross Area
Wetlands & Water Bodies
Public Parks & Open Space
Arterial ROW
Other
Net Area
Number of Units
Gross Density
Net Density
LEGEND
T
0
0
LOT 1
BLOCK 1
/
/
•
Drainage and
Utility Easement
HOULE ADDITION
\
'fr„,
to to'
2
Orindary High Water
Elevation: 883.7
58"E -
40,
8,E40.75
Sg 6:60'
--
Th�
Ic\I 26F
olM
I
z
•
• i
•
CP
�. 8g5r
sem.
•
it
rn
CO
0'
Exysung Roc
Entrance
iii +1`� :::
Co.PA•419INgioMat V:4444
I440.10* esti hilogwa
30.72 Acres
22.12 Acres
NA
NA
NA
8.60 Acres
1 Unit
1 Unit per 30.72 Acres
1 Unit per 8.60 Acres
Retaining Wall and Fence Fa)II
1.5' North of Property
NOTES
/
1) The property lies in flood zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual
chance floodplain) and zone A (areas where no base flood elevations are determined) as
designated on Flood Insurance Rate Map Community Panel Number 27003C 0365 E, Anoka
County, Minnesota, published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency effective date
December 16th, 2015.
2) The Contiguous Buildable Area is 10' outside the wetland boundary and consist of
20,381 sq. ft for Lot 1.
3) This project falls in the Wards lake shore land overlay district and is categorized as a
natural environment lake
4) The flood plain elevation of 886.87 was provided by the Rice Creek Watershed District.
5) Per the Shoreland Ordinance the setback from the OHWL is 75' minimum or the
average of adjacent houses. The adjacent houses are at 56.3 and 92.1 with the average
being 74.2. So the 75' minimum must be held.
6) All structures (decks, accessory structures etc.) shall meet the required OHWL setback.
7) Ordinary High Water Elevation was field located
8) Wetland delineated on Lot 1, Block 1, was performed by Jacobson Environmental
32£ EXISTING LIGHT POLE
EXISTING SIGN
EXISTING POWER POLE
EXISTING GUY WIRE
® CB EXISTING CATCH BASIN
EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE
EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE
EXISTING GATE VALVE
• FOUND IRON MONUMENT
O SET MONUMENT
EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER
DO EXISTING MANHOLE
wM EXISTING WATER METER
GM EXISTING GAS METER
Z EXISTING HAND HOLE
® EXISTING TELEPHONE BOX
Cl EXISTING GUAR POST
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
EXISTING SOIL BORING
WL
502
502
E
D
>1
G
SF
W
D
>1
SF
PROPOSED SETBACK LINE
EXISTING RETAINING WALL
EXISTING WETLANDS EDGE
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING BURIED ELECTRIC
EXISTING GAS LINE
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING TREELINE
EXISTING WATERLINE
EXISTING SILT FENCE
CONTIGUOUS BUILDABLE AREA
I
I/
30 0 30
56.3'
60
HORIZONTAL: 1"=30'
House
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
_J
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
NIMMIN
L.
/
/
/
/
h6\ U�
\'flL
v
\ lEil
/zz
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
N
/
1
Conservation Easement
\
•
cP
♦ r/—?5•4S O
• //7 /c4
0 < aOt 20h
co e
f -89Q
895—f`
N
7
Hou
\/o \
,-,a
• `<-7,5-4.
SF \ \oo o� 9�Zo e,,♦‘,2c,
\SA
♦, \sd's°;52.
4� o. ��
\ a,\�.
\ �S. 7'
\ \
1
\
\
se
\
Drainage and
Utility Easement
\
z
%l
•
/\
/
• /
i
/
/
CX
0
•
\
\
59.24 \ \
N</
10
0
N
;n
0
z
/NN
•
0
Conservation
Easement
•
PREPARED BY:
0 an
en N
an 06
CC; u
cip
CC; Qeo
,...!:.1! ."
1)
Ct *50
LICENSE NO.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
688435000021
1-4
44.
L.)
rz4
4417 Channel Lane NE
120
ct
REV.
DATE
DESCRIP
SHEET
04
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
04 OF
07 SHEETS
SHEET TITLE:
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PROJECT TITLE:
4-1
DRAWN
BY:
SCA
SHEET
04
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
04 OF
07 SHEETS
17-1042
LAST PLOTTED: 7/21/2017 9: 03 AM
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
PROPOSED LOT 1, BLOCK 1, HOULE ADDITION
1
Drainage and
Utility Easement
\
\
\
\
\
____ r
10
\
INSTALL CONSTRUCTION
FENCE AT DRIPLINE TO
PROTECT EXISTING TREE
Orindary High Water
Elevation: 883.7
r
\
RCWD Floodplain
=Elev 886.87
__,
O
•
I
•
r tree
,\ /mpa hor
Ct
•
/
/
N ,
N 1 wz
1 l
Existing Roc
Entrance
.pose
Ser
Proposed
Maple Tree
/
/
% ••,
•,
♦ ••,
♦ •
•
•
♦ •.
1
\
\
\
\
\
N.
EROSION CONTROL NOTES
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTROLLING ALL SILTATION AND EROSION OF
THE PROJECT AREA. ALL EROSION CONTROL AND SILTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL COMPLY WITH
MINNESOTA'S BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MANUAL. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHATEVER MEANS
NECESSARY TO CONTROL EROSION AND SILTATION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, STAKED STRAW BALES, ROCK
ENTRANCES AND/OR SILT FENCES. CONTROL SHALL COMMENCE WITH GRADING AND CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE
PROJECT UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF WORK BY THE OWNER. THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY INCLUDES: ALL
DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION AS REQUIRED TO PREVENT EROSION AND THE DEPOSITING OF SILT. THE OWNER MAY,
AT HIS/HER OPTION, DIRECT THE CONTRACTOR IN HIS/HER METHODS AS DEEMED FIT TO PROTECT PROPERTY AND
IMPROVEMENTS. ANY DEPOSITING OF SILT OR MUD ON NEW OR EXISTING PAVEMENT OR IN EXISTING STORM
SEWERS OR SWALES SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH RAIN AND AFFECTED AREAS CLEANED TO THE SATISFACTION
OF THE OWNER, ALL AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CONTRACTOR.
ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF GRADING OPERATIONS AND
BE MAINTAINED UNTIL ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON THE SITE HAVE BEEN RESTORED.
TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL TO BE PLACED AROUND STORM DRAIN STRUCTURES DURING CONSTRUCTION.
SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM ALL SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES AS NECESSARY AND MUST BE REMOVED IF
DESIGN CAPACITY HAS BEEN REDUCED BY FIFTY PERCENT.
A STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTAINED FOR DURATION OF PROJECT.
ALL SLOPES 3:1 OR STEEPER, TO BE SODDED AND GREATER THAN EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT, SHALL HAVE EROSION
CONTROL FABRIC INSTALLED.
WHEN THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SEED AND MULCH THOSE AREAS
AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER WITHIN 48 HOURS OF GRADING COMPLETION. THE SEEDING SHALL COMPLY WITH
MN/DOT SPECIFICATION NO. 3876, AT A RATE OF 50 LBS/ACRE. THE SEEDED AREA SHALL BE MULCHED. THE
MULCH SHALL APPLY WITH MN/DOT SPECIFICATION 3882, TYPE 1. THE MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AND ANCHORED
IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPECIFICATION NO. 2575.3, F1. MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT THE RATE OF 2
TONS PER ACRE. THE MULCH SHALL BE ANCHORED WITH A DISC, CLODBUSTER OR OTHER APPROVED EQUIPMENT.
ALL ADJACENT STREETS SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY AND SWEPT CLEAN OF SEDIMENT TRACKED FROM THE SITE.
SILT FENCE CURRENTLY IN PLACE. NEEDS TO BE REFRESHED.
LEGEND
EXISTING LIGHT POLE
EXISTING SIGN
EXISTING POWER POLE
EXISTING GUY WIRE
EXISTING CATCH BASIN
EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE
EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE
EXISTING GATE VALVE
FOUND IRON MONUMENT
SET MONUMENT
EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER
EXISTING MANHOLE
EXISTING WATER METER
EXISTING GAS METER
EXISTING HAND HOLE
EXISTING TELEPHONE BOX
EXISTING GUAR POST
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
EXISTING SOIL BORING
PROPOSED SETBACK LINE
= EXISTING RETAINING WALL
EXISTING WETLANDS EDGE
EXISTING CONTOUR
502 EXISTING CONTOUR
E
G
DD DD
SF
W
SF
EXISTING BURIED ELECTRIC
EXISTING GAS LINE
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING TREELINE
EXISTING WATERLINE
EXISTING SILT FENCE
UTILITY NOTES
L
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
111*.fry.-0 --e
Vf EX. SMH
cad i s () <C\ I P )
` •\�G• 0<\O,`e �h
seelS
c;S'\::,\\ .<\6 (O
Q ' \-C> �Q JCi
/
/
/
CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES
AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF SITE GRADING. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS
FROM THE PLANS.
ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE
ONE CALL" (651-454-0002) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION.
UTILITY CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION AND SANITARY
SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS
ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA AND ALL STANDARD DETAILS FOR THE CITY OF LINO
LAKES.
SEWER SERVICE MUST CONNECT TO NORTHERLY STUB FROM EXISTING MANHOLE
SEE CITY DETAILS FOR WATER & SERVICE CONSTRUCTION (SHEET 6 ON PLANS)
CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS -BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND
SUBMIT THESE PLANS TO ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. AS -BUILT
INFORMATION SHALL INCLUDE ELEVATIONS OF ALL SANITARY SERVICE ENDS.
/
zz
zz
/
/
RIM: 894.21
INV: 887.40
,\qpo
v
•
/895J—
Ex. 8" Sanitary Plug
Inv: 887.07±
EX SMH
RIM: 893.53
INV: 887.01
/
Total Lot Area: 201,870 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area: 4,669 sq. ft.
Impervious Surface Coverage: 2.31
N
- Drainage and •
Utility Easement
/
/
yl
/%c),,c7//cicocy N(/
Contiguous Buildable Area: 20,381 sq. ft.
Upland Impervious Area: 0 sq. ft.
Upland Impervious Coverage: 0.00%
Shore Impact Zone Area: 50,823 sq. ft.
No grading within this zone
NOTES
1) For additional proposed home information see house plans as submitted
2) All structures (decks, accessory structures, etc.) shall meet the required
OHWL setback.
3) The flood plain elevation of 886.87 was provided by the Rice Creek
Watershed District and will not be impacted.
4) Per the Shoreland Ordinance the setback from the OHWL is 75' minimum
or the average of adjacent houses. The adjacent houses are at 56.3 and
92.1 with the average being 74.2. So the 75' minimum must be held.
5) Total area to be disturbed is 9,632 sq. ft.
30
/
/S0,
0
/
30
60
HORIZONTAL: 1"=30'
N
/
/
• BUILDING ELEVATIONS
First Floor
Garage Floor
Lowest Floor
Bottom of Footing
Sewer Service at House
i J
899.93
898.43
889.6
888.77
888.1
GRH Contracting
4417 Channel Lane NE
East Bethel, MN 55092
REV.
DATE
DESCRIP
A
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
A
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
05 OF
PROJECT TITLE:
CD
p4 4
DRAWN
BY:
SCA
SHEET
05
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
05 OF
07 SHEETS
17-1042
LAST PLOTTED: 7/21/2017 9:03 AM
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
w
J_
c
0)
0
E
0
cn
FINISHED GRADE
2" x 2" HARDWOOD
MARKER W/SPIKE.
--6' METAL FENCE
POST MARKER
PAINTED GREEN
a
0
a
NOTE: SERVICE PIPE TO BE PVC,
SCH. 40 (ASTM D-2665).
SOLVENT WELD ALL JOINTS.
=111=111=111
GRANULAR BEDDING
MATERIAL (COMPACTED)
SERVICE WYE TO
BE EMBEDDED IN WITHOUT RISER
CONCRETE
DEPTHS GREATER THAN
14' WHERE RISER APPROVED
BY ENGINEER.
SERVICE
WYE
diI
WITH RISER
2" x 2" HARDWOOD
MARKER W/SPIKE.
- AIRTIGHT
_j PLUG OR
45' BEND
CAP
6' METAL FENCE
POST MARKER
PAINTED GREEN
N
SLOPE 2% MIN.
4
MAX. 45'
—1 I I-1 I I—I I I—'
GRANULAR BEDDING
MATERIAL (COMPACTED)
SERVICE WYE TO BE
EMBEDDED IN CONCRETE
_111111
AIRTIGHT
PLUG OR
CAP
NOTE: SERVICE PIPE TO BE PVC,
SCH. 40 (ASTM D-2665).
SOLVENT WELD ALL JOINTS.
SANITARY SEWER
SERVICE
MAY, 2013
SAN -7
GEOTEXTILE WITH NET
BACKING
BACKFILL
it
5' METAL OR 2"x2'WOOD FENCE POST
GEOTEXTILE TO
OVERLAP THROUGH
TRENCH.
TRENCH
6„ MO
NOTES:
1. SILT FENCE SHALL CONFORM TO
MNDOT 3886, (GTF 100 OR EQUAL)
2. FENCING SHALL BE PLACED ALONG CONTOURS
OR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
SILT FENCE
MAY, 2013
GEN -16
END OF SANITARY SERVICE
MUST EXTEND ABOVE AND
BEYOND CURB STOP.
1' MAX.
•
SEE SANITARY
SEWER SERVICE
DETAIL
NOTES:
1. SERVICES SHALL BE 4" DIAMETER PVC SCHEDULE 40 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLANS
2. SEWER SERVICES ARE LOCATED 3' DOWNSTREAM OF WATER SERVICE IF IN SAME TRENCH
SERVICE
DETAIL
PROPOSED OR EXISTING
ROADWAY
MAY, 2013
SAN -8
6' STEEL
FENCE POST
PAINTED BLUF1/4
COVER AS SPECIFIED
7'-6" MIN
COVER
SIZE, LENGTH, AND TYPE
OF MATERIAL FOR SERVICE
LINE AS SPECIFIED
CURB
STOP
� � 1
1' MAX.
CURB BOX 8'
/7-CURB
LONG AT FULL
EXTENSION
INSTALL PLUG
FOR TESTING
HORIZONTAL LOOP NO HIGHER
THAN WATERMAIN
CORPORATION STOP
NOTES:
1. CURB BOXES INSTALLED IN AREAS WHERE BOULEVARD IS TO BE CUT
AT A LATER DATE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT DEPTH REQUIRED, CURB
BOX EXTENTION FOR BOXES EXCEEDING 7.5' IN LENGTH ARE TO BE
BID AT CONTRACT PRICE AND SHALL INCLUDE STACK COUPLINGS,
CONNECTIONS, ETC..
2. CURB BOXES LOCATED IN DRIVEWAYS OR PARKING LOTS SHALL
UTILIZE THE FORD MINNEAPOLIS PATTERN CURB BOXES A-1 OR CITY
APPROVED EQUIVALENT.
3. CORP. STOPS SHALL BE FORD BALLCORP FB600-4 AND CURB STOPS
SHALL BE FORD BALL VALVE B22 -444M OR CITY APPROVED EQUIVALENT.
4. WATER SERVICES SHALL BE TYPE K COPPER - 1" DIA. MIN.
5. MAINTAIN 18" VERTICAL & 36" HORIZONTAL
SEPARATION BETWEEN SEWER & WATER SERVICES
6. CURB STOPS SHALL HAVE INTERNAL OPERATING
RODS TO FINISHED GRADE
7. CURB STOPS LOCATED IN PAVED AREAS SHALL
BE COVERED WITH METER BOX COVER (FORD A-1)
OR APPROVED EQUAL
_SUPPORT CURB
BOX WITH CONC.
BLOCK
WATER SERVICE
DETAIL
MAY, 2013
WAT-5
100 0
100 200
HORIZONTAL: 1"=100'
• Notes
1) The purpose of this drawing is to show neighboring land uses.
PREPARED BY:
rn
1
4o
E
0
u
0)
08
cA
CC;
CZ; 54)
v
LICENSE NO.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
688435000021
Minnesota Professional Design Firm
b!J
U
c�
0
L.)
rz4
4417 Channel Lane NE
W
ct
W
REV.
DATE
DESCRIP
A
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
06 OF
07 SHEETS
PROJECT TITLE:
DRAWN
BY:
SCA
SHEET
06
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
06 OF
07 SHEETS
17-1042
LA T- PLOTTEDS-7/21742fi 17 9:03 AM OPERATOR: SCA
1 rl
PEAT SOILS
yl
cr-.,
1
Lam.
APTAINSP L
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
200 0 200 400
HORIZONTAL: 1"=200'
NOTES
1) All trees to remain across site with the exception of where the proposed
house is to be constructed on Lot 1, Block1, proposed Houle Addition.
2) No mitigation necessary.
3) Soils shown are from US Department of Agriculture Bureau of Soils.
4) Hydrology features are shown from Anoka County Water Resources.
HYDROLOGY AND SOIL SUMMARY
Sandy subsoil
phase
Miami fine
sandy loam
ERC[ t ST
CSAH 34
'CHOKECHERRY -RD
LEGEND
Type 1 - Seasonally Flooded
Type 2 - Wet Meadows
Type 3 - Shallow Marshes
• Type 4 - Deep Marshes
▪ Type 5 - Open Water Wetlands
Type 6 - Shrub Swamps
Type 7 - Wooded Swamps
Type 8 - Bogs
PREPARED BY:
4
"0
r
0
N
eaea cf)an an (xi
LICENSE NO.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
6884350000211
4417 Channel Lane NE
k 1
REV.
DATE
DESCRIP
A
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
A
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
07 OF
PROJECT TITLE:
DRAWN
BY:
SCA
SHEET
07
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
07 OF
07 SHEETS
17-1042
LAST PLOTTED: 7/21/2017 9:03 AM
P: \17-1042 — Houles — Lino Project\10_CAD\CADD Drawings\Guy — Lino Lakes Project 6-8-17.dwg
100
S 89°42'27" W
1314.92
S 89°19'39" W 719.23'
LOT 1
BLOCK 1
Sg62j 6F�
oS,' 3 .1I!Ii0)D
-8'wL2'
3"E
60
z
Conservation
Easement
isz
650
(0
0
N
N
1I)
0
z
0
3
0
onservation
Easement
1 sg. 76
�`1�1�79.i6 22 E
\-\ (61/
WETLAND
4/625748
w
N 89°41'31" E
VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale
/ Viiia/
sX.
11 tx
DATE
G•
Cy
//moi \ 1bc
4
------------�O-------
A
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
S
•
te, 7D
�Icn
D�
__ 12TH AVE___
N0.10 --
1 ^
I
1 5Ak
I
I
Section 27, & 28 Township 31, Range 22
Anoka County, MN
0 100
200
HORIZONTAL: 1 "=100'
LEGEND
0
-SI-
O
CB
GV
•
0
AS
WM
GM
El
EH
SB -1
1315.53
H
60
L
I /
N
/
/ /
/ /
L �
>:
EXISTING LIGHT POLE
EXISTING SIGN
EXISTING POWER POLE
EXISTING GUY WIRE
EXISTING CATCH BASIN
EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE
EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE
EXISTING GATE VALVE
FOUND IRON MONUMENT
SET MONUMENT
EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER
EXISTING MANHOLE
EXISTING WATER METER
EXISTING GAS METER
EXISTING HAND HOLE
EXISTING TELEPHONE BOX
EXISTING GUAR POST
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
EXISTING SOIL BORING
NOTES
PROPOSED SETBACK LINE
= EXISTING RETAINING WALL
EXISTING WETLANDS EDGE
EXISTING CONTOUR
502 EXISTING CONTOUR
E
G
SF
W
SF
EXISTING BURIED ELECTRIC
EXISTING GAS LINE
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING TREELINE
EXISTING WATERLINE
EXISTING SILT FENCE
UPLAND AREA
1) Per Rice Creek Watershed a 25' minimum conservation easement on the
upland side of the delineated wetlands on Lot 1, Block 1 and a minimum of
50 feet on Outlot A
2) Wetland buffer signs to be installed per requirements of Rice Creek
Watershed District and per detail
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve, Anoka County, Minnesota
EXCEPT that part of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve being in the West One-half of the Northwest One -Quarter,
Section 27, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of the West One-half of said Northwest One -Quarter, Section 27; thence
North 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds West along the East line of said West One-half, Northwest One -Quarter,
Section 27, a distance of 57.73 feet to the Southeast corner of said Outlot D for a point of beginning of the tract
to be described; thence North 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds West, along the East line of said Outlot D, a
distance of 910.02 feet; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 580.47 feet; thence
South 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel with the East line of said Outlot D, a distance of 548.90
feet; thence North 89 degrees 22 minutes 49 seconds East, parallel with the South line of said Northwest
One -Quarter, Section 27, a distance of 416.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel
with the East line of said Outlot D a distance of 370.14 feet to the Northerly right-of-way line of C.S.A.H. No. 10
(Anoka County Right -of -Way Plat No. 11); thence North 85 degrees 24 minutes 36 seconds East along said
right-of-way line a distance of 28.66 feet; thence continuing along said right-of-way line along a curve concave to
the North (which has a radius of 3879.72 feet, a delta angle of 02 degrees 00 minutes 31 seconds, and an arc
length of 136.02 feet) a chord bearing and distance of North 86 degrees 24 minutes 53 seconds East, 136.01 feet
to the point of beginning.
And EXCEPT the North 1100 feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserver, Anoka County Minnesota
And EXCEPT the South 400 feet of the North 1500 feet of the East 600 feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills Preserve,
Anoka County, Minnesota
/
/ 'o
\ /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
\
BENCHMARK
Top Nut of Hydrant (NAVD 88)
Located at the end of Ruffed Grouse Road
as shown on the survey.
Elev.= 897.26 feet
BASIS OF BEARINGS
For the purposes of this survey the West line
of Outlot D, of PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE,
according to the plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota is assumed to bear N 00'44'55" W
/1i•lt A
L L_ _/ r \ r
/
/
<\
PACK 4
3
/
A
\ / „
4
/ \a
/ 5 / >\
a
Gr
/ \ °QSe
W EITILAN D
BL. FFER
VINO
MOWING
ALI4OWED
SPECIFICATIONS:
MONUMENT
CONSISTS OF A POST AND A WETLAND BUFFER SIGN
WETLAND BUFFER SIGNS
MOUNTED FLUSH WITH THE TOP OF THE POST FASTENED WITH
NON -REMOVABLE SCREWS OR RIVETS SIZE: 12" H x 8" W
ALUMINUM. SHALL BE 5052-838 OR 6061-T6 ALLOY. GAUGE
SHAT BE 0.080
POST MATERIALS
4" X 4" SQUARE
TREATED WOOD OR OTHER CITY APPROVED MATERIAL
COLOR
COLOR SHALL BE GREEN LETTERS ON
WARE BACKGROUND.
POST INSTALLATION
MOUNTED TO A HEIGHT OF FOUR FEET ABOVE GRADE SET AT
LEAST 42 INCHES IN THE GROUND INSTALLED AT EACH LOT LINE
WHERE IT CROSSES A WETLAND BUFFER WITH A MAXIMUM
SPACING OF 300 FEET BETWEEN SIGNS (IF NO BUFFER IS
REQUIRED THE MONUMENT SHALL BE AT THE EDGE OF THE
WETLAND).
PLACE ADDITIONAL POSTS AS NECESSARY
TO FOLLOW BUFFER CONTOUR UNE
WETLAND BUFFER SIGNS
MAY.2013
GEN -22
6 /
/
/ 7
/ 1 /
-1C
CO
(f)
S60'27"E
84.36 \
7919'22-E-
77. 21
'22„E77.21
WETLAND
��- WETLAND
S89'44'16"E
154.42
N86'25'05"W
152 06
)!-!r-A^A IT ! !II 1
wL1
4
Conservation
Easement
s
's24"E `
.
N81'S5�� ul
124.76 moo,.
0.F
D r ^ r D /r -
i 1 1 L_/ -\.2/-\I N 1 1 11 1\ \ V L
•
/
N 89°22'49" E 309.80
30
0
O
Ln
r\I IT1 /1T r-
' J lJ 1 L_LJ 1 LJ
Conservatio
Easement
OUTLOT A
A99'
7..9
N
E0
oo
ri
WETLAND -
57.28
S74.74,392,4_
c
0
5.
3
c
3
N83'3� E
197.17
6
O
O�
z
S 89°19'39" W 600.01
N79.09'38"E
�9g25
\o
0
N 89°41'18" E
302.40
4-
---- WETLAND
1M
N
6
0)
0
0
O
z
•r -
L=129.32
R=5669.58
A=1818'25"
C.S.A.H. NO. 34
S 89°22'49" W 580.47
)!_!r A (17' A NIT
I I L_/ -\`:/-\I N 1
!! I I 1 T) [) r^ rI_)\ /r_ -
I I 1 I \L_I \ V L_
(� I I T /1'T r,
_/ V I L_\J 1 LJ
I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me
or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land
Surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota.
DATE 7-21-17 LIC NO 17765
PREPARED BY:
00
1
E
q
a
en
en
kri 06
LICENSE NO.
688435000021.
REV.
DATE
DESCRIP
A
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
A
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
02 OF
SHEET TITLE:
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROJECT TITLE:
DRAWN
BY:
SCA
SHEET
0 (�
V(
�
CHECKED
BY:
RPA
SHEET NO.
PROJECT NUMBER
02 OF
07 SHEETS
17-1042
LAST PLOTTED: 7/21/2017 9:03 AM OPERATOR: SCA
c
to
(1)
w
z
a>
.c
0
Lr) O
LoO
CLI
O
O
y)
BLOCK 1
914.91
LOT 1
Edge Of Wetland As--,
Delineated By Jacobson \I
Environmental in April, 2017
\
Drainage and
Utility Easement
-- 915.53 --
N 89°41'31” E
\
`--The Southwest corner of the NE 1/4
of the NE 1/4, Sec. 28, Twp. 31, Rge.
22
N3°53'50"W
60.31
1315.53 I
EXCEPTI O N
r -A CT' A NIT
1 1 L_/-\ /-\ I N I
S 89°42'27" W
s4v
RD
tO
! ! II I
T) C-‘ r- \ /r -
I 1 I\ L_.: L_ I\ V L_
r I IT1 /-\T r-\
_/ L) I L_V I LJ
1314,92
N85°00'01"E
\\\ 112.92• 93,6111
>N11°34'16"E
43,33
0
0
0
0
-r
I
Drainage and S27°12'35"E-
Utility Easement 26,92
73
o
0
V �
N
- \,
�5*`i/ \2N
\`1, 2,\ t' 5� / \
/ \
/ \c
/
/ -10 / N
L /
C ///
9.55_
NO°54'44"W
V
HOULE ADDITION
OUTLOT A
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Guy R Houle and Jennifer L Houle, husband and wife, and Joseph L Houle, a single person, owners
and proprietors of the following described property situated in the County of Anoka, State of Minnesota, to wit:
Outlot D, PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE, Anoka County, Minnesota,
EXCEPT that part of Outlot D, PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE, being in the West One—half of the Northwest One—Quarter, Section 27, Township 31,
Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of the West One—half of said Northwest One—quarter, Section 27; thence North 01 degrees 00 minutes 55
seconds West along the East line of said West One—half, Northwest One—quarter, Section 27, a distance of 57.73 feet to the Southeast corner of
said Outlot D for a point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence North 01 degree 00 minutes 55 seconds West, along the East line of
said Outlot D, a distance of 910.02 feet; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 580.47 feet; thence South 01
degree 00 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel with the East line of said Outlot D, a distance of 548.90 feet; thence North 89 degrees 22 minutes
49 seconds East, parallel with the South line of said Northwest One—quarter, Section 27, a distance of 416.00 feet; thence South 01 degree 00
minutes 55 seconds East, parallel with the East line of said Outlot D a distance of 370.14 feet to the Northerly right—of—way line of C.S.A.H. No.
10 (Anoka County Right—of—Way Plat No. 11); thence North 85 degrees 24 minutes 36 seconds East along said right—of—way line a distance of
28.66 feet; thence continuing along said right—of—way line along a curve concave to the North (which has a radius of 3879.72 feet, a delta angle
of 02 degrees 00 minutes 31 seconds, and an arc length of 136.02) a chord bearing and distance of North 86 degrees 24 minutes 53 seconds
East, 136.01 feet to the point of beginning.
And EXCEPT the North 1100 feet of Outlot D, PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE, Anoka County, Minnesota.
And EXCEPT the South 400 feet of the North 1500 feet of the East 600 feet of Outlot D, PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as HOULE ADDITION and does hereby donate and dedicate to the public for public use forever the easements
as shown on the plat for drainage and utility purposes only.
In witness whereof said Guy R Houle and Jennifer L. Houle, husband and wife, and Joseph L Houle, a single person have hereunto set their hands this
day of , 201__.
Guy R Houle
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
Jennifer L. Houle Joseph Houle
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 201___ by Guy R Houle.
Notary Public, County, Minnesota
My Commission Expires
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 201___ by Jennifer L. Houle.
Notary Public, County, Minnesota
My Commission Expires
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 201___ by Joseph L Houle.
Notary Public, County, Minnesota
My Commission Expires
I Ronald P. Alwin, hereby certify that I have surveyed and platted the property described on this plat as HOULE ADDITION,
that this plat is a correct representation of the survey, that all distances are correctly shown on the plat in feet and
hundredths of a foot, that all monuments will be correctly placed in the ground as shown, that the outside boundary
lines are correctly designated on the plat.
Ronald P. Alwin, Land Surveyor
Minnesota License Number 17765
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 201__ by Ronald P. Alwin,
Land Surveyor, Minnesota License No. 17765.
Notary Public, County, Minnesota
My Commission Expires
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
This plat of HOULE ADDITION was approved by the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota at a regular meeting thereof held this
____ day of , 201_, and said plat is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section
505.03, Subd. 2.
By Mayor By Clerk
COUNTY SURVEYOR
This plat has been checked and approved this day of , 201__.
By
Larry Hoium
Anoka County Surveyor
COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURER
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.021, Subd. 9, taxes payable in the year of 201__ on the land hereinbefore described
have been paid. Also pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 272.12, there are no delinquent taxes and transfer entered this
day of , 201___.
Property Tax Administrator
By , Deputy
/
WETLAND ---'
400.00
The Southeast corner of the NE 1/4 of--'
the NE 1/4, Sec. 28, Twp. 31, Rge. 22
/
L
\
-7
/
�I /11.1, n
L_\Jvr\ 1-
8 8
\ \ /
\
/
`r
/
1
\iDr`\
w N
N
o o
a
a)
_c
o N
U •U
C N
-/./)
▪ -
_c
z
•
EXCEPTI O N
T_)I_Ir_-AC'A I\IT !_III I cs
i
I___/-\._:‘/-\1 \I I I iIL_L_`: I I\L_.:L_I\VL_
-The South Line of the North 1100 feet
/ of Outlot D r\1T1 r• -i-
\
TL/ V 1 L _ \J 1
I-):) r-^ r -L)\ /r -
S 89°19'39" \A/
LJ
719.23'
Edge Of Wetland As
Delineated By Peterson
Environmental Consulting,
/
Inc. On Nov. 15, 2000
/
N
U)
W
LO
O
r
LJ LJ T I
L_
\ /
R4,,fea
Cro \ /
/
Baa
/
/
/
/
�1
/
/
-7
— _L
Anoka County Monument
Cast Iron Monument — J
Southwest corner of the NW 1/4 of
Sec. 27, Twp. 31, Rge. 22 ti
COUNTY RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES
County of Anoka, State of Minnesota
WETLAND --'
-r-
r-
r- n^ n NIT !_! I I I
1 I L_/ -\`:/-\I N I 1 I 1
•\I N 89°22'49" E
of
N00'54'46"W
/
vn.
DEc E.)\ /2-
1 I\L_L_I\V L_
OUTLOT A
309.80
`--The South line of the
NW 1/4 of Sec. 27,
ru-
Twp. 31, Rge. 22 c
00°54'46"
WETLAND --'
I hereby certify that this plat of HOULE ADDITION was filed in the office of the County Recorder/Registrar of Titles for public
record on this day of , 201 ___, at o'clock __.M. and was duly recorded in Book
Page 46, as Document Number
County Recorder/Registrar of Titles
By , Deputy
N 89°41'18" E
302,40
C.S.A.H. NO. 3
O
3
Ln
°
z
c 0
0
w
0
9-9-
0 0
0
=0
v0
0 0
co
G
The South Line of the North 1500
feet of Outlot D, Pheasant Hills
Preserve, Anoka County, MN
S 89°19'39" W 600.01
VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale
V/
��G
. VVVVVi
11
V VINI
C.S.A.H.
/ J"
k
!`�.1 N
5
N0.10
Section 2Z & 28 Township 31, Range 22
Anoka County, MN
-- WETLAND
CO
0
•
\
\
CLI
V
L=129.32 1
R=5669.58
S 89°22'49" W 580.47
[)!-!r-A ^ A NIT !-!II I
1 I I L_/ -\.;/-\I N I I I I
,A=1°18'25"
LEGEND
416.00
r•1 1-r1 /"\TI L_\J 1
Parallel with the South line
of the Northwest Quarter
• DENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT
MARKED BY LICENSE NO. 17765, THAT WILL BE SET
WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THE RECORDING OF THIS PLAT.
• DENOTES FOUND MONUMENT
wt. DENOTES WETLAND BOUNDARY
L -)r -^r -D\ /r-
1 I \ L_ ._; L_ I \ V L_
L)
a)
0
0
0
°7-b`56;
7_?).
6
I
I
M „85,00° l0 N
CO
0
0
N
The Northerly
right-of-way
line of C.S.A.H.
No. 10.
The Southeast
corner of said
Outlot D.
AL\
o A0'�
p`• �' co
cbti
co' Cr
o^
� r
C.)
PREPARED BY:
BASIS OF BEARINGS
For the purposes of this survey the West line
of Outlot D, of PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE,
according to the plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota is assumed to bear N 00'44'55" W
3
Ln
O �
0
z
z
O
a)
0
O
w
0
•
M
N
u)
100
0
100 200
H❑RIZ❑NTAL: 1"=100'
—Point of
/ Beginning.
--The Southeast corner of the
—W 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of
Sec. 27, Twp. 31, Rge. 22
Kaskaskia
Engineering Group, LLC
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
2550 University Avenue West, Suite 161S
St. Paul, Minnesota 55114
615.337.5652phone
618.233.5977 fax
www.kaskaskiaeng.com
LICENSE NO.
Minnesota Professional Design Firm
688435000021
SHEET 1 OF 1
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 5B
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner
P & Z MEETING DATE: August 9, 2017
REQUEST: 6602 Pheasant Run -Variance Amendment
CASE NUMBER: VR2015 — 001
APPLICANTS:
Dylan Lindman
6602 Pheasant Run
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
OWNER: Dylan Lindman
REVIEW SCHEDULE:
Complete Application Date:
N/A
Environmental Board Meeting:
N/A
EDAC Meeting:
N/A
Park Board Meeting:
N/A
P & Z Board Meeting:
August 9, 2017
City Council Meeting:
August 28, 2017
60 -Day Review Date:
N/A
BACKGROUND
On October 14, 2015, the Planning & Zoning Board recommended approval of a 10 foot
variance to allow the property owner, Dylan Lindman, to construct an attached garage 30 feet
from the lot line along CSAH 34/Birch Street. The required setback is 40 feet.
On October 26, 2015, the City Council passed Resolution No. 15-119 approving a 12 foot
variance to allow for the construction of an attached garage 28 feet from the lot line. The
property owner requested the additional 2 feet.
Per Resolution No. 15-119:
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by The City Council of The City of Lino Lakes
hereby approves of a 12 foot variance to reduce the required setback from 40 feet to 28 feet
1
along Birch Street to allow for the construction of an attached double garage at 6602 Pheasant
Run, subject to the following conditions:
1. The detached shed in the northeast corner of the lot, found in violation of city ordinances,
shall be relocated onto the applicant's property.
2. The accessory structure shall meet the requirements of § 1007.043 General Building and
Use Provisions.
3. The accessory structure shall meet all other city code and state building code
requirements.
4. A building permit shall be submitted for by the applicant and approved by the City of
Lino Lakes prior to construction.
The property owner thought the variance applied to both the attached double garage and
detached shed. He relocated the detached shed onto the property 28 feet from the south lot line
to line up with attached garage. Technically, the resolution only allowed for a setback variance
for the attached double garage, not the detached shed. The detached shed should be 40 feet from
the south lot line and 5 feet from the rear lot line.
The property owner does not want to relocate the detached shed again and is requesting the
variance to include the detached shed.
ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed the location of the detached shed and does not see any issues with its current
location. It appears to be located 5 feet from the rear property line and 28 feet from the lot line
along CSAR 34/Birch Street. The structure does encroach into the rear 10 foot drainage &
utility easement and an Easement Encroachment Agreement is required.
The detached shed is approximately 18' x 18' (324 s.f.) and the attached garage is approximately
22' x 36' (792 s.f.). The combined total of accessory structures is 1,116 s.f. which is under the
allowed 1,200 s.f. threshold.
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS OF FACT
The findings of fact are amended as follows with new text underlined.
No variance shall be granted unless it meets all the criteria in paragraphs 1. through 7. below.
The City shall make findings regarding compliance with these criteria.
1. The variance shall be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance.
The general purpose and intent of the ordinance is to establish performance standards intended
to assure compatibility of uses, prevent blight and to enhance the health, safety and general
welfare of the residents of the community.
2
Approving this variance request for an attached accessory structure and detached shed doesn't
pose a threat to the health, safety or general welfare of the neighborhood. In fact, since no
attached accessory structure is present on the applicant's property (6602 Pheasant Run)
approving this variance request will enhance the atmosphere in the neighborhood as Lino Lakes
requires all dwellings to have, at minimum, a double garage.
2. The variance shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The variance request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The applicant's property is
intended for a Single Family dwelling as such, current zoning ordinances require dwellings to
have, at minimum, a double garage. Detached accessory structures are also consistent with
single family dwellings.
3. There shall be practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as
used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to
use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the ordinance. Economic
considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are
not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.
The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, as the construction of
a double garage and relocation of a detached shed are considered a reasonable use of the
property. The practical difficulty in complying with the 40' setback from Birch Street's right-of-
way creates a situation where the applicant cannot construct a double garage unless the
variance is approved.
4. The plight of the landowner shall be due to circumstances unique to the property not created
by the landowner.
The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and was not created
by the landowner. The current landowner recently purchased the property and did not construct
the house without a garage.
5. The variance shall not alter the essential character of the locality.
The variance shall not alter the essential character of the locality by maintaining a 28 foot
setback similar to the 30 foot setbacks found along other Birch Street corner properties.
Accessory structures such as garages and detached sheds are common features found throughout
Lino Lakes residential districts.
6. A variance shall not be granted for any use that is not allowed under the ordinance for
property in the zoning district where the subject site is located.
Accessory structures (attached and detached) are permitted as Accessory Uses in the R-1, Single
Family Residential District.
3
7. In accordance with MN Stat. 462.357, Subp. 6, variances shall be granted for earth sheltered
construction as defined in MN Stat. 216C.06, Subd. 14, when in harmony with the zoning
ordinance.
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends amending Resolution No. 15-119 to approve of a 12 foot variance to reduce
the required setback from 40 feet to 28 feet along the south lot line (CSAH 34/Birch Street) to
allow for the construction of an attached double garage and relocation of an existing detached
shed at 6602 Pheasant Run with the following conditions:
1. The property owner shall enter into an Easement Encroachment Agreement with the City
and pay for the recording of the document.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2015 Aerial Map
2. 2017 Aerial Map
3. Certificate of Survey with Dimensions
4. Easement Encroachment Agreement
4
Property Location Map
6602 Pheasant Run
9/24/2015
Legend
6602 Pheasant Run
0 40 80 160
Feet
240
GERALD T. COYNE
300 BRUNSWICK AVE. S.
GOLDEN VALLEY, MINN.
MINN, REG. NO. 4741
INDUSTRIAL — JUDICIAL
COMMERCIAL — TOPOGRAPHICAL
CITY LOTS — PLATTING
LOT SURVEYS COMPANY
LAND SURVEYORS
REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF M1NNE80TA
7801 - 73rd Avo. No Minneapolis, Minnosola 55428 560-3093
'urur1jnr9 Trrtifiratt
a. J. CONSTRUCTION
f,..‘2..:
.C.
4,., r. ).t.
•
u'---1
-r
•_
, .... ... ' .f 36.LI. ._
Atrovigt
Currtvll" SeN644,14 'Fiom
3;4 7`' ; o, b.ite
We hereby, col -tiff that this is is true ar.d correct rapresentotion of a survey of the boundaries of the above
described Iand and the location of all builldings end yislk:lo cncroachmerts, i1 any, from or on said Iond.
Surveyed 4y us tris 15th _. day or September 19 $2
''i
Signed
RAYMOND A. PRASCH
6917 IDAHO AVE. N,
BROOKLYN PARK, MI ',IN,
MINN, REG. NO. 6743
INVOICE NO. 101
F. B. NO. 214-6
SCALE I"
O —
30'
DENOTES IRON'
Denotes Wood Hub
Set For Excavation
Only
A N°x
Lot ;2, Block 5,
h LAKES ADDITION NO.
5«I11,4 1 u �> �1ce-0
we Cur
30 541.66t.c is
2
HOdiC w) 1' iYV u1
WI. & 2.0/ Wry
double gava.ye
LOrf SURVEYS COMPANY
CITY OF LINO LAKES
EASEMENT ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
PLEASE CHECK WHICH STRUCTURE APPLIES:
FENCE ❑ RETAINING WALL ❑ ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ❑
We/I, and
(single person(s) or husband and wife) property owner(s) of a parcel of property legally
described as:
and known as (address): hereby acknowledge on this
day of , in the year of that ( I or we) are aware of the
following described requirements of the City of Lino Lakes in regard to structures and other
encroachments:
A. Structural encroachment shall not be allowed on any drainage and utility easement unless
the following criteria apply to said property:
1. The encroachment is not located within the 100 -year high water elevation of an
existing lake, storm water pond, or wetland.
2. The drainage will not be affected by the approved structure or other encroachment
on the easement.
B. The encroachment construction is done at the property owners own risk. If drainage
and/or utility improvements on this easement become a problem in the future, the
property owner(s) may be required by the City to remove the easement structure and
regrade the easement, at the property owner(s) expense.
C. All other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance are enforced. This agreement shall
become a part of the property record and apply to all present and future property owners.
The placement of the approved structure or other encroachment shall be located in
accordance with the Site Plan, attached here to as Exhibit A
OWNER
Revised 01/01/2017
State of Minnesota )
) ss.
County of Anoka )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on , by
(month/day/year)
(insert name and marital status of each Grantor)
(notary stamp)
Notary Public
CITY OF LINO LAKES
By Attest:
Mayor City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
) SS
This instrument was acknowledged before me on day of , 2017, by Jeff
Reinert as Mayor of the City of Lino Lakes on behalf of said City.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on day of , 2017 by
Julianne Bartell as City Clerk of the City of Lino Lakes on behalf of said City.
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
The City of Lino Lakes Building Department
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
651-982-2420
Revised 01/01/2017
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 6A
STAFF ORIGINATOR:
P & Z MEETING DATE:
REQUEST:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
REVIEW DEADLINE:
Katie Larsen, City Planner
August 9, 2017
Outlot C, Century Farm North 6th Addition -
Discussion to Re -Plat 12 Townhome Units to 4
Single Family Lots
None
City Initiated
Gary M. Uhde
3157 Berwick Knoll
Brooklyn Park, MN 55443
Complete Application Date:
NA
Environmental Board Meeting:
NA
Park Board Meeting:
NA
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting:
August 9, 2017
Council Work Session Meeting:
TBD
Council Meeting:
TBD
BACKGROUND
Century Farm North is a residential Planned Unit Development (PUD) in northwest Lino
Lakes and was approved in 2003. It includes a mix of housing styles including typical
single family lots, single family airpark lots with hangars, single family detached
townhomes (individual house lots located within a commonly owned yard lot) and
attached townhomes.
The PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat for Outlot C, Century Farm North 6th
was approved for 12 townhomes (2 buildings with 6 units each) in 2003. Due to a
weakened townhome market, the owner, Gary Uhde, is proposing to re -plat the outlot
from 12 townhome units to 4 single family lots.
1
ANALYSIS
History
On April 28, 2003, the City Council passed Resolution No. 03-60 approving the PUD
Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat for the entire development of Century Farm
North. The subject site, Outlot C, Century Farm North 6th Addition, is shown as a
townhome development.
On July 28, 2014, the City Council passed Resolution No. 14-43 amending the PUD
Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat to include a 0.991 acre parcel located at 7880
Sunset Avenue, realign Robinson Drive and add 8 more single family lots. The
townhome home development remained the same.
On December 14, 2016, Lino Lakes Townhomes, LLC presented to the Planning &
Zoning Board a PUD Final Plan/Final Plat for 12 townhomes on this outlot. The Board
recommended approval. Unfortunately, the developer did not take the final plat to City
Council for approval.
Lot Summary
The Lot Summary reflects changes from the approved original 2003 PUD Development
Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat and 2014 amendment.
Phase
Single Family
Lots
If,. ;
Single Family
Detached
Townhomes
Attached
Townhomes
TOTAL
Original
Proposed
Original
Proposed
Original
Proposed
Original
Proposed
Original
Proposed
1St
30
26
9
8
16
16
--
55
50
2nd
1
-
--
22
23
42
42
65
65
3rd
-
-
9
14
9
9
34
34
52
57
4th
--
-
-
1
1
38
38
39
39
5th
5
-
-
-
-
5
-
-
5
5
6th
11
29
1 -
-
10
-
-
-
21
29
7th-
-
-
-
-
-
12
12
12
12
TOTAL
47
58
18
22
58
54
126
126
249
257
Difference
+8
+4
-4
0
+8
A total of 126 attached townhome units have been approved for the entire development.
2
Density Calculations
The density calculations are based on the entire amended preliminary plat for Century
Farm North. At the time the original PUD was approved in 2003, the City's
Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential development allowed for 3 to 6
dwelling units per acre. Although the current Comprehensive Plan for medium density
requires 4.0 to 5.9 dwelling units per acre, the developer has the right to develop at a
density consistent with the original PUD. The density would remain consistent with the
comprehensive plan if the 4 single family lot amendment was approved.
Considerations:
1. Morgan Lane would terminate with a 250 foot cul de sac.
a. City ordinance allows up to 500 foot cul de sacs.
2. The existing housing units to the east and south are townhomes.
3. The existing housing units to the north are single family homes.
4. Outlot C, Century Farm North 6th Addition is the last phase in this development.
a. The owner currently has an interested builder for 4 single family lots.
b. Wait for townhome market conditions to change.
If the Planning & Zoning and City Council support this concept, a PUD Development
Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat amendment and PUD Final Plan/Final Plat would be
required. Staff would not support any credit for previously paid park dedication fees.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting input from the Planning & Zoning Board.
3
Current Plan
Proposed Plan
Gross Property Area (acres)
95.63
Wetland
12.72
12.72
Arterial (CR 53) ROW
1.28
1.28
Park Dedication
13.32
13.32
Net Property Area (acres)
68.31
68.31
# Units
257
249
Density
3.76 units/acre
3.65 units/acre
The density calculations are based on the entire amended preliminary plat for Century
Farm North. At the time the original PUD was approved in 2003, the City's
Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential development allowed for 3 to 6
dwelling units per acre. Although the current Comprehensive Plan for medium density
requires 4.0 to 5.9 dwelling units per acre, the developer has the right to develop at a
density consistent with the original PUD. The density would remain consistent with the
comprehensive plan if the 4 single family lot amendment was approved.
Considerations:
1. Morgan Lane would terminate with a 250 foot cul de sac.
a. City ordinance allows up to 500 foot cul de sacs.
2. The existing housing units to the east and south are townhomes.
3. The existing housing units to the north are single family homes.
4. Outlot C, Century Farm North 6th Addition is the last phase in this development.
a. The owner currently has an interested builder for 4 single family lots.
b. Wait for townhome market conditions to change.
If the Planning & Zoning and City Council support this concept, a PUD Development
Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat amendment and PUD Final Plan/Final Plat would be
required. Staff would not support any credit for previously paid park dedication fees.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting input from the Planning & Zoning Board.
3
ATTACHMENTS
1. Site Location Map
2. Aerial Map
3. Preliminary Sketch, Outlot C, Century Farm North 6th Addition
111■11111►
ono
owl
' 111
.. rung /,
of -1111:
11■
Century Farm North
r .
m
l—I.
MEW
11111111111111
111111i
'm "�� %�111111■
1111MI=
M.
Dinning
■
�� L�����■ 35W �.� ��
111161i11�lEAr .II 1��rff
® mal\m1,� gtiir M11.4 =1„1 111
..: . min ■■res t► ■ MAW
� 1
George Watch Luke \ j`
AA
I
III
35W All
' g:41
111
�Rondeaa Lake AIr Fi
MIS AMIndMMI
1517 r ■IF I �i■mml�
■ ■■■
1111 11111111111111•0161 IrMin
-■i VIII 04
1111111111!! I1!d
11��■
r0...
T35W
11 L1
3tJIIImi
MIN
Unn
.1.9.111111
MOM
14111
�mJ111111111
om
GA
lb ir
'1 11�'p I 1 min Ir
,
Rue [Ake
•
p e•Y t�'oni
Centervillle Lake
Peltier Lake
III;
!1■■.1
r1. ■1111 ■, dp
i 414 MI .:
u_ arr
_I:Lao
MN
iou NV -
__'CII
I •
RTN
CIINOKS
Site Location Map
1
N
s
0 1,250 2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
Feet
CITY,' , OF
IN KE
Aerial Map
Outlot C, CFN 6th
w
N
s
E
0
100
200
400
Feet
Date: 8/4/2017
CENTURY FARM NORT
OUTLOT C
LINO LAKES, MN
PREPARED FOR:
CENTURY FARM NORTH
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
H
PREL MINARY ONLY
SITE PLANNING
& ENGINEERING
PLOWE
ENGINEERING, INC.
6776 LAKE DRIVE
SUITE 110
LINO LAKES, MN 55014
PHONE: (651) 361-8210
FAX: (651) 361-8701
NORTH
0
15 30
1 INCH = 30 FEET
OUTLOT C TOWNHOMES (12)
SAW -CUT & REMOVE EXISTING
CURB
& REPLACE W/ CONCRETE
VALLEY GUTTER
N8806'43"E
895:24 .......
APRONINV
..................
..................
.......
..................... ..
...
................................................
...............
............
.............
.............. ..
........
.............. ... •
..............
CONNECT TO EXISTING
8" DIP W.M.
CONNECT TO EXISTING
SANITARY SEWER STUB
(14 -FOOT DEPTH)
PROPOSED CURB &•GUTTER
4" PVC SCH 40 @ 2%
1" COPPER TYPE K
1" CURB STOP & BOX
....................................... .... •
........................................... ........ •
................... ........................
................. ......................... ..:
................. ......................... .•:
.....
.......
.....
............
48" DIA. SAN MH
(10 -FT .DEPTH)
8" DIP W.M.
8" PVC SR 35 SAN. SEW.
CONNECT TO EXISTING
8" DIP W.M.
OUTLOT C - SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES (4)
_.•••••
............................................. ------------
/
90t05
.-.13CCB
cW0
LOW FLOOR = 902.0
...............
... ...
...........
.............. ..........
............
... .....
...
....... .
.. .............
MOVE & SALVAGE
XISTING HYDRANT
JAL/ B - - - -
D HYDRANT
• •
• • •
........... 895 ................ ......
........
. . ................................................. CONSTRUCT.. CATCHBASIN
• • 199