Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/03/1992 Park Board Packet CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING - MONDAY, AUGUST 3, 1992 6:30 PM AGENDA 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2 . Approval of Minutes of July 6, 1992 3 . Open Mike 4. Old Business a. ) Quail Ridge b. ) Park Grove c. ) City Celebration d. ) Forestry 1. Oak Wilt Control Grant 5. New Business a. ) Park Shelter b. ) Apollo Meadows Park Concept - Gary Uhde c. ) Joel Schilling, Limnologist - Report on surface water quality 6. Other New Business 7. Adjourn The balance in the Dedicated Park Fund is $239,455.43 as of June 30, 1992. CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING JULY 6, 1992 The July meeting of the Lino Lakes Park Board was called to order by Chairman George Lindy at 6:30 PM on July 6, 1992 at Lino Lakes City Hall. Roll call was taken, members in attendance were Jacquelyn Farm, Candi Toffoli, Ken Johnson, Brian Bourassa, George Lindy and Ray Johnson. Staff in attendance were Marty Asleson , Parks, Recreation and Forestry Coordinator, Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor, and Carole Kohler, Parks, Recreation and Forestry Coordinator. The minutes of the June 1, 1992 meeting were approved as mailed. OPEN MIKE: No one appeared under Open Mike. OLD BUSINESS• School Trails Mr. Andy Matzke, landscape architect for the new Rice Lake Elementary School appeared before the board. He was here to update he board on the progress of the trails for the new school. Mr. Matzke explained that there will be a trail to get children to and from Hokah Drive, and also on the south side of the road from Arrowhead to the underpass. The matter of a transportation trail was also discussed. Mr. Matzke explained that transportation trails are off the road further, opposed to bike trails, etc. that are located nearer to the roadways. George Lindy wanted to know who was paying for them. Evidently, the school pays for the base and the City does the surface. The school will expect the City to maintain them. Discussion also centered around the underpass. Marty Asleson reported that construction will be completed by the time school starts this Fall. The speed limit will remain 50 MPH along Birch St. The board discussed the concern for this high of a speed limit, and how to deter children from using short cuts across the street rather than using the corners to cross. All agreed that this is the school responsibility and should be handled through the school patrol. Park Grove Development Park/Trails: Mr. Ted Mattke representative for Rick Carlson and the Park Grove development, appeared before the board. Mr. Mattke showed a preliminary plat of the Park Grove development. (This is the extension, second phase of PineRidge) . He explained that he trail/park plan he is presenting now is basically 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING JOLY 6, 1992 the same as was originally submitted in 1988, "with a few slight changes". The total park area for this development would be 10. 07 acres, this includes the pond. This area would fulfill the park dedication for this development. One area of concern was that of wetland. Marty Asleson wanted to be assured that the city crews would be able to maintain this area, considering it is low land. He doesn't want to have another problem like we have at Shenandoah Park where it is too low and wet to mow. Mr. Mattke explained that the Corps of Engineers has no concerns, and he will see that they submit a letter regarding that matter to the city. Mr. Mattke is hoping to get acceptance of his proposal from the Park Board so that he can proceed, as he is scheduled to appear before the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 8th. Ray Johnson questioned whether this land was buildable. He stated that if we can't build on it, it's not acceptable for parks either. Ray referred to the original proposal where there were several options. The original recommendation made to council on March 5, 1990 was researched and it was discovered that there were two options. It was further noted that at the time of the recommendation to council in 1990, there was a good deal of concern about elevation. The board at that time, and still does, want the grade to be at least 3' above flood elevation so as to insure against flooding and wetlands in the park area. A very lengthy discussion followed. RECOMMENDATION: Ray Johnson moved to recommend to council to accept Option #2 - as originally proposed on March 5, 1990. All park board members were in agreement with this recommendation. There were several options presented to the board at the March 5, 1990 park board meeting, the minutes from that meeting read as follows: . . . " MOTION: Ken Johnson moved to recommend to the city council consideration of the following options for park dedication at Pine Ridge development: Option #1: Complete grading to a minimum of 3' above the 100 year flood elevation on the proposed five acre park in the southeast section of phase 2 of PineRidge. This will be completed during grading of phase 1's development. Once construction begins in phase 2 the remaining park dedication equal to approximately 60 lots will be collected at $400. 00/lot. This is to assure the park board that a park will be installed in this area. Trails will also be brought to grade and graveled per the plan. Option #2: Accept the cash dedication of $400.00 per lot for phase 1, of PineRidge Preliminary Plat which consists of approximately 60 lots, the developer will also install the trail as specified in the 2 r� CITY OF LINO LAKES PARR BOARD MEETING JULY 6, 1992 plan, bring it up to grade, and surface it with gravel. The bituminous surface will be the City's responsibility. Phase 2 consists of 50 acres. Park Dedication will be met in phase 2 by claiming a 5 acre parcel to be brought to grade for a park. This 5 acre parcel surrounds a pond consisting of 3 .3 acres. Trails noted on the preliminary plat will also be brought to grade and graveled. Grading of the park will be accomplished when grading of phase 2 begins. option #2 to be accepted only if Option #1 is in some way not legally feasible to do. John Bauman seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. " (A copy of those park board minutes are attached at the end of these minutes. ) Comp Plan - Marty Asleson reported that there has been no response 00"*N by the viewing audience, either by phone or mail, regarding the Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Park Plan held on July 1, 1992. Jeff Schoenbauer states that in his experience this is not unusual. He explained that the plan does prove useful and come in to play when residents call and inquire about parks in their area. The Comprehensive Park Plan will be added as part of the City Comprehensive Plan. The next step will be to go to the City Council in resolution form, then on to the Metropolitan Council for approval as part of our City Comprehensive Plan. This is a flexible document and can be changed and moved around if the need be. PARRS/FACILITIES UPDATE: Lighting for Lino and Country Lakes Parks - As was discussed at previous meetings, the board would like to put lighting in at Country Lakes and Lino Parks in order to use these parks for night skating programs. Marty Asleson has gotten quotes on this. Remington Electric has quoted $11,718. for electric for both parks. MOTION: - Ray Johnson made a motion to do the electrical work as per the quote. This motion was seconded by Ken Johnson. All were in favor. Motion carried. Marty Asleson explained that his crews are working to make Country 3 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING JULY 6, 1992 Lakes Park more aesthetically pleasing. There is a good deal of work to be done, such as removing stumps so that it can be mowed. Candi Toffoli mentioned that the neighbors are concerned about the algae problem in the water here. She noted that the neighbors are circulating a petition to ask the City to clean up the problem. Marty Asleson explained that the City is currently working on a surface water management plan. The board was concerned about the condition and quality of the water in Lino Lakes this year. George Lindy suggested that someone involved in water management be scheduled on the agenda for an upcoming meeting. Shores of Marshan Lake - The city now owns the building located on this property. It has been agreed that the old owner can use the building for storage until we want to move in. Marty Asleson will set up a tour of this building for the next park board meeting. He explained that the trails are roughed in. He also noted that evidently this is somewhat of an historical area. At one time long ago there was a stop off station for wagons nearby and other points of historical interest. Rice Lake Elementary - Marty Asleson explains that tke field here is going real good. There have been two mowings alre . There are a few glitches with the irrigation system, but that will be worked out. He commented on what a nice agreement we have with the School District regarding the use of this facility. Country Lakes Park - Councilperson Linda Elliott, received a complaint from a resident about the looks of this park. As noted earlier, clearing of stumps started last year when Marty used some workers from the prison. However, this created a problem because these workers weren't very adept at the use of the equipment. This year he does not have the help from the prison. The boat dock is in at the lake, it will be fenced off in the winter. Aras Property (N-14) - This item will surface on the Agenda again sometime in the near future. Mr. and Mrs. Aras were at the Comp Plan Public Hearing. Marty Asleson reported that he is still interested in obtaining part of the Aras property for park use, and will keep the board appraised. Rice Lake Estates - Joint agreement with Circle Pines regarding a park for this development is still being handled and "dragging on" . Marty Asleson has recently talked with Jim Keinath of Circle Pines and reports "no progress. " 4 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARR BOARD MEETING JULY 6, 1992 Personnel I Crews/Parks, Recreation Balance - Marty Asleson explained that with the new park, of course there is need for more employees. The parks department will be adding a new person this year, in parks maintenance. Recreation Committee Formation - There has been some interest regarding formation of a recreation sub- committee. Marty Asleson has sent his resolution on to the council, and expects that they will adopt it. Spring/Summer Recreation Programs - Barry Bernstein updated the board on the current programs. Marty Asleson handed out information with profit and loss balances for all the programs from early Spring to current. Barry explained that a few programs were dropped due to lack of interest, such as the teen programs. Marty commented that we will keep trying programs for teens, and hope that one will get their attention. The department will be putting out a Fall brochure soon - if anyone has any ideas, please let Marty or Barry know. Forestry: 211 trees were planted in developments in the city this year. Marty reported the Tree Preservation Ordinance is working well. Developers are catching on now. He noted that there will be monies coming for oak wilt control, and there will be funds available in 1993 also. This will help to pay for the vibratory plow we will be using. Other Old Business: Ray Johnson referred to the last meeting where he questioned why there was no culvert built in at Wenzel Farms. He thinks there should be one there. Marty Asleson explained that he was told the design was correct for this development. NEW BUSINESS LINO CITY FESTIVAL - This event has been known as Lino Days in the past. This year a very interested and active committee has changed ,...� the name to Summerfest. There will be Summerfest buttons going on 5 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING JULY 6, 1992 sale soon. This year the event will be held on August 14 and 15. The committee will be soliciting donations from various businesses in the city. There are a lot of activities planned, including a Rodeo, a street dance, and a craft sale handled by senior citizens. All of the events will take place at City Hall Park and the open area surrounding City Hall. The projected cost is $13, 000. It is anticipated that monies collected will off-set this cost. There was no other new business. A motion was made and seconded to adjourn. All were in favor. Meeting was adjourned at 9:50 PM. r-t 6 k+ MEMORANDUM TO: All Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson-Parks, Recreation and Forestry Coordinator DATE: July 30, 1992 SUBJECT: Quail Ridge Please find attached a copy of the most recent concept for park dedication in Quail Ridge. This development has been to the Parks and Recreation Board previously, but since then has been requested to be changed under a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) . The park area is basically the same, but now includes the wetland areas. The development total area equals 39.9 acres. The proposed usable park area on the south and west end equals 3 . 1 acres. This area as previously noted would convert via trail, to the Captain's Place cul-de-sac. The total park acreage needed for the neighborhood area is 6 acres according to our comprehensive plan. The developer has provided trail through his development via the linear trail corridor, cul-de-sac access and park trail link through the wetlands. The combination of the two areas equal approximately 6 acres. I have discussed this concept with other city staff, including Alan Brixius our city planner, and everything appears to be in order. SEH has prepared a trail cross section for the linear trail corridor. This cross section shows that the linear trail corridor can be engineered into the design. I have previously discussed this development with Jeff Schoenbauer in the comprehensive planning process, and the proposal includes the essential components needed. Kirk Corson will be at the park board meeting to present his proposal. Please call if you have any questions or thoughts on this matter. UAIL IDGE x 690�` . C00.1 82.8 21 22 82.7 x f t x I 20 xOz. � �\ PARK I 9e.9� °o PARK RMu a 17 03.9 3.8 c 13 15 I / 2 \\ 91.E > 13.29.0x p u 84.i 12 30 / C / \ 94.1 i II � x 9 x 97 _ 9 . \ I 7 32 8 8.9\ � FM wE as 0 37 0 1.5 x 8. --� g90 °j_ _ / 88 _ 1 x 906 85.E 1 / 38 935 1 89.9 1 i 59 x, PARK 131 9 s�a y x 86.7t Y MTIfJTE WE 1_ ego J 92 x 91.E IRC S EE C 16E R �� 890 908.5E 15 C I T Y O F INOLA11,1E8 July 7, 1992 Mr. Ted Mattke Mattke and Associates, Inc. 7671 Central Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Dear Ted, This letter will follow up our Park Board meeting of July 6, 1992 . At the meeting you proposed park dedication for the new Park Grove development (PineRidge Addition second phase) to be the same as was originally presented to the Park Board on March 5, 1990. In researching the minutes from the March 5, 1990 meeting, it was discovered that the Park Board recommended several options to the City Council. As you can see in the attached excerpt of these minutes, there was, and still is a concern of wetland in this area being presented as buildable land. Also of some concern was the matter of being able to mow and maintain the dedicated park area and whether the Corps of Engineers would allow the City to do so. You assured us that this would not be a problem, and you would have the Corps submit a letter regarding that matter to us. Ted, another important matter of concern is the elevation. When the recommendation was made to Council in 1990, the Park Board insisted that the grading be brought up to 3' above the 100 year flood elevation. You have also assured us that this will be done. At our last Park Board meeting, the Board moved to recommend to Council to accept Option #2, as originally proposed on March 5, 1990. Please note that Option #2 further states: "Option #2 to be accepted only if Option #1 is in some way not legally feasible to do. " One other addition to the park dedication proposal is the purchase of Outlot D from the City. This issue was addressed in the Development Contract dated and signed June 10, 1991. . . . " Item 14. PARK DEDICATION. Park land shall be deeded to City. Developer has the right of first refusal for two (2) years from the date hereof to purchase if the City, at its sole option, decides to sell. The purchase price shall be Twenty-seven Thousand Two Hundred and 1189 MAIN STREET, LINO LAKES,MINNE8OTA 55014 612-464-5562 t no/100 ($27,200. 00) Dollars plus all special assessment payments made by the City. In addition, Developer will assume all outstanding unit charges and special assessments at the time of purchase. Developer shall have the right to plat said property in accordance with the approved preliminary plat for Pine Ridge Addition. " I trust- this is the information you will need to bring before our Planning and Zoning Board. If I can be of further assistance in this matter, please call me. ely, Marty A leson Parks, Recreation and Forestry Coordinator enc: cc: Park Board Members Darrell Schneider, City Engineer M _� :� ._� >h� � ga. a : :�{ 3, •Y - ���` ,� ���� i � � �. AN 4 UL 04,3 36 94, y x r 5�z �,' �.• ,� '. gyp, _ -� � �� / � �� r/ � x 03. 96,4 47x6 //// f'J-. WOUR N NO O"WON�=� IVA k` ,( `�` t rM..r t d �'"1'1""'1"11 �<*v-' �✓y'Y-•��� s�'� ®: AN • MY \111111111■ p a w4 f I�® ■1a11 _ ." J y. __�� ��-� _ •max MEMORANDUM TO: All Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: July 31, 1992 SUBJECT: Apollo Meadows Please find enclosed a copy of a letter from Gary Uhde, developer of Apollo Meadows. This area is just south of the Sunset Oaks development, and is bordered by I-35W to the south and Sunset Road to the west. Attached is a map. Mr. Uhde will be at the park board meeting to present his park dedication and trail proposal. His proposal is consistent with the goals set forth in our comprehensive plan. The trail that will run along the western border of his development is a . 5 mile transportation trail. This trail would be located in the existing road right-of -way. Staff has asked Mr. Uhde to curve the trail inward towards his cul-de-sac at this time. This would be at the freeway bridge end. We would not want to encourage the bridge crossings at this time. The trail would be extended when the bridge is upgraded and a pedestrian path provided for on the bridge. If you should have any questions previous to the park board meeting, please call me. Marty AGENDA ITEM 5 " 1 i { i a ` a i { I P f II A {{i P f 3 I it t t i • Cy 7 1`,s APOLLO MEADOWS -- PRELIMINARY PLAT I uJ II SUNSET OAKS ,>r. < I 1 I I I 12 B 4` I 3 1 .. .J---S-• B I I I I - - - J—.�.-..-n-Y.J i lot i '' 1 •,��•r , ' 1 �� r 1 I� j A I / / , / Z �Z 27 25% I h op y I , •� _,a6�_ � s � / , / �, IOOiO�Ca�r 2432 33 / 1 _ 1 6 r >> / / �. / DESIGN STANDARDS Ilr y %F�t i / /' / / M •r.� e.d��aWm N.A ar. N.w ar. FDR: GARY UHDE Resi-la,n,Lard Deverlent lr,c 3825-85t h A wa .m North irr a`..�ra:w m Bra�da�yi Pork MN 55443 44 a..r rawr..r W—n char � / / II.�raa ®a.Nan.. b_y >A Irt >♦ Aat M SV gat 1�.r 1Y.Vx r 1r A Va r rr I VI r Iee 4a M Is K d'k-1 t s�e..srmarna`s raw—sd'nrrra e°r"wr av a r.� r w.e r n.a L a qM ara�lf r e.e r�lA.q arc r a - �M r� _ P•V �rM• �.��` ' a.o1r P-4 rac Owlq P•4 lu • a� J C JDNSCN CQJSILTANTS. INC. r ba aal0iv yw O L!. W Lr. MI•?f A .N. aVo•aa rI m 6�.1y.I.rw.M SUN +�.n..c • w.c r w,m 16121 566-6I58 rusr..ars . w. no r.a FAX—Islxl sw-ur4 PRGJ.: 920107 - Apollo M.ado— W.1 cn.ar '�� •• PATE: 7/20/92 OF g Cs�f� 17 �✓"yi /m/�/i'!Z� �H 9L�/Y `� Z LLC�Fi1 G� ul`i6e0 47 jjjj��) ev at1s 171 Z CV y 00, %ewe - >z 22#) - - > > y. � . . . . . . . . . � �� . . § . | FAX 4 124 9»;2 � } ) � . | � I . ... .. � | � yea � �, � � �/ � Z rnl�.r , �� o L CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 05 - 91 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LINO LAKES CITY CODE BY CHANGING THE PARK DEDICATION FEE The City Council of the- City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota does ordain: I. Property Dedication. Section 1001. 14 of the Lino Lakes City code is amended to read as follows: AMENDMENT: ELIMINATE: Entire section 1001. 14 after (4) in paragraph 2. ADD: For residential development the following formula shall apply: I. Density in Units/Acre Percentage of Land Dedication 0 to 3 10% 3 to 5 12% 5 to 7 14% 7 to 9 16% 9 or more 18% Land site selection is to be approved by the park board. The city may choose to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant based on the following formula: Land Cost/Acre $10 ,000/minimum) x (Density Factor % x Subd_ Acreage) = Park Dedication Per Unit Number of Lots in Subdivision OR Park Dedication/Unit) x (No_ of Units) = Park Dedication/Acre Number of Acres ORDINANCE NO. 05 - 91 II. The park board may accept any combination of land and monies, not to exceed the dedication requirements. III. Minor subdivisions, as defined by ordinance, will be required to follow the Land Dedication Density Table listed in the ordinance, or $500. 00 per building site, at the decision of the park board. IV. For commercial or industrial development: A. The developer shall pay to the City $200. 00 for each 1, 000 square feet of proposed building for any commercial or industrial use except those uses set forth as follows: B. The developer shall pay to the City $133 . for each 1, 000 square feet of proposed building for uses as follows: 1. ) Warehousing 2 . ) Low Labor Intensive Light Manufacturing/Assembly (one or less employee per 1, 000 square feet of structure) 3 . ) Other Low Labor Intensive Uses C. All such money must be paid prior to the issuance of the building permit. D. The above shall apply to new buildings and additions to existing buildings. II. This Ordinance shall be effective February 1, 1992 . Passed by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 12th day of November , 1991. Harold L. Bisel, Mayor ,-� Marilyn,G. Anderson, Clerk-Treasurer The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly ORDINANCE NO. 05 - 91 seconded by Mayor Bisel and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: Kuether, Bisel, Reinert, Bohjanen. The following voted against same: Neal. Whereupon, the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. r. .«'>E; .' �F equipment at the Incarnation Cemetery. The property is zoned mural and a cemetery is a permitted use. Although the cemetery is "grandfathered", any change or alteration requires an amended conditional use permit. The cemetery is approximately one (1) acre in size and has no other structures located on the property. The storage building would be located within the required setback. Staff has reviewed the request and find it to be compatible with the existing use and neighborhood and recommends approval. Council Member Bergeson moved to approve the amended conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. Proper building permits be obtained for the construction of the storage building. 2. Site plan submitted be made a part of the conditional use permit. 3. A landscape plan be submitted with the building permit application indicating landscaping to be provided around storage building. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried -'Nnimously. Consideration of Subdivision Request, Royal Oaks Realty, 985 Birch Street - The property at 985 Birch Street is completely surrounded by the Black Duck Estates and the Black Duck Estates, Second Addition subdivisions. zoning is Residential, (R-1) and utilities are available to the site. The property owner, Royal Oaks Realty is requesting a subdivision of the lot into two (2) lots. Each of the two (2) lots would exceed the minimum square footage requirements for this zone. The requested split is consistent with the overall development plan for the area. Staff does recommend that requested subdivision be granted although the present home on the site infringes on the front setback. The present home is considered an existing non- conforming use and would be allowed to remain. The setback requirements on the newly created lot would conform to the City Code. The Planning and Zoning Board has reviewed the request and recommends approval of the subdivision with the condition that the existing home at 985 Birch Street be connected to municipal utilities prior to the sale of the home. Council Member Bergeson asked if there would be any problem obtaining a driveway permit for the newly created lot from Anoka PAGE 7 tit C County. Ms. Wyland said that it was her understanding a permit would be granted. Council Member Kuether moved to approve the subdivision request. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Variance Request, Roger Kolstad, Carl and Thomas Street - Mr. Kolstad has requested a variance to extend Carl Street and Thomas Street in the Lino Air Park subdivision using the street standards in place when the original portions of the streets were constructed in 1977. The extended portion of the streets would be identical to the abutting segments of streets which currently exist. Street construction standards have changed considerably and if the variance was granted the extended portions of Carl Street and Thomas Street would not conform to the current City Code. The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the request and after some discussion recommended denial of the request. The Board concurred with the City Planner who indicated that the findings of fact did not justify granting a variance. No hardship could be found relating to the property. A copy of the City Council minutes from 1976 regarding installation of the streets was given to the City Council. It was noted that the City Code has been amended since the original subdivision was approved and any new street construction in the subdivision must conform to present codes. -� Mr. Kolstad told the City Council that the original streets were not constructed to the streets standards that existed in 1977. This was allowed because it was thought that only one side of each street would be developed. However, after the streets were constructed, subdivisions occurred on the other side of the streets and additional building was allowed. Mr. Kolstad said he did not understand why the current street standards with concrete curb and gutter would be required in this case since only seven (7) lots can be built on abutting each street. He felt it would also look strange. Mr. Kolstad also said that the hardship would be on the air park users. An association has been formed for the maintenance of the air strip and if additional lots are not allowed to develop on the air strip, the current landowners will never get additional help in maintaining the air strip. Mr. Kolstad said that if the City does not allow the variance, he will be forced to let the property go tax forfeit. Council Member Neal moved to approve the variance request with the conditions recommended by the City Engineer. Mayor Reinert seconded the motion. Mr. Schneider said that he did try to PAGE 8 "� CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES 1?ATE a J1i S'� :<:199 ......::.... . DIME STARTED 6: Q....p,m. TIME EI�lyED ..:.:.... .... ... .. ......:,:..:. . MEME ::':` RE Gelimaun, .: aude�cs, Mea. h, Nod3it± :;:: ScYtapt MESERSAESEN :;...:R .ba�maou :;; 81attn ' .AES� PRESENT. M:>: I W 1an i, A. Br u3u§, D Sc: of e APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Nordine moved and was supported by Landers to approve the minutes of the June 10, 1992 meeting as submitted. All voted aye. Motion carried. OPEN MIRE: No one was present to address Open Mike. PLANNING ITEMS: A. 92-22 , Incarnation Cemetery, Ash Street, Amended Conditional Use M.K. Wyland reviewed this request which is to construct a 12 x 14 storage building for lawn maintenance equipment at the Incarnation Cemetery. The Planning & Zoning Board recommended approval of the request with the conditions outlined in the staff report including the following: 1. Property building permits be obtained for the construction of the storage building. 2. Site plan submitted be made a part of the permit. 3 . A landscape plan be submitted with the building permit application indicating landscaping to be provided around the storage area. MOTION: Glebmann moved and was seconded by Meisch to approve the request. All voted aye. Motion carried. Mr. Jerry Hawkins of the Church Cemetery Committee was present and advised the Board that a yard light is located on the property and that it is currently fenced. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1992 B. 92-24 Royal Oaks Realty, 985 Birch Street, Subdivision M.K. Wyland reviewed this request which is to split the property at 985 Birch into two parcels of property approximately 104' wide by 208' deep. The property is Zoned R1 Residential and sewer and water is available to serve the site. MOTION: Mesich moved approval of the request provided the existing dwelling at 985 Birch Street is connected to the sewer and water. Nordine seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. C. 92-26, Salberg, 7678 20th Street, Subdivision M. K. Wyland reviewed this request which is to rearrange lot lines to provide for the sale of an existing home and acreage. The new lot arrangement would provide a parcel of property 8.765 acres in size thereby requiring a variance for 1.235 acres. MOTION: After some discussion Gelbmann stated that there was no apparent hardship in not meeting the 10 acre requirement as adequate acreage is available to the rear of this property, therefore he would recommend Option 1 of the Staff Report approving the realignment of lot lines with the addition of acreage from the east to provide a total of 10 acres for the new parcel. Landers seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. D. 92-27 Cottage Homesteads, Rezoning on Elm Street Al Brixius, NAC, advised the Planning & Zoning Board that the staff had met with the developer just prior to the meeting and determined that some changes in the site plan would be required. It was therefore recommended that this item be held over until next month to allow the developer time to redesign the site plan. Chairman Schaps advised the audience that this item would be held over until the August 12th meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board. E. 92-29 Roger Kolstad, Carl & Thomas Street, Variance Al Brixius, NAC, reviewed this request which is to allow a 3 ton road to be extended at a width of 241 . The Code has changed since the Lino Air Park was originally approved and constructed and the requirements now include a 7 ton roadway with a 33' width. Mr. Brixius explained that there is no apparent hardship in this case �. and would recommend denial of the variance request. Mr. Kolstad was present and stated that when the ordinance was changed concerning the width of streets his subdivision was of PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1992 record and he was not notified regarding the change. He further indicated that it is not feasible for them to develop the remaining lots with a wider street. Sewer and water is not available and probably will not be for a very long time, if ever, and he does not feel that curb and gutter necessary. Traffic in the area is minimal and will remain that way and the larger lots allow plenty of off street parking. Dedication of a 66' right of way would be provided, it is merely the constructed width of the street that is at question. Concerns of the Planning & Zoning Board included parking, safety in regard to the narrow streets and emergency vehicle access. Mr. Mesich asked why the narrower streets were not grandfathered in and was advised that this is a new development, thereby the current requirements apply. Mr. Brixius also explained that if the Board considers approving the request they should specify the uniqueness of the site to prevent other developments from seeking the same variance. He also suggested addressing drainage, restrictions on development, a 60' right of way dedication, and agreements to be assessed for sewer and water when available. MOTION: Landers recommended Option 1 denying the request for a variance to construct substandard streets. Nordine seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. F. 92-30, 7080 Lake Drive, Leszinski, Conditional Use Permit/ Site Plan Review M. K. Wyland reviewed this request and explained that it is to allow an Automobile Service Use in a General Business District. The home on the site would be considered an existing non-conforming use. MOTION: Gelbman moved and was supported by Mesich to approve the request with the following conditions: 1. Signs be located in conformance with existing sign ordinance and proper permits obtained. 2 . No exterior storage be allowed on the site, including vehicles being serviced. 3 . A refuse area be provided and properly screened from the street right of way. 4. Proper building permits be obtained for any construction/remodeling. All voted aye. Motion carried. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1992 G. 92-31 Park Grove, (Extension of Pine Ridge) , Subdivision Al Brixius reviewed this request which is to allow platting of approximately 86 single family lots on 45 acres of land adjacent to Pine Ridge. The property has been reviewed in the past and was discussed at length when Pine Ridge was originally approved. The staff report indicated approval with several conditions. Park Board review included discussion of a useable park and possible modifications to the land being offered as park. After some discussion concerning parks and trails the following motion was offered. MOTION: Meisch recommended approval with the conditions outlined in the staff report except # 2, 6, and 7, and the condition that the request be reviewed again by the Park Board, prior to the Council meeting, to address the following issues: 1. Vehicle access to the park. 2. Trails 3 . Park elevation. Nordine seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. DISCUSSION: New Developments: Landers suggested that developers be required to provide enclosed containers for trash to help eliminate some of the trash problems in these areas. Darrell suggested staff could review the policies in place and report back to the Board. Schaps asked if staff was aware of any commercial developments pending. Darrell stated that the City now has an Economic Development Committee that is working on promoting the Apollo Drive area and also possible development at 49 and 23. He also advised the Board that the City is considering preparing a Growth Study to help guide development and project city facility needs. Nordine asked if the Board members could be provided with a copy of the Comprehensive Plan. ADJOURNMENT: Upon the unanimous consent of the Board the meeting was adjourned at 8: 50 p.m. The August meeting of the Lino Lakes Park Board was called to order on August 4, 1992 at 6: 30 pm, at the Lino Lakes City Hall by Vice Chairman, Ken Johnson. Roll call was taken, members in attendance were Jacqualyn Farm, Ray Johnson, Ken Johnson, John Bauman. Brian Bourassa was in attendance at 6:40. Members absent were George Lindy and Candi Toffoli. The minutes of the July 6, 1992 meeting were approved as written. OPEN MIKE - No one appeared under Open Mike. OLD BUSINESS• Quail Ridge - Marty Asleson explained that this park dedication had �n t t ark board some time ago. This is an extension of and is a total of 39. 9 acres. The proposed park dedication is 3 . acres of usable park land in the southwest corner of the devel pment,, is thr-mug the_---.development via--Linear-trail corridor, cul-de sac acc-es-s_ to---Captain-s_ -Plaee a-nd---a- park-- trail--link--to-_get to the "island" in the �� tt;hanepy. All 3 .9 acres are high land with mature trees. system rom the n j th t_t'he__c.o=idor-, he-will l wnrk with the DNR on the walk-way _,�ystP 4, Chi c nntt l r� hP a wnnr7Pn_r_ _ .._g _ extons i nn acress tie-wetland-. Staff and city engineers agreed that this dedication is acceptable. Marty Asleson commented that with changes continually being made with wetlands, boardwalks are becoming a reality, even though they present a problem with maintenance and also with the handicapped. Motion: Ray Johnson made a motion to approve the park dedication for Quail Ridge as proposed by the developer, and with the understanding that he (the developer) will work with the DNR on the walk-way system, and take the remaining dedication (if any) in a cash dedication. This motion was seconded by Jacquelyn Farm. All were in favor. Motion carried. (�tr. r ' ,j fie. A-A 'C�Qt. --�c � to L1 Ole s� CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES .: . ...:.'.>'.....::::::>:>::>::::::::::.:::: ::.. ..>:>:>: . ::..:......:......: .::::::::::: :. :::::..:::: .::.::.::.::::.::. ....::..:::.::::::.>:::>:::::.: .. : : :.:1.,1i'iL' STAR�1''E13::.::;:...;::..;:::• . i s >:. .. Dn»>:::::::::::::::::,::::a .... o.... .�. . ......... _ .. ............................. . :. _..__. _ .............. > > >: .... :::::::::::::::::::::.:::...::::::::. ::::::.:.:::.: :::.: :. : : :. : : : . I+iEMBS18><>F ESEi T .'. Bl ma u f.' �;aii.. ....`' Ie s l # ortl i2z , ::.:.:: ava .:.::..::::::::::.::.::::::::::::::::::...... 1�I$I+I$ER$ AB8$ T:>: ::;::31QniB'`':>>.`.>>::> .>.:: <: .......... S Y1;ESENT .. '>8ra. i � iunseg..Cattlait Ra hand Sta Person I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 8, 1992 John Landers moved and was supported by Rick Gelbman to approve the minutes of the July 8, 1992 meeting as submitted. All voted aye. Motion carried. III. OPEN MIKE: No one was present for Open Mike IV. ACTION ITEMS: A. 92-27-PDO, Senior Cottages, Elm Street The Public Hearing concerning the Senior Cottages on Elm Street was continued from the July 8th Planning and Zoning Meeting. The request involves a rezoning to R4 residential with a Planned Development Overlay to allow the construction of approximately 90 senior housing units. Mr. Brixius advised the Board that a revised site plan has been submitted and reviewed the Staff report which recommended approval with several conditions. Mr. Roger Derek was present and briefly reviewed the request with the board. Al Robinson asked a question concerning driveway width and indicated that 22' seems to be rather narrow for access for garbage trucks. Mr. Brixius explained that permits would be required from the County for the access drives which would be required to meet County standards. A question was raised concerning parking for recreational vehicles. Mr. Derek explained that in their experience with similar housing developments the need for parking of any recreational vehicles was very limited. Their plan would be for these vehicles to be stored in the garage units provided. Kathy Nordine asked how much traffic would be generated by this use. Mr. Derek explained that it would not be much as most seniors do not drive at night or when the weather is bad and that a transportation service is proposed for the development. Planning & Zoning Board 2 August 12, 1992 Mr. Mesich asked if Cottage Homesteads was a National Company and was advised that they are Minnesota based. They also have a few other developments in the state and they average 80-90 units. He also expressed concern regarding no basements and what to do in case of severe weather. Mr. Derek stated that Minnesota is rather unique in that most construction has basements and added that none will be provided due to cost and the fact that seniors like to avoid stairs if at all possible. The questions was raised concerning putting a basement under the proposed community center but Mr. Derek stated it would be too costly as handicapped access would be necessary along with other design constraints. Landscaping along the north property line will be provided in the form of 6, 8, and 10 foot evergreens. The exterior is sided with aluminum and refuse and snow removal will be handled by the management. Tom Meisch asked if the Fire Chief had reviewed the plans for this development and was advised by Mr. Brixius that he had and his only concern was hydrant location. Kathy Nordine asked if this proposed construction is not ,•� carried out will the property remain R4 thus allowing any high density residential use. Mr. Brixius explained that the PDO designation provides for the development of the property as approved with a signed development agreement. If this developer does not construct the units, another developer would be required to meet the approved plan or resubmit the proposal. Mr. Meisch stated that although he believes this type of housing is needed in the City of Lino Lakes he has concerns regarding the width of Elm Street in relation to additional traffic and the lack of nearby shopping and sidewalks. Mr. Dereck stated that there will be a comprehensive sidewalk plan within the development and again, that transportation will be available for the seniors. Kathy Nordine asked if these units could be converted to market rate apartments and was advised by Mr. Brixius that if that were the case he would have a substantially different staff report on the project due to traffic concerns. Mr. Meisch asked if the Rezoning, PDO, and Site Plan Review are all tied together and was advised by Mr. Brixius that he would recommend such. MOTION: Mr. Meisch then made a motion to deny the request as submitted. Kathy Nordine seconded the motion. On roll call: AYES: Meisch, Nordine NAYS: Gelbmann, Landers, Robinson, Slatten Motion Failed. Mr. Gelbman then moved approval of the request with the conditions outlined in the Planning Report and the additional condition that the Developer return to the Planning & Zoning Board within the next two months with a detailed site plan. Planning & Zoning Board 3 August 12, 1992 Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. on roll call: AYES: Gelbman, Landers, Robinson, Slatten NAYS: Meisch, Nordine Motion carried. B. 92-36-Z, 92-37-P, Apollo Meadows, Rezoning & Subdivision Mr. Brixius explained that this is Public Hearing to review a request to plat 42 single family lots and rezone a five acre parcel from R1 to R4, High Density Residential. The Planning Report recommends approval of the subdivision with the elimination of Item 3, as 100' of right of way dedication has been approved by the County, some variances outlined in the staff report concerning lot width at the building setback line and the adjustment that this setback line be maintained at 35' for this plat and realignment for Lot 42 to correct depth deficiency. It is recommended that the property be rezoned to R3, Medium Density, rather than the R4 proposed by the applicant. At this time there are no specific plans for the multiple parcel, however, three alternate site plans submitted more nearly conformed to the medium density classification than the higher density use, thus the recommendation to go with R3. Mr. Mesich asked what type of housing is proposed for this development and was advised that it would be low to moderate housing. He also asked why not rezone the property to a business use as business is needed in the area. Mr. Uhde, the developer, explained that in working with the extension of Apollo Drive and the neighboring residents that the proposal submitted seemed to be the most acceptable to all concerned including the City, County, and Neighborhood. Mr. Gelbman asked about Alternate G in the Staff Report as a consideration for the site plan. Mr. Uhde explained that it was not a good idea because lots back onto Apollo Drive. The plan proposed is the best alternative and the access points have been ok'd by the County. Mr. and Mrs. Huntington of 140 Marvy Street were present and asked if a park was proposed for the site and if the rezoning is approved could anything go in at that location. Mr. Brixius explained that the Park Plan does not call for park area in this location as there is a park a few blocks to the north. In regard to the rezoning, any proposed construction would require site plan review and approval by the Planning Board and the City Council. Mr. Meisch stated that he was not comfortable approving the rezoning without any plans for development. He stated that if it remains an R1 Outlot, Mr. Uhde can request the rezoning when he is ready to further subdivide or build on the site. Mr. Uhde stated that economics dictate the rezoning at this time. n Planning & Zoning Board 4 August 12, 1992 MOTION: Mr. Meisch made a motion to approve the preliminary plat striking Item 13 from the Staff Report and adding Items 11 and 12 pertaining to correcting the depth deficiency in Lot 42 and requiring a building setback of 35' on all lots in the plat. The Outlot is to remain zoned R1 so Denial was recommended on the rezoning request. Mr. Landers seconded the motion. On roll call: AYES: Landers, Mesich, Gelbman NAYS: Nordine, Robinson, Schaps, Slatten Motion failed Monika Slatten moved approval of the subdivision with the conditions outlined in Mr. Meisch's motion and the Rezoning of the Outlot to R3 Residential. Mr. Gelbman seconded the motion. On roll call: AYES: Gelbman, Nordine, Robinson, Slatten NAYS: Landers, Mesich Motion carried. C. 92-29-CUP, Northern Instrument, 6680 Hwy 49, Amended CUP A Public Hearing was held concerning an addition to the Northern Instrument facility at 6680 Hwy 49. Mr. Ehrmanntraut of Northern Instruments was present and explained that they wish to add a 76 x 60 wood frame storage building. The staff recommended approval of the request with the conditions listed in the staff report. It was suggested that the applicant check with the Rice Creek Watershed District to insure that no permits are required of them. MOTION: Monika Slatten made a motion recommending approval with the conditions outlined in the staff report. Mr. Gelbman seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. D. 92*31!-D vV ChiropMatia, 7661 Lake Dr. , Site Plan Review Mr. Buys was present and indicated that he will be remodeling the site into an office and paving an area to provide 9 parking spaces. The staff report recommended approval of the request and asked for screening & curb along the south border of the parking area. Mr. Buys explained that the area is screened by trees and he believes screening & curb may be needed on the north side. There was some discussion regarding handicapped parking which Mr. Buys agreed to provide and an increase in the width of the parking area to provide adequate maneuvering space. MOTION: Monika Slatten made a motion recommending Option 1, approval of the site plan with the conditions listed in the ,.�, staff report, an addition to Item B providing for a 58, wide parking area, Item C providing screening & curb on the north side of the parking area, and Item D providing for a handicapped parking space and striping of the parking lot. Mr. Gelbman seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Planning & Zoning Board 5 August 12 , 1992 R. 9 5-F, J. Mi.l, North Rd. , Subdivision Mr.-,1�cNeil was present and indicated that he would like to t the property into three lots. Staff recommended approval with the conditions indicated in staff report and the additional condition that a 10' utility easement be provided on the rear and side property lines. MOTION: Mr. Robinson moved approval of the request with the conditions outlined in the staff report and the condition that a 10' utility easement be provided on side and rear property lines. Nonika Slatten seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. F. 92-38-PDO, Reshanau Park Estates, Planned Development A Public Hearing was called to Order by Chairman Schaps at 8:36 P.M. concerning the Reshanau Park Estates Planned Development. Mr. Don Gorowsky was present to explain the request which is to allow a private boat launch and park area for the Reshanau Park Estates Homeowners Association on Outlots A and B of Reshanau Park Estates. He explained that there are 17 lots in the development that do not have lakeshore and 16 lots on the lake. Some of these lakeshore owners are not able to launch their boats from their own property due to the shoreline/landscaping. The park and launch would be a private area for Association members only. The access would be fenced and locked. The request is to actually improve the site which currently exists and is owned by the Association. Mr. Brixius reviewed the Planning Report and concluded with recommending that the City make a determination due to the number and degree of importance related to each outstanding issue and that this is a policy decision to be made by the City. Mr. Pete Brown of 6897 Black Duck Drive was present and stated that this matter had been discussed three years ago, withdrawn from the plans due to local opposition, and he did not understand why it had to be discussed again. The previous requested included the launch, special lighting, pillars at the entrance to the development, and all these items were removed - we should not be discussing it now. Chairman Schaps asked Mr. Gorowsky what his understanding was ..� of what people were told who bought property in Reshanau Park Estates - was there anything contractual in the purchase? Mr. Gorowsky explained that it was an expectation, not in a contract, that there would be a boat access provided in Outlots A and B. Planning & Zoning Board 6 August 12 , 1992 Gary Uhde, the Developer of Reshanau Park Estates, was present and stated that yes, the street lights, entrance pillars, and cobblestone streets were removed from the plan but the park area was only a concept. The Homeowners Association owns the Outlots and have the right to use the area to launch their boats. What they are asking for is an improved access - otherwise they could leave it as it is and still use it. Chairman Schaps stated that having been present at the previous meetings regarding the plat it was his understanding that the boat launch/marina issue was dead. Mr. Uhde stated that it was not a part of the plat approval, but was not a dead issue in his opinion. Just something that was not fully developed yet as the properties were not all sold and the Homeowners Association not complete. Al Thiemich of 6725 East Shadow Lake Drive stated that over the past 20 years there has been some degradation of the lake although not great. Now we are talking about increased access and there is a belief that this launching area will invite more use and the problems will become the lakeshore owners problems. It will increase the public use of the lake and he is opposed to that. He also stated that he thought this issue had been settled three years ago. Mr. Don Dunn of 6085 Black Duck Drive read a letter stating that he too believed the marina had been removed and that the only boats allowed would have to be hand carried to the lake. He is opposed to more access to the lake and believes the lake can not afford more traffic. This could open the area on the south end of the lake and set a precedent. He believes the developer withdrew the matter from the final plat package and that these proceedings are therefore unethical on his part. He believes the problem is not with the new residents but with the developer and that the matter should be settled in the courts if the property owners were misled in believing there would be a boat access provided. Mr. Meisch asked if the Planning Board could have a little history of the matter. The Board was provided a copy of the Council minutes from July 24, 1989 at which the preliminary plat was approved. These minutes indicated that there were no plans for developing Outlots A & B and that a marina was no longer planned. Mr. Brixius explained that the Homeowners Association had begun improvements on the park and were advised that a DNR permit was necessary and granted. In applying for the DNR permit the City was notified and thus became aware of the proposed access. The City Administrator asked Mr. Brixius to review the matter and it was determined a private park is not a permitted use in this Zoning District. The Association was notified that they would need to request a Planned Development Overlay for the area. The site now Planning & Zoning Board 7 August 12, 1992 includes a gate, a gravel access point to the lake, volleyball court and horseshoe area. Mr. Uhde explained that in the fall of 1991 they began having meetings with the Homeowners Association about the area. They talked with the previous City Planner about what they were doing and were told there was nothing needed except a permit from the DNR and/or the Corp. of Engineers. They received an ok from the Rice Creek Watershed District for work above the high water mark and the DNR was made aware of their plans. An application was made for a permit from the DNR. It was never their intent to put this in without approval but they had been advised by the City Planner at that time that no permit was necessary. Mr. Pat Smith of 6922 West Shadow Lake Drive stated that he felt the problem here may be in marketing. The City made a decision a number of years ago, but apparently, buyers were told there would be a launch. Mayor Reinert was present and stated that Mr. Uhde has been a good developer, however, his recall is that the boat launch was stricken from the plan. It is not a good idea on such a small lake. On the opposite side of the lake there is a piece of property that is owned by 14 different property owners - if this is allowed they could do the same thing. He stated that he did recall discussion of development of the park, but no launching space. He believes the issue here is the "improved" access, not the park improvements. He also believes the realtors "over-sold" the property. Mr. Greg Johnson of 6773 East Shadow Lake Drive expressed concern about the ecological impact. The fish population is very low and he has been working with the DNR to increase it. At this time 10% of the fish show propeller wounds due to the lakes shallowness. Mr. Dunn stated that he had met with the DNR and initiating work on this site was a violation because no permit approval was received. Rice Creek has no authority and the City has the final say. Mr. Mike Hayden, from the east side of the lake, stated that he was mislead when he purchased his home because he was told there would be a boat access. Brad Bainen, 6955 Black Duck Drive stated the problem is with the developer. There was a strong promise that there would be a boat launch that even the people on the lake side could use. B. Olson of 6673 East Shadow Lake Drive asked who would be responsible for policing this area once it is improved. Planning & Zoning Board 8 August 12 , 1992 Mayor Reinert stated that we may need to form a citizen's group to discuss water rules/ground rules, water quality and management, and the like. Mr. Uhde agreed with Mayor Reinert that this would be a good idea concerning use of the lake. He added that the Association has made a commitment to control the access they propose and limit it to property owners. There may be 2 or 3 boats, maybe up to 6. The Association has been very willing to work with those concerned. He added that when the property was originally being constructed the DNR had asked if they could buy some property for a boat access but he had said no. Mr. Pat Smith stated that he has been a resident for over 12 years and during that time, if a neighbor needed to launch his boat and could not from his property, it has been worked out, this practice could certainly continue. Most boats go in the water in the spring and come out in the fall. ,.� A Mr. Greg Johnson stated that this proposal could set a precedent other development on the lake. In response to a question, a resident stated that there is approximately 311 acres of water and it is 5'-6' deep. Mr. Larry Brandonberger of 6940 West Shadow Lake Drives stated that the useable area of the lake is reduced as the season progresses. Mr. George Gotweld of 6710 East Shadow Lake Drive was concerned that increased us of the lake will prove hazardous. The shallowness of the lake presents problems now with shoreline erosion. There being no further discussion, Chairman Schaps closed the Public Hearing at 9:55. He stated that the problems seems to be not with the park improvements but with the improved boat access. The business of the access seems to have been finished but the controversy continues. Lots were sold with no contractual basis for a boat access. This would be a large step for the City to take. The residents in the area all want to get along and be good neighbors. The decision was previously made not to allow a boat access and the City should stick with their decision. Improvement of the park will be an asset to the residents even without the boat access. Country Lakes Park has a canoe access. At the time it was developed it was determined that it should be only a canoe access. Mr. Gelbman asked if there ever was a rough draft of a plan for Outlots A and B and Association Bylaws. Planning & Zoning Board 9 August 12, 1992 MOTION: Mr. Landers made a motion to deny the entire request and was supported by Kathy Nordine. On roll call: AYES: Landers NAYS: Gelbman, Mesich, Nordine, Robinson, Slatten MOTION FAILED Mr. Gelbman made a motion recommending approval of the PDO with the exception of the boat access and launch with the following conditions: 1. A barrier be installed to prevent motorized boat access to the lake from the park property. 2. The current access be demolished and restored to its previous condition. On roll call: AYES: Gelbman, Mesich, Nordine, Robinson, Slatten NAYS: Landers Motion carried to approve park improvements but deny boat launch area; restoration of boat launch area and return to natural condition. ¢. 92-39-8, Quail Ridge. Birch St. , Subdivision/PDO Mr. Brixius reviewed the Planning report which indicated that this request is to plat a 40 acre parcel into 41 R-1X lots. The Planned Development Overlay designation is being requested to maintain an overall density in accordance with the R1X District while requesting some flexibility on lot area and width. The Park Board has reviewed the request and recommend approval with the dedication of the park land indicated. This dedication would include much of the wetland. The report recommended approval with the conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Kirk Corson was present and indicated that the plat has been revised several times. This plan appears to be the best use of the property and provides for fewer lots then previously request. Monika Slatten indicated concern regarding the several variances needed, especially for Lots 3 & 4. Mr. Brixius explained that the property had been Zoned R1 and recently rezoned to R1X. With the previous zoning, these variances would not have been necessary. Mr. Glen Bowen of Black Duck Drive was present and expressed concern about addition street run-off eventually flowing into Reshanau Lake, surface water control and filtering of the run off. He suggested a full comprehensive plan and an environmental impact statement for this sensitive area. Mr. Corson explained that Rice Creek Watershed District had reviewed the request and approved the revised plan. He indicated that they have worked very hard with both the City and Rice Creek to come up with a development plan that would Planning & Zoning Board 10 August 12, 1992 have minimum impact. Mr. Bowen requested that the City check how this development will affect the property owners downstream and insure that they are adequately protected. He believes there should be better silt fences and better protection standards when the impact is over such a large area as this is. He also suggested dual holding ponds. Mr. Corson stated that a hydrologist reviewed the plan and recommended the dedication of an addition 1 1/2 acres of wetlands. They have had to jump through many hoops to get the plan that is being reviewed tonight. Mr. Brixius added that the property directly to the west is Zoned R1 with a greater density than that proposed. The park/wetland dedication enhances the project. Mr. Gelbman and Mr. Mesich had concerns regarding the shoreland and the park dedication that allowed these lots not to be considered riparian lakeshore. Chairman Schaps stated that there seems to be many defects in the plan submitted. MOTION: Mr. Gelbman made a motion to deny the request. The motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Mesich stated that his concerns would be lessened if the lots met the RIB zoning requirements. Mr. Robinson suggested the plat be resubmitted with lots that are correct in size for the zoning district. Mr. Corson explained that it was the Planners suggestion that this proposal be for a PDO which allows flexibility in lot width and depth. Mr. Robinson moved and was supported by Mr. Gelbman to table the request. On roll call, all voted aye. Motion carried. H. 92-4 =9. Cutgm Mfg. . 7582 4th Ave. . Site Plan Review Mr. Lloyd McKinney was present to discuss this item and stated that they are requesting permission to add a 24 x 36 garage to the south side of their manufacturing building on 4th Avenue. Staff has recommended approval of the request with conditions listed in the staff report. MOTION: Mr. Mesich moved approval of the request with the r conditions indicated in the staff report. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. VI. ADJOURNMENT: Upon the unanimous consent of the Board the meeting was adjourned at 11: 10 P.M. - • �) 80.4- B0. /Be.G I BO-T 80.5 60 80/ Ba Ba. /sS I GO �y / 1 L oad °dam ✓ d BLOC/ / F t/R /� /oeoad �,vaa� l / A 1�GS7. saa I• ,� ,° " /oeaa /qeo° e / t ,or t I F F. y/, a !m /q BOod l a /,Boai �b u > / Z �.�' .d n � �I � /,fl/o,✓o �� /Q nl //. 1� / ! I 9zs � /aA_�.,N) d� z `fps` 437 y49 9bI ?, / 1g�j`•�� gi / \ �.&1G��?�Bo_s Ohl. Xi -/ ('� / P- >ti \.Ve— / �� •S'tRt�4cv.[Y� �,-. a>.T}zv,�sc j S i� p 9/z-`_ I O 64,60od \ Il%•. d r7 o /r,/ a al Z 3 I 4 ; ppo/2 nl /b .1 •� , / /�/z0 I �� / S/ iddB �°`q7 /or 1 �,..ea�e3 � .90 �,1 5`>,eL� zo,sza� \� _ _ /�• , .- __ _ a � w ��-• so ea" _ ea.< vo.6� .>z7�l µ O ice_ —/— / Ay i/% 6 !Z `�I // .I /O MI ,.., 9 nI B gy�G 7 ✓�—.G� C" /a I axc__ _ a_ - ri-.d�,� _� / 19i ` / �. \° IB,zOUd r •'>� 1� :mil" lo• I/I��� l / ye,aoo� �•,_- _---�. _ / ! G•e ••/!%� Pi-. •`Ytl„b� I l - mead/AAOHW� / �J /•`rC\r /// _ /d;/3 d / ..'9 "6 /—�——:�1 a l' eG /•. eco ;S�•ll I 1 7f.;Ola. v / �— rv� e5c. '�9hFb' �'f;•, C�' ,7—fi �� 1 I J /O Ih�a �;.... /' 7a,B°o� Lq OUDEp m t / e,v.".• jb �t,�ao� , /" , ¢ n 3 n id ! rt�l P o ! /11iJ- 3 as,7cod(AAow �F -/ 'k.7�V r y-,u wo � bro /s`a95'� /° �0 ' � J`J'I'I/' ' _r� �l r/ / ��r� �.. / •� 3 .b�� .f H v /0n' //7 8 ^I 9 16 — "AAOHW , Oen. � 9a p l�P,�l�lll� A�n 9cc,7Ga+' 12 //j /OGC_- J /0e),7� .e�a< Cver. is 22-0 c7000'� t f o /a,eau io,Bood /o eoo¢ /a bo0¢ I h I �'t i� i _ _�� /4- / -'l• i 3s 76 Ba.e rn.c I ea 671 Sec i e 1 PAe A4- OV, LAND USE PLANNING AND DESIGN BRAU E R & ASSOCIATES, LTD August 2, 1992 Mr. Marty Asleson Park Superintendent/City Forester City of.Lino Lakes 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Re: Park N-10 - Space Analysis. Dear Marty, As per your verbal authorization, I have completed a park development space needs analysis for N-10. The attached graphic illustrates the space requirements associated with the facilities programmed for this park as defined in.the Comprehensive Park Plan and Development Guide (copy attached). As the graphic illustrates, 10 acres should be considered the minimum land area necessary to ensure that all program elements will physically fit on the site as well as allow sufficient space for other functional park elements, such as reserve and ornamentation. Although the configuration of the site is somewhat linear, it should still function reasonably well for neighborhood park uses. This is especially true given the sites optimal location with respect to the linear trail system. Although the graphic should be fairly straight forward, there are a number of critical concerns that I feel you should consider during your own analysis of the park's space needs: • the land acquired (through park dedication or direct purchase) should be high ground. Wetland or marginal lowland land should be avoided because it is typically no more suitable for park development than it is for residential housing. A good case in point is the nearby Shenandoah Park, where a fair portion of the park consists of poor soils which are unsuitable for park development. If you recall, one of the goals of the community is for quality parks. Naturally, the quality of the land is at the forefront of achieving this objective. • it should be noted that the park's configuration is based on my best interpretation of the base mapping provided by the city and my understanding as to the extent of the adjacent wetland. Naturally, the exact park boundaries will need to be confirmed by field research and review of more complete base mapping. Again, 10 acres of upland should be considered minimal given this park's development program. 7301 Ohms Lane, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55439 Tel (612) 832-9475 Fax (612) 832-9542 • when negotiating for land, you should consider the objectives as defined under Future Development Issues for N-10 (copy attached). As defined, this park (as well as all parks) plays an important part in the overall park system. The integrity of the system depends upon all of its components coming together to form a cohesive whole rather than a collection of eclectic parts that do not function together. As you recall, this was one of the issues of most concern to the city at the very beginning of this planning process. This is a vital point that should always be considered during negotiations with developers and land owners. • although the plan is intended to allow for a certain amount of flexibility with respect to actual park boundaries, substantial deviation from the location as defined in the Comprehensive Park Plan and Development Guide should be undertaken with extreme caution and,where possible, avoided. Each deviation from the original plan has a ripple effect on the entire system, usually resulting in a loss in the plan's overall integrity and, most importantly, the park system's ability to enhance the quality of life that those moving to the city are seeking. If you have any questions or concerns, please give me a call. Sincerely, BRAUER & AS OCIATES, LTD. VA- bauer, R.L.A. Vice President Slope Into Park I Ponding Area Trail Link To Linear Trail Corridor Residential Development Area Informal BalMeld c 1; 1 Picnic/General Recreation Area �v,M Pirnkking " \ Internal Park Trail(g'Wide) - Trail Link To Linear �j��� Trail Corridor R Picnic/General Recreation Area esidential Development Area� � 1 • Picnicking Picalle MAN ploy seraee.re rl • Games Aces j • Hardcoact Multl-Purpose Building Parkin (Warming House,Restrooms,Etc.) 20 can(pine/minus) X . Trail Link To Linear Trail Corridor '�.� low Lowland/W ethusd �—•"'� I Hockey North t I Rink f Approximate Edge Of Wetland Vegetation kating Scale:1"= 100' ' Lowland/Wetland ParkDevelopmen"pace Needs Analysis - Park Site N-10 Residential Development Area(Future) City Of Lino Lakes,'Minnesota Note: Schematic Is For Space Analysis Purposes And Does Not Represent A Final Design.