HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/04/2022 EB Packet
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING
Tuesday, January 4, 2022
6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 30, 2021
5. OPEN MIKE
6. ACTION ITEMS
A. NorthPointe Garden Estates
B. Robinson Property
7. UPDATES
A. 2021 Preparing for EAB Grant
B. Water Quality Project Updates
C. Recycling Updates
8. ADJOURN
DRAFT MINUTES
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Mr. Sullivan called the Lino Lakes Environmental Board meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. on
November 30, 2021.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Sullivan stated to approve the Agenda as it stands.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
October 27, 2021
Ms. Holmes made a MOTION to approve the October 27, 2021 meeting minutes. Ms.
Cavegn seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 - 0.
V. OPEN MIKE
Mr. Sullivan declared Open Mike at 6:32 p.m.
Open Mike declared closed at 6:32 p.m.
VI. ACTION ITEMS
A. Final Plat for MTO Properties and Site Plan Review for Thrivent Financial
Building
Mr. Nelson presented the staff report for the final plat for the MTO Properties Addition
and Site Plan Review for Thrivent Financial office building. The site is located at the
DATE : November 30, 2021
TIME STARTED : 6:30 P.M.
TIME ENDED : 7:43 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT : John Sullivan, Cassie Cavegn, Shawn Holmes,
Ella McNulty, Jonathan Parsons
MEMBERS ASBENT : Lindsay Buchmeier, Alex Schwartz
STAFF PRESENT : Andy Nelson, Phillip Davis
Environmental Board
November 30, 2021
Page 2
DRAFT MINUTES
northwest corner of the intersection of Hodgson Road and Blue Heron Drive. The parcel
is located in the Neighborhood Business zoning district.
The report included a detailed discription of the site’s characteristics, including soils,
significant resources, stormwater management and drinking water protection, wetlands
and a tree preservation plan among others. The majority of the trees on site are
cottonwood.
Staff recommended approval of the request with the following recommendations:
1. A Natural Heritage Information System request must be submitted to the DNR to
identify any rare, threatened, or endangered species that have been documented
within one mile of the site.
2. Exposed soils must be stabilized within 7 days due to proximity to an impaired water
(Rice Lake). This must be noted in the plans.
3. Preservation and mitigation standards require 2 additional trees to be planted.
Consider oaks in the turf area between the building and Hodgson Road.
4. Open area landscape standards require an additional 42 large shrubs to be planted in
open areas.
5. Buffer and screen requirements have not been met. A double row of triangulated
plants is needed for the area between the parking lot and right-of-way on Hodgson
Road. Also, plants should not be planted under future tree canopy. A fence might be a
better option to screen the project site from 6681 Blue Heron Drive.
6. Canopy cover requirements have not been met. An additional 395 sq. ft. of canopy
coverage is required.
7. Foundation landscape standards have not been met. An additional 2 large trees and 3
large shrubs will be required for the northeast building face.
8. A seed mix must be specified for the area scheduled for native seed northwest of the
infiltration pond.
9. Mulch should be type 3, with MCIA tags provided to the city at time of install.
10. Rolled erosion control product shall be category 25 natural net, per city standard
specifications.
Mr. Sullivan inquired on the reasoning behind removing a tree on the north end of the
property and why it is being mitigated with two new trees.
Mr. Nelson responded that the tree removal is necessary for the grading for stormwater
management, and that the two mitigation trees are needed because that tree removal is in
an Environmentally Sensitive Area which has higher mitigation rates.
Mr. Sullivan mentioned that stormwater management for this project included discharge
to wetland, and inquired if future projects, such as development on the southwest corner
of Hodgson and Lake Drive, were taken into consideration as they might also be
discharging stormwater to the same wetland.
Environmental Board
November 30, 2021
Page 3
DRAFT MINUTES
Mr. Nelson responded that each project has to address stormwater concerns seperately,
which includes rate and volume control for storm events not increasing due to the project.
He also noted that the wetland near this project was in Wetland Management Corridor,
and that efforts are made to avoid impacts to these wetlands.
Mr. Sullivan noted that the project seems like a good fit for the area, provided the buffers,
screening, and other landscape measures are in place.
Ms. Holmes wanted to confirm that the project is essentially clearing the site of all trees
and any new plantings will consist of new young trees with few, if any, existing trees
remaining.
Mr. Nelson remarked that it is a drastic change in the appearance of a site when the initial
tree removals are done, but when looking at the long term plan for the site there will be
new native plantings and a diverse set of tree species on site.
Mr. Parsons inquired on the process of how the canopy cover requirements are met and if
they are based on mature size of the trees.
Mr. Nelson stated that the coverage requirements come straight from city zoning
ordinances, including details such as the height of the tree and the location of the tree in
relation to surrounding hardscape. It is generally up to project architects to solve the
requirements and the city can work through requirements with them.
Mr. Sullivan asked for clarification on the stormwater management and grading for the
parking lot.
Mr. Nelson states that the majority of runoff water will infiltrate on site before reaching
stormwater inlets on Blue Heron Lake or the wetland.
Ms. Cavegn made a MOTION to approve the recommendations. Motion was supported
by Mr. Parsons. Motion carried 5 – 0.
B. Conditional Use Permit for Precision Tune Auto Care
Mr. Nelson presented a staff report that included a detailed discription of the site’s
characteristics.
Staff recommended the Conditional use Permit for Precision Tune Auto Care be
forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council with the following
recommendations:
1. Mulch used for stabilization shall be type 3 certified noxious weed free mulch. Minnesota
Crop Improvement Assocation (MCIA) tags must be provided to the City.
2. A concrete washout area should be established on site and identified with a sign.
3. Tree inventory and preservation and mitigation plan must be provided to the city.
Environmental Board
November 30, 2021
Page 4
DRAFT MINUTES
4. Buffer and screen standards have not been met for the west perimeter, as a triangulated,
double row of plants is required. Plants with a shorter mature height (2-3’) should be used
to form this buffer.
5. Canopy cover requirements have not been met.
6. Foundation landscape standards have not been met. 1 large tree and 3 large shrubs will be
required for the west face of the building.
7. Autumn Blaze maples have poor structure and are prone to defects. Replace Autumn
Blaze maple with another variety of maple or another species.
8. The landscape details indicate MnDOT 33-261 will be used for the stormwater
management areas, but MnDOT 33-262 is indicated on the C7 details page. This should
be changed to match the landscape details page (33-261).
9. The landscape plan indicates sod will be used in all areas not planted with MnDOT 33-
261, but the C7 details page indicates MnDOT 25-131, low maintenance turf seed.
Clarify which of the two turf types will be used and ensure plans match.
10. Irrigation should only be needed for the areas with turf, trees, or shrubs. The stormwater
seed mix areas should not require irrigation.
Mr. Parsons asked about the known flow of stormwater to the city system and if there
was an estimation of what increase could be expected with this project.
Mr. Nelson stated that the Engineering department looks through the project plans with
more detail.
Mr. Sullivan asked how deep the project’s catch basins are.
Mr. Nelson answered by showing the contour lines that indicate elevation details.
Mr. Sullivan wanted to know if the stormwater pollution prevention plan mentioned rain
gardens or rain guardians.
Mr. Nelson responsed that rain guardians would be used and briefly described them.
Mr. Sullivan recommended that the Board take a trip to see some of these features in the
future.
Mr. Parsons asked if the trees that needed to be mitigated were part of the hardcover
canopy or if they were separate.
Mr. Nelson stated that they are separate. They are based on removals and where those
removals occurred. Some of the planted trees can overlap to fulfill more than one
requirement. He added that he will have to take another look at the calculations before
the final recommendations are sent to the applicant.
Mr. Sullivan asked about the process of having an applicant pay a fee in lieu of planting a
tree where there isn’t room for one on site.
Environmental Board
November 30, 2021
Page 5
DRAFT MINUTES
Mr. Nelson stated he hasn’t brought the fee up in the past because it is generally a last
resort option. Most sites usually have enough land but this site is particuarly small,
leaving little space for grading and elevation changes that would not provide much room
to replace a tree. The option that may make more sense would be to use a mitigation fee.
The fee would be the same as developers for boulevard trees at $485 per tree.
Mr. Sullivan wanted to know if lighting was part of the Board’s concern.
Mr. Nelson stated that the city planner looks into the outdoor lighting. There is a certain
threshold of light that cannot be exceed at the property line. This is a concern that the
City Planner will address.
Ms. Holmes mentioned that lighting issues had been covered in previous presentations,
particularly when projects were close to residential areas.
Mr. Sullivan asked that a description of how lighting issues are addressed with projects
be included in a future presentation.
Mr. Nelson confirmed that he would provide more info.
They would like to understand how the City Planner decides the implementation of light
pollution concerns on projects.
Ms. Cavegn wanted to know more about the concrete washout areas.
Mr. Nelson explained that, in accordance with the requirements for the storm water
pollution prevention plan, the project is required to have an area set aside with a sign
indicating that it is a concrete washout area. The idea is that none of the business’s rinsate
will enter the stormwater system when the employees are cleaning their tools. There is a
dedicated area to let concrete dry and prepared to be taken offsite. Mismanaged concrete
can change the pH levels in the soil and can effect tree plantings within the boulevard.
Ms. McNulty MOTIONED to approve the staff recommendations. Motion was supproted
by Ms. Holmes. Motion passed 5 – 0.
VII. UPDATES
A. Program Updates
Mr. Nelson provided an update on the Rainbow Tree Injection program that was
approved by the Environmental Board and City Council. The City had 163 resident
trees treated through the program. A total of 100 city trees were treated as well. In
total, 263 trees were treated.
Environmental Board
November 30, 2021
Page 6
DRAFT MINUTES
B. Recycling Updates
Mr. Davis shared an update on the November Recycling Saturday event. There were a
total of 220 residents for recycling and 60 residents for paper shredding. This was one
of the busiest events of the year.
The dates for recycling events in 2022 have been finalized and residents can look
forward to receiving a postcard in the mail within the first two weeks of January.
Anoka County’s Recycling Ambassador program will start again next spring. If
members of the Board are interested in learning more about the program, Mr. Davis
will provide updates on the class in the future.
Staff have begun planning for the Earth Day event at Wargo Nature Center. The event
will be discussed in a future Environmental Board meeting.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Holmes made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 7:43 p.m. Motion was supported
by Ms. Cavegn. Motion carried 5 - 0.
1
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 6A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Andy Nelson, Environmental Coordinator
MEETING DATE: January 4th, 2022
REQUEST: NorthPointe 8th Addition – NorthPointe Garden
Estates Final Plat and Site Plan and Building
Review
APPLICANT: Lino Lakes 72, LLC
Attn: James E. Illies
175 7th Avenue South
Waite Park, MN 56387
OWNER: Tony Emmerich Construction
Attn: Baleen Roberts
227th Street Court North
Forest Lake, MN 55025
BACKGROUND
The applicant, Lino Lakes 72, LLC, is final platting a 4.5 acre parcel for the purpose of
constructing a 72 unit, 55+ age restricted independent senior housing building called
NorthPointe Garden Estates. The name of the final plat is NorthPointe 8th Addition.
This staff report is based on review of the following submittals:
• INH Project Description
• ALTA Survey prepared by Carlson McCain, dated 11-12-21
• Final Plat for NorthPointe 8th Addition prepared by Carlson McCain, dated 12-13-
21
• Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Carlson McCain, dated
12-10-21
• Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Carlson McCain, dated 12-10-21
• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan prepared by Carlson McCain, dated 12-10-
21
• Landscape Plan prepared by Carlson McCain, dated 12-10-21
• Wetland Delineation Report prepared by Kjolhaug Environmental Services
Company, Inc., dated 9-08-21.
2
• Lighting Plan prepared by Luma Sales Associates, dated 12-09-21
ANALYSIS
General Site Characteristics
Per the applicant’s narrative, the proposed project is a 55+ age restricted senior housing
building constructed on a 4.5 acre parcel zoned for Planned Unit Development. The
project consists of a 3-story, 72 unit building constructed over a one story, at-grade
parking garage providing one parking space per unit, with an additional 73 open-air
parking stalls.
Several amenities will also be offered, including a community room, fitness center, mail
and package lockers, woodshop, game room, and salon. There will be a variety of one
and two bedroom floor plans available. The building is estimated to be open for
occupancy by August 2023.
Stormwater will flow to two wet sedimentation basins, both of which outlet to a large
wetland northwest of the parcel.
Land Cover
Pre-settlement land cover (Marschner) was wet prairie. Wet prairie is typically
dominated by grasses, with some sedges present and less forbs than are found in mesic
prairie. In the absence of fire, wet prairie will have higher concentrations of trees and
shrubs.
Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) data indicates the following land
cover types: not planted on hydric soils, spruce and fir trees on upland soils, floodplain
forest, saturated graminoid vegetation, upland soils – cropland, and medium-tall grass
altered/non-native dominated grassland.
Most of the trees on the parcel are red pine, Scotch pine, and blue spruce in a row on the
east perimeter. Quaking aspen, American elm, hawthorn, and a bur oak are present to
either side of the wetland in the south portion of the lot.
Rare, Unique, or Significant Resources
A Natural Heritage Information System request was submitted to the MN DNR for the
entire 2005 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), and in the subsequent updates
to the AUAR at 5 year intervals. These data requests identify any rare, threatened,
endangered, or special concern species that have been documented within one mile of the
area in question.
Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) have been documented within a one-mile
radius of the site. The DNR fact sheets on this species must be provided to all contractors
3
working on the site. Natural-netting type erosion blanket must be used where blanket is
needed. Surmountable curb sections should be added to provide connectivity between
the wetland in the south of the site and the larger wetland to the northwest.
The wetland northwest of the project site is significant, with buffer areas around it
receiving native seed and establishment work associated with earlier additions of
NorthPointe. Utilizing Mn DOT type 3 mulch with Minnesota Crop Improvement
Association tags will minimize the risk of invasive and/or noxious weed species being
introduced in proximity to these restored native plant areas.
No impacts are proposed to the smaller wetland on the south portion of the project parcel.
No additional environmental assessments are required.
Soils
Soil types according to the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey
Geographic Database include: Hayden fine sandy loam with 2-6% slopes, Hayden fine
sandy loam with 12-24% slopes, and small sections of Rifle mucky peat in the far north
and west corners of the site.
The Hayden fine sandy loam is a non-hydric soil in hydrologic group B, which has
moderate infiltration rate, is moderately well-drained to well-drained, and has moderate
rate of water transmission.
Rifle mucky peat is a hydric soil type in hydrologic group A/D, which has a high
infiltration rate when drained, and a very slow infiltration rate when undrained.
Nine soil borings were performed in 2013 related to the entire NorthPointe subdivision,
though only one was performed near the proposed senior housing facility. This boring
detected silty clay and organic matter in approximately the first foot, with sandy lean clay
with traces of gravel from the topsoil to 21 feet. Groundwater was not detected in this
boring.
Stormwater Management
A stormwater management plan has been submitted and will receive a full review by the
Engineering Department. The following summary review is based upon the same
stormwater management plan and drainage calculations.
The majority of stormwater on the site currently drains to wet sedimentation pond 200P,
which is outside the site boundary to the west; wet sedimentation pond 300P, which is in
the northern portion of the site; and Wetland 1P, which is just west of the site. This
wetland outlets to Ditch 3P, which heads northeast to a larger wetland complex east of
35E, and ultimately to Peltier Lake.
4
Development of the 4.503 acres site includes 1.98 acres of hardscape (44%) and 2.52
acres of pervious surface (56%). For the R-4 zoning district, impervious surface shall not
exceed 65%. The site as proposed is in compliance with the impervious surface
requirement.
Existing Conditions
Per the stormwater management plan, the site was partially graded as part of the mass
grading for the NorthPointe master plan of development. At that time, two wet
sedimentation basins were constructed to provide rate control and water quality treatment
for the proposed site.
Proposed Conditions
Stormwater for the proposed conditions will mostly flow to the existing wet
sedimentation ponds 200P and 300P. These ponds will overflow to Wetland 1P, which
outlets to Ditch 3P. Ultimately, all stormwater outlets to Ditch 3P. An outlet control
structure will be constructed for Pond 300P as part of this project.
No impacts are proposed to the wetland in the south.
The rates for Pond 200P include increases from the rates included in the Master Plan for
the NorthPointe Development, and decreases for Pond 300P. All water ultimately flows
to Ditch 3P, which did see a slight increase for the 10-year storm event and decreases for
the 2- and 100-year storm events from the calculations included in the Master Plan. The
stormwater management plan notes that this increase is not significant enough to affect
downstream conveyances.
5
The water quality treatment for the proposed conditions will not be affected by the slight
variations from the overall plan for NorthPointe.
Stormwater Pollution Prevention
The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) notes the locations of several Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be installed to minimize erosion and sediment
leaving the site.
These BMPs include a rock construction entrance, silt fence (including redundant silt
fence in the proximity of the wetland to the south), inlet protections, riprap for energy
dissipation at pipe outfalls, and a concrete washout area.
Being that this site is within one mile of an impaired water, Clearwater Creek,
stabilization of exposed soil areas must be initiated immediately after construction
activity ceases and be completed within 7 days after the construction activity in that area
permanently ceases. This is noted in the applicant’s SWPPP.
Flood Plain
Site does fall within the flood management zone. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) issued a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) in 2016 in relation to the
entire NorthPointe development. A LOMR is a letter from FEMA that officially revises
the current flood maps to show changes to floodplains, regulatory floodways, or flood
elevations. The revised flood elevations may impact building design and determine how
the City floodplain ordinance should be applied.
The LOMR effectively reduces the size of the floodplain to account for water
management in stormwater ponds, stormwater conveyances, and wetlands.
The Engineering Department will be reviewing any floodplain-related implications for
the proposed plan.
Shoreland District
Site does not fall within Shoreland District.
Greenway System
Greenway system improvements were added in the vicinity of this site during the
construction of earlier NorthPointe additions. The site, both in current conditions and
under the proposed conditions for this project, is an example of a multi-functional
greenway corridor. There is land provided for park, trails, wetlands and native vegetative
buffers, stormwater management features, and open space.
There are no additional Greenway-related concerns for this site.
6
Wetlands
Per the Wetland Delineation Report, a 0.085 acre wetland area was delineated within the
project boundary at the south end of the parcel. This area was classified as shallow
marsh and wet meadow, with reed canary grass, lake sedge, woolgrass, and arrowleaf
tearthumb present.
No impacts to this wetland are proposed.
This wetland is currently noted as being part of the Wetland Management Corridor
(WMC), so a vegetated buffer with an average width of 50 ft. and a minimum width of 25
ft. will be required per Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) rules.
The applicant has requested that RCWD reevaluate the status of this wetland, proposing
that it should not be included in WMC due to the fact the area in the original buffer does
not drain to this wetland and thus would not provide additional wetland protection. The
applicant also notes that this wetland is not connected to the larger WMC wetland. If the
wetland is withdrawn from the WMC, the City standard 10 foot vegetated buffer would
suffice, which would provide more green space to be used by the residents for gardening.
See attached wetland buffer exhibit.
If RCWD determines that the wetland should remain as part of WMC with the same
buffer dimensions required, there is the possibility that buffer area could be added to the
west to accommodate the parking lot as designed without impacting the total buffer area.
Rice Creek Watershed District will be reviewing this and issuing a decision at a later
date.
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Considerations
The site is within the AUAR environmental review boundary. The project is consistent
with Land Use Scenario 1 for medium density residential development.
A noise study will be required for this project.
No further environmental review is required.
Drinking Water Protection
The site is in the Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) and is highly
vulnerable. Aquifer vulnerability assessments determine which potential contaminant
sources must be managed in DWSMAs. In highly vulnerable areas, all land uses and
potential contaminant sources, including wells and tanks must be managed. This site will
be connected to City water and sewer. Infiltration potential is limited or prohibited in
highly vulnerable areas in the DWSMA. The proposed ponds are wet sedimentation
ponds.
7
LANDSCAPE PLAN
Tree Preservation and Mitigation Standards
The purpose of these standards is to protect valuable trees and stands of vegetation while
not interfering with landowners’ reasonable use and development of property. The goal
is to minimize unnecessary loss of habitat, biodiversity, and forest resources and to
replace removed trees in areas where tree cover is most critical.
The Tree Preservation Plan calls for preserving 22 of 55 trees inventoried.
The plan calls for removals of 33 trees of 55 trees inventoried. All of the removals are in
Basic Use Areas, which are within grading limits, or associated with construction of a
retaining wall on the east perimeter.
Removals:
Basic Use Area Natural Resource
Protected Area
Non-Environmentally
Sensitive Area
Mitigation Trees
Required
27 No 27 0
6 6 No 2
27 of the removals are in Basic Use Area, and non-environmentally sensitive areas.
These removals will not require mitigation trees.
The other 6 removals are in Basic Use Area and Natural Resource Protected Area. These
trees require 1 mitigation tree for every 2 trees removed. In this case, three of these trees
are undesirable, due to being in poor condition or being an invasive species. The other 3
trees require mitigation at the rate of 1 mitigation tree per 2 trees removed, resulting in 2
mitigation trees being required for the project.
The 2 green ash (T1040 and T1041) should be added to the removals list.
Any trees to be preserved must be protected as described in the Tree Protection Fence
Detail. This detail plate should be added to the details sheet in the plans.
Mitigation trees have been credited through open space plantings.
Preservation and mitigation standards have been met.
Open Areas Landscape Standards
The purpose of these standards is to provide general site beautification and high aesthetic
quality with a mix of plant materials in open areas. Open area landscape standards call
for 1 large tree and 3 large shrubs per 2000 sq. ft.
The following substitutions are allowable:
1 large tree = 1.5 medium or 2 small trees
8
1 large shrub = 1.5 medium or 3 small shrubs
109,831 sq. ft. of open space calls for: 55 large trees
165 large shrubs
Provided: 61 large trees or large tree equivalents
115 large shrubs or large shrub equivalents
Existing trees are credited at the following rates:
There are 23 large trees worth (14 actual trees) of existing tree credit for trees being
saved in the northeast corner near the stormwater pond and in the southwest near the
wetland. Trees that were noted in the Preservation Plan as being saved that did not
receive existing tree credit include prohibited species (ash, Blue spruce, cottonwood) and
two dead trees.
The additional 38 large trees or large tree equivalents are in the common area, near the
north stormwater pond, and on the west perimeter of the site.
While 166 large shrub or large shrub equivalents were planted site-wide, they are not all
applicable by placement. The 115 large shrubs or large shrub equivalents in the common
area in the center of the building all count towards open space standards (sheet L2), as do
the shrubs in the accent sign planting.
The plants in foundation landscape zone and vehicular hardscape area do not count
towards open space standards (sheet L3). The rest of the shrubs planted are in these two
areas.
Note that from the planting schedule, 14 plants were categorized as large shrubs, 176 as
medium shrubs, and 105 as small shrubs. Swapping some of the smaller plants for larger
varieties would save considerably on planting quantities.
Open areas landscape standards have not been met. 50 additional shrubs will be needed
in open space areas.
9
Buffer and Screen Standards
The purpose of this requirement is to separate and buffer different land use types, screen
roads and parking, and screen utility and loading areas. Continuous, year-round planting
screens require, at the minimum, a double row of plants with triangulated spacing.
Buffer and/or screen will be required along the east lot line. The retaining wall will
satisfy part of the requirements. Planting an additional 4 trees and 5 large shrubs will
satisfy the requirements. Note that these plants will also satisfy the foundation landscape
requirements for the northeast building face.
Buffers and screens as planned do not meet the requirements.
Canopy Cover
The purpose of this requirement is to mitigate the effects of vehicular hardscape by
establishing tree canopy cover to intercept rainfall, protect pavement from sun
deterioration, reduce the heat island effect, and improve aesthetics. Canopy cover
standards call for a minimum of 40% canopy coverage.
Vehicular hardscape planned: 37,779 sq. ft.
Canopy cover requirement: 15,112 sq. ft.
Canopy cover provided: 15,425 sq. ft.
Canopy cover requirements have been met.
Foundation Landscaping
The purpose of these standards is to soften and enhance building architecture, define
access points, add color and seasonal interest, and to blend buildings in with the natural
environment. These standards apply to building fronts and sides facing public or private
streets.
2 large trees and 6 large shrubs are required per 100 linear feet of building. These plants
should be within 30 feet of the building.
The following substitutions are allowable:
1 large tree = 1.5 medium or 2 small trees
1 large shrub = 1.5 medium or 3 small shrubs
The applicable building faces are the southwest side facing Chestnut Street
(approximately 120 ft.), and the east side facing 35E (approximately 315 ft.).
The foundation plantings required for the southwest side:
Required: 2 large trees 7 large shrubs
Provided: 4 large tree equivalents 23 large shrub equivalents
10
The foundation plantings required for the east side:
Required: 6 large trees 19 large shrubs
Provided: 2 large tree equivalents and 14 large shrubs equivalents
4 large trees and 5 large shrubs should be planted east of the retaining wall along the
northeast section of building that runs parallel with the lot line.
The foundation landscape requirements have not been met for the east building face.
Sod and Ground Cover Standards
All areas not otherwise improved in accordance with the approved site plans shall have a
minimum depth of 4 inches of topsoil and be sodded including boulevard areas. Seed
may be provided in lieu of sod in certain cases, including when the area is adjacent to
natural areas or wetlands.
The plan indicates sod in the common area in the center of the building, along the east
and west building faces, and along the south edge of the parking lot and access road.
Mn DOT seed mix 34-271, wet meadow, is indicated for the disturbed areas near the two
stormwater ponds, and east of the retaining wall that runs along the east building face.
Mn DOT seed mix 35-241, mesic prairie, is indicated for the disturbed area south of pond
300, and disturbed area near the wetland in the south of the parcel.
Due to the area east of the retaining wall being higher in elevation, on sandy soil, and
being quite exposed, a dry prairie mix should be better suited than the wet meadow mix
proposed.
Outdoor Lighting
Per Section 1007.043(6)(d), no light source shall exceed 1.0 foot candle onto right of way
or 0.4 foot candle onto adjacent property. The site photometric plan shows 5 light poles
in the parking lot that are 25 ft. tall with downlit and cutoff light fixtures.
The foot-candle measurements, light poles and fixtures meet ordinance requirements.
Noise
The 2020 AUAR Mitigation Plan states:
• Require project proposers to follow all appropriate guidelines and policies related
to traffic noise and noise walls.
11
• Require that site plans for each of the developments include measures such as
appropriate setback distances, earthen berms, noise walls, and appropriate site
design to reduce the impact of traffic noise to residential areas.
A Traffic Noise Assessment was completed on April 25, 2014 by David Braslau
Associates, Inc. as part of the original NorthPointe residential development. The study
noted plans for a senior housing facility on this outlot were not available and not
addressed in the assessment. A separate noise assessment for that project will have to be
completed once specific plans are available.
The applicant shall submit a noise study related to the NorthPointe Garden Estates
development.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the NorthPointe 8th Addition and NorthPointe Garden Estates final plat
and site and building plan review be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Board and
City Council with the following comments:
1. Blanding’s turtle flyer and factsheet shall be distributed to all contractors working on the site. 2. MnDOT type 3N or 4N bio-netting or natural netting erosion control blanket should be used where blanket is necessary for stabilization to minimize wildlife impacts. 3. Surmountable curb sections should be added in the vicinity of the blue highlights below to allow for passage of wildlife (turtles).
12
4. A noise study will be required.
5. Trees to be preserved must have tree protection fence installed as described in the
City Tree Protection Fence Detail. This should be added to the details sheet in the
plans and referenced in the landscape specifications.
6. Two green ash (T1040 and T1041) should be added to the removals list. These
trees will not require mitigation trees to be planted.
7. Plant quantities should be indicated on landscape plan sheets.
8. Open area landscape standards require an additional 50 large shrubs to be planted
in open areas, preferably in the open space near pond 300, in the sodded area near
the wetland buffer, or along the east perimeter.
9. Foundation landscape standards have not been met. An additional 4 large trees
and 5 large shrubs will be required for the northeast building face, east of the
retaining wall.
10. Buffer and Screen requirements have not been met. The plants added for the
foundation landscape standards will also satisfy the buffer and screen
requirements.
13
11. Mn DOT 34-27, a wet meadow seed mix, is specified for the east perimeter. A
seed mix, such as 35-221 Dry Prairie General, should be more suitable to the
high, dry conditions in this specific area.
12. All native seeding is subject to the City Native Plant Establishment Requirements.
This should be noted in the landscape specifications.
13. Mulch used for stabilization should be type 3, with MCIA tags provided to the
City at time of install. This should be noted in the landscape specifications.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Aerial Photo
2. ALTA Survey
3. Site Plan (C3)
4. Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan (sheet C5)
5. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (C6)
6. Wetland Buffer Exhibit
7. Tree Preservation Plan
8. Landscape Plan (Sheets L1-L4 )
Northpointe Garden Estates
Legend
Parcels
December 27, 2021
Map Powered By DataLink
1 in = 376 ft
±
"N
O
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
S
O
B
S
E
R
V
E
D
"1CHESTNUT STREET2INT
E
R
S
T
A
T
E
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
N
O
.
3
5
E816 14161688Zone AEZone AEZone AEZone XofALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY
COLE GROUP ARCHITECTS, LLC
216 Park Avenue South, Suite 102
St. Cloud, MN 56301REVISIONS1.2.3.4.5.6.DRAWN BY:FILE NO:bjs2372PROPOSED NORTHPOINTE APARTMENTS
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
f:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\survey\9669_alta-2021.dwgSave Date:11/11/21 ISSUE DATE:11/12/21OUTLOT A,NORTHPOINTE 5TH ADDITION,ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA~ of ~R
E
V
I
E
W
C
O
P
Y VICINITY MAP11D R A F TLEGEND8116142
C3SITE PLANKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRf:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\engineering\9669_site.dwgSave Date:12/09/21of9 REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR12/10/21Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:45889I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State of Minnesota1. LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
GRADING, DRAINAGE, &
EROSION CONTROL PLANC5Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRf:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\engineering\9669_grade.dwgSave Date:12/09/21of9 REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR12/10/21Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:45889I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State of Minnesota1. LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
C6STORMWATER POLLUTION
PREVENTION PLANKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR f:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\engineering\9669_swppp.dwgSave Date:12/09/21of9 REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR12/10/21Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:45889I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State of Minnesota1. LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
WETLAND BUFFER EXHIBITNotes:f:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\engineering\9669_drain_alt.dwgSave Date:12/09/21
03060120NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATESLino Lakes, MinnesotaLINO LAKES 72, LLC175 7th Avenue SWaite Park, MN 56387
TP1TREE PRESERVATION PLANKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRf:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\landscape\9669_tree preservation.dwgSave Date:12/10/21of REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:12/10/21Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:1. Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.RJRRJR1LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
6BH3SB6FM2KC2CA1CA4HL4PD10BF1HO2SB4BL3WP4RM1HO3OB5BL4WO1SB3JL3RM2KC2KCL1LANDSCAPE PLANKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRf:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\landscape\9669_landscape.dwgSave Date:12/10/21of REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:12/10/21Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:1. Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.RJRRJR4LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
f:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\landscape\9669_landscape.dwgSave Date:12/10/21of REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:12/10/21Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:1. Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.RJRRJR4LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, MinnesotaL2LANDSCAPE PLANPLANTREE WRAPBACKFILL MIXPAINTED FLUORESCENT ORANGEWHITE FLAGGING (TYP.)DOUBLE STRAND 12 GAUGE WIRE8" 2-PLY NYLON STRAPS8' STEEL TEE POST-4 INCHES HARDWOOD MULCHFROM TOP 1/3 OF THE BALLREMOVE BURLAP & ROPEUNDISTURBED SUBSOIL4 INCH DEEP SAUCERNOTE: SEE PLANTING NOTES FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH MATERIAL TO USE.12"6"
2'(MIN.)
6"
6"3 REQUIRED AT 120EXISTING GRADEGUY WIRE WITH WEBBINGFLAGGING- ONE PER WIREPLANTING SOIL MIXTURE (SEE SPEC.)MINIMUM 1/2 WIDTH OF ROOT BALL4"-6" SHREDDED BARKMULCHUNDISTURBED OR STABILIZEDSUBSOILNOTE: GUY ASSEMBLY OPTIONAL BUTCONTRACTOR ASSUMES FULLRESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTAINING TREEIN A PLUMB POSITION FOR THEDURATION OF THE GUARANTEE PERIODGUY ASSEMBLY- 16"POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE(40 MIL) 1-1/2" WIDE STRAP (TYP)DOUBLE STRAND 10 GA. WIRE, 2-7"ROLLED STEEL POSTS (MnDOT 3401)@ 180° O.C. (SEE STAKING DIAGRAM)COORDINATESTAKING TO INSUREUNIFORMORIENTATION OF GUYLINES AND STAKES2. TRIM OUT DEAD WOOD AND WEAK AND/ORDEFORMED TWIGS. DO NOT CUT A LEADER. DONOT PAINT CUTS.4. PLACE PLANT IN PLANTING HOLE WITHBURLAP AND WIRE BASKET, (IF USED), INTACT.BACKFILL WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 12" OF THETOP OF ROOTBALL, WATER PLANT. REMOVETOP 1/3OF THE BASKET OR THE TOP TWOHORIZONTAL RINGS, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.REMOVE ALL BURLAP AND NAILS FROM TOP1/3 OF THE BALL. REMOVE ALL TWINE.3. SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOILOR THOROUGHLY COMPACTED BACKFILL SOIL.INSTALL PLANT SO THE ROOT FLARE IS AT ORUP TO 2" ABOVE THE FINISHED GRADE.6. WATER TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILLVOIDS.5. PLUMB AND BACKFILL WITHBACKFILL SOIL.7. WATER WITHIN TWO HOURS OFINSTALLATION. WATERING MUST BESUFFICIENT TO THOROUGHLY SATURATEROOT BALL AND PLANTING HOLE.8. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OFTHE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOILMOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE.1. SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLEPRIOR TO PLANTING2'(MIN.)
6"12"UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL( SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES FOR TYPE OF MULCH )REMOVE BURLAP & ROPEFROM TOP 1/3 OF BALLIF SHRUB IS B & B, THENBACKFILL MIX4 INCHES MULCH
f:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\landscape\9669_landscape.dwgSave Date:12/10/21of REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:12/10/21Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:1. Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.RJRRJR4LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, MinnesotaL3LANDSCAPE PLAN
TREESCODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERRM 7Acer rubrum `Northwood`Northwood Red Maple2" Cal.B&BFM6Acer x freemanii `Sienna`Sienna Glen Maple2" Cal.B&BHL 4Gleditsia triacanthos inermis `Harve`Northern Acclaim Thornless Honey Locust2" Cal.B&BKC6Gymnocladus dioica `Espresso`Kentucky Coffeetree2" Cal.B&BWO 4Quercus bicolorSwamp White Oak2" Cal.B&BHO 2Quercus x macdanielii `Clemons` TMHeritage Oak2" Cal.B&BBL9Tilia americana `Boulevard`Boulevard Linden2" Cal.B&BCONIFEROUS TREES CODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERBF10 Abies balsameaBalsam Fir6` Ht.B&BBH6Picea glauca densataBlack Hills Spruce6` Ht.B&BWP3Pinus strobusWhite Pine6` Ht.B&BORNAMENTAL TREES CODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINEROB3Aesculus glabra 'JN Select' TMEarly Glow Ohio Buckeye1.5" Cal. B&BSB6Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`Clump Form, Red Fall Color, 1.5" CalEquivalentAutumn Brilliance Serviceberry7` Ht.B&BPD 4Cornus alternifolia `Wstackman`Pale Yellow Flowers, Maroon Fall ColorGolden Shadows Pagoda Dogwood1.5" Cal. B&BCA3Malus x `Prairifire`Red FlowersPrairifire Crabapple1.5" Cal. B&BJL 3Syringa reticulata `Ivory Silk`White FlowersIvory Silk Japanese Tree Lilac1.5" Cal. B&BSHRUBSCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERBCB8Aronia melanocarpa `Autumn Magic`Autumn Magic Black Chokeberry#5 Cont.SSC20Clethra alnifolia `Hummingbird`Summersweet#5 Cont.RTD25Cornus sericea `Alleman`s Compact`Dwarf Red Twig Dogwood#5 Cont.DBH19Diervilla loniceraDwarf Bush Honeysuckle#5 Cont.ABH 22Hydrangea arborescens `Annabelle`Annabelle Hydrangea#5 Cont.NBS 2Physocarpus opulifolius `Seward` TMSummer Wine Seward Ninebark#5 Cont.LLA 11Rhododendron x `Lemon Lights`Lemon Lights Azalea#5 Cont.APC16Ribes alpinumAlpine Currant#5 Cont.SPG30Spiraea x bumalda `Goldflame`Gold Foliage, Red FlowersGoldflame Spirea#5 Cont.MKL6Syringa patula `Miss Kim`Miss Kim Lilac#5 Cont.VBC10Viburnum trilobum `Bailey Compact`Red Fall ColorBailey`s Compact American Cranberry Bush#5 Cont.EVERGREEN SHRUBS CODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZECONTAINERGVB75Buxus x 'Green Velvet'Green Velvet Boxwood#5 Cont.JSG21Juniperus chinensis `Sea Green`Sea Green Juniper#5 Cont.YEW 24Taxus x media `Tauntonii`Tauton Yew#5 Cont.ARB 2Thuja occidentalis `Techny`Techny Arborvitae#5 Cont.PLANT SCHEDULEGRASSESCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERKFG32Calamagrostis x acutiflora `Karl Foerster`Feather Reed Grass#2 Cont.LBS33Schizachyrium scopariumLittle Bluestem#2 Cont.PDS 22Sporobolus heterolepisPrairie Dropseed#2 Cont.PERENNIALSCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERNEA 22Aster novae-angliae `Purple Dome`Purple Dome New England Aster#1 Cont.MBC 14Coreopsis x `Moonbeam`Moonbeam Coreopsis#1 Cont.PCF38Echinacea purpurea `Prairie Splendor` Prairie Splendor Coneflower#1 Cont.DLB67Hemerocallis x `Baja`Red FlowersBaja Daylily#1 Cont.DLS57Hemerocallis x `Stella De Oro`Yellow / Gold FlowersStella De Oro Daylily#1 Cont.SGF52Liatris spicata `Kobold`Purple FlowersSpike Gayfeather#1 Cont.WLC61Nepeta x faassenii `Walkers Low`Walkers Low Catmint#1 Cont.LRS19Perovskia atriplicifolia `Little Spire`Little Spire Russian Sage#1 Cont.BES55Rudbeckia fulgida `Goldsturm`Goldsturm Coneflower#1 Cont.SCS18Sedum spectabile `Autumn Joy`Stonecrop#1 Cont.GROUND COVERS CODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERDG1,266 sfDecomposed GraniteCompacted, Non-Woven Geotextile IncidentalDecomposed Granite4" DepthROCK6,405 sfRock MulchNon-Woven Geotextile Incidental1.5" Trap Rock Mulch4" DepthSOD60,261 sfTurf Sod BluegrassKentucky BluegrasssodTII12,626 sfType II - Wet Meadow Seed MixRefer to notes for acceptable seedingmethods. Seeding Rate 18.0 lb/acMnDOT Seed Mix 34-271seedTIV7,695 sfType IV - Native Seed MixRefer to notes for acceptable seedingmethods. Seeding Rate 50.0 lb/acMnDOT Seed Mix 35-241seedf:\jobs\9661 - 9680\9669 - northpointe apartments - lino lakes\cad c3d\landscape\9669_landscape.dwgSave Date:12/10/21of REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:12/10/21Name:Signature:Date: 12/10/21 License #:1. Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the State of Minnesota.RJRRJR4LINO LAKES 72, LLC
175 7th Avenue S
Waite Park, MN 56387 NORTHPOINTE GARDEN ESTATES
Lino Lakes, MinnesotaL4LANDSCAPE PLAN
1
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 6B
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Andy Nelson, Environmental Coordinator
MEETING DATE: January 4th, 2022
REQUEST: Robinson Farms PUD Concept Plan Review
APPLICANT: Integrate Properties, LLC.
Attn: Ian Peterson
6980 Sand Ridge Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
OWNER: Harold Robinson
310 Main Street
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
BACKGROUND
The applicant submitted a land use application for a Planned Unit Development Concept
Plan review. The proposed development is a master planned residential community
located on the Robinson Farm property south of CSAH 14 (Main Street) and east of CR
53 (Sunset Avenue). The site contains 4 parcels totaling approximately 160 gross acres
and consists of a mix of housing types totaling 707 housing units. Home construction is
anticipated to begin in July of 2023.
This staff report is based on review of the following submittals:
• Existing Conditions Survey prepared by Alliant Engineering, Inc., dated 10-29-21
• Concept Plan and Submittal Narrative prepared by Alliant Engineering, Inc.,
dated 12-13-21
• Site Rendering Graphic prepared by Alliant Engineering, Inc., dated 12-03-21
2
ANALYSIS
History
In October 2006, a concept plan for Robinson Lakes was reviewed at a Council Work
Session. The concept plan included 680 acres of Robinson property located both north
and south of Main Street. The plan included a residential mix of single family, multi-
family and active adult multi-family homes. Lakes, open space and greenway system
with parks and trails were incorporated throughout the development. Unfortunately, due
to the onset of housing recession, this project never moved forward.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The predominant existing land use is agricultural related to Robinson Sod Farm. Public
ditch ACD 10-22-32 and private ditches drain the site south. Wetlands appear in the
National Wetland Inventory along the ditch corridors and the east perimeter of the site.
Land Cover
Pre-settlement land cover (Marschner) was wet prairie. Wet prairie is typically
dominated by grasses, with some sedges present and less forbs than in mesic prairie. In
the absence of fire, wet prairie will have higher concentrations of trees and shrubs.
Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) data indicates mostly sod on
hydric soils and short grasses with 11-25%, 26-50%, and 51-75% impervious cover.
There are some trees (aspens, boxelders, etc.) on the west, south, and southeast
perimeters along the public ditch system.
Soils
Soil types according to the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey
Geographic Database include: Rifle mucky peat, Markey muck, Lino loamy fine sand,
Isanti fine sandy loam, and Zimmerman fine sand. The majority of the site is hydric
soils.
Shoreland District
Site does not fall within Shoreland District.
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Considerations
The site is not within the AUAR environmental review boundary.
3
Drinking Water Protection
The site is not within in the Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA).
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
A majority of the site is in floodplain and mitigation will be utilized for stormwater
management (lakes and ponds), creation of a multi-functional greenway system (parks
and trails) and providing fill for house pads, streets and other upland areas.
Single family detached home neighborhoods are located in the northwest section and
southeast quadrant of the site. The townhome neighborhood is centrally located on the
east side. A gated multi-family rental neighborhood and clubhouse are located in the
northeast quadrant of the site. Trails, sidewalks, stormwater ponds and lakes are included
throughout the development.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Completion of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is required for this
project. The requirement is based upon the calculation below.
Information required in the EAW includes:
• cover types, geology, soils, and topography
• permits and approvals required
• surface water features and impacts, groundwater, wells, and location of impaired
waters within a mile of project
• wetlands, wetland impacts, and potential delineation requirement
• wastewater management
• stormwater: erosion and sediment control, NPDES permit required, Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
• water appropriation, including potential DNR appropriation permit
• shoreland and floodplain ordinance compliance
4
• fish and wildlife resources, including habitat and vegetation near the site; impacts;
and mitigation of impacts
• MN DNR Natural Heritage Information System request (the comprehensive
database of rare features), mitigation measures for plants and animals identified
• contamination/hazardous material/waste management
• air, noise, transportation (traffic) concerns
Rezoning
The property is currently zoned R, Rural. The property would need to be rezoned to
PUD, Planned Unit Development in order to allow for a variety of lot widths and housing
types.
The intent of Planned Unit Development is to provide for the grouping of lots or
buildings for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional
parcel by parcel, piecemeal, or sporadic approach to development. It is intended to
introduce flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land and open
space through clustering of lots, buildings and activities, which promote the goals
outlined in the Comprehensive Plan or serve another public purpose.
The applicant would need to provide additional public benefit in order to be considered
for PUD zoning. Examples could be open space, enhanced greenway corridor, wetland
restoration, additional wetland buffers, higher architectural & building standards etc.
Flood Plain
A large portion of the site does fall within the flood management zone. Floodplain
management shall be incorporated into the overall site design.
A Base Flood Elevation is required to be determined, using detailed methods acceptable
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
A FEMA Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and Letter of Map Revision
(LOMR) are required for this site.
Rare, Unique, or Significant Resources
A Natural Heritage Information System request must be submitted to the MN DNR to
identify any rare, threatened, endangered, or special concern species that have been
documented within one mile of this site. Any species identified as a result of this
information request may indicate additional steps required. This will be addressed in the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet.
5
Stormwater Management
There are 26 acres of ponds noted in the concept plan. Existing ditches and wetlands on
the parcels are currently managing stormwater.
Native vegetation buffers should be included around all ponds.
Greenway System and Trails
The proposed project site is noted in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan as being part of the
Greenway System Plan, with Natural Resource Enhancement Area noted specifically.
This site provides opportunity for the creation of a multi-functional greenway corridor
that incorporates many attributes into one comprehensive design, including:
• Interconnected trail system and parks
• Protected open space and natural areas
• Wetlands, including Wetland Management Corridor and buffers
• Major and minor drainage routes and other elements of the local surface water
management system (including stormwater ponds)
• Floodplain management
Per the 2040 Parks, Greenways and Trails System Plan, local and regional trails are
proposed along both the north and south side of CSAH 14 (Main Street). Additional
trails or sidewalks shall be included to Main Street to provide connectivity to the
development.
A proposed on-street bike route is shown along CSAH 53 (Sunset Avenue).
Pedestrian connection and trails to Sunset Avenue are provided at the street and
northwest corner of the site.
The existing trail in Century Farm North near 7836 Century Trail shall extend to the east
into the development.
A trail to Robinson Drive currently exists between proposed Lots 30-31. This will
provide connectivity to the park land in Century Farm North.
Wetlands
There are wetlands indicated on the proposed project site. A wetland delineation will be
required. Any wetland impacts related to the project will be mitigated for per Rice Creek
Watershed District rules.
The large wetland complex east of this project does extend onto the proposed project
parcels, and is part of the Wetland Management Corridor. A vegetated buffer with an
6
average of 50 ft. and a minimum width of 25 ft. will be required per Rice Creek
Watershed District rules.
LANDSCAPE PLAN
A Tree Survey, Tree Preservation and Mitigation Plan, and Landscape Plan in
compliance with Section 1007.043 (17), Required Screening, Landscaping and Buffer
Yards shall be submitted. Note that additional landscaping may be required as a
condition of the PUD.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the Robinson Property Concept Plan be forwarded to the Planning and
Zoning Board and City Council with the following comments:
1. A multi-functional, cohesive Greenway System plan shall be incorporated into the
development, including trails, open space, natural areas, wetland and buffers,
stormwater management features, and floodplain management.
2. A diverse mix of native plants and plants beneficial to pollinators should be
utilized wherever possible and/or practical. This should include vegetative
buffers around wetlands and stormwater management features, and also in
required open space and landscape plantings.
3. Wider native vegetation buffers should be included adjacent to ponds, including
on rear lot lines.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Aerial Photo
2. Site Rendering
3. Concept Plan
4. Survey (sheets 1-3)
5. Concept Plan Submittal Narrative
Robinson Property
December 29, 2021
Map Powered By DataLink
1 in = 1,505 ft
±
ROBINSON PROPERTY
LINO LAKES, MN
12-3-2021
N
MAIN STREET (C.S.A.H. NO. 14) (PUBLIC)MAIN STREET (C.S.A.H. NO. 14) (PUBLIC)SUNSET AVE (C.R. 53) (PUBLIC)ROBINSON DR (PUBLIC)CARDINAL WAY(PUBLIC)CENTUR
Y
T
R
A
I
L
(
P
U
B
L
I
C
)CARL STREET (PUBLIC)ZONE AZONE AZONE AZONE ACARL STREET (PUBLIC)30201014143506075821'LAKE' 8.0 ACRESPOND - 0.5ACRES112131416068788898PO
N
D
-
0
.
5
AC
R
E
S
POND - 3.1 ACRESPOND - 0.3
ACRES
PO
N
D
-
0
.
6
AC
R
E
S
POND - 1.3
ACRES 11020304045504660708083CLUBPO
N
D
-
0
.
6
AC
R
E
S LAKE - 5.3 ACRESPO
N
D
-
0
.
3
AC
R
E
S POND - 2.3 ACPOND - 2.7 AC23456789111213141516171819212223242526272829313233343536373839404244454647484951525354555657585961 62636465666768697071727374767778798081234567891012131415161718192022232425262728293032333435363738394042434445464748495051525354555657585961626364 65 6667697071727374 75767779808182838485868789909192939495969723456789111213141516171819212223242526 2728 293132333435363738394142434447484951525354555657585961626364656667686971727374757677787981821-45-1213-2021-2829-3233-4041-4445-5253-6061-641-56-10
11-16
17-21
22-26
27-31
32-36
37-4243-4849-5455-6061-6465-70
71-74
75-78
87-90
91-94
95-10079-8283-86DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DSDS DSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DSDS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDS DSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDS DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS DSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDS DSDS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS6G6GSMGP123456891012713116G6GS6GS6GS6GSCLUBHOUSE6G14POND - 0.8
ACRES
POND - 0.5
ACRESROBINSON PROPERTY - CONCEPT PLANLINO LAKES, MINNESOTA733 Marquette Ave, Ste 700Minneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080 612.758.3099www.alliant-inc.comMAINFAXSITE DATAAREAS: 157.054 acres (Per ALTA Survey) + 1.4356 acres (PID:073122220002)TOTAL GROSS AREA OF CONCEPT: 158.490 acresWETLANDS: DITCHES - PUBLIC & PRIVATE PER SURVEYCONCEPT PLAN DETAILS:·LOCAL PUBLIC ROAD TYPICAL SECTION = 60' ROW, 30' B-B·PARKWAY TYPICAL SECTION = 100' ROW, 20' BB w/ 20 MEDIAN·EAST-WEST COLLECTOR = 66' ROW, 36' BB·PRIVATE DRIVE ROADS = 24' BB·RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ASSUMPTIONS··25' FRONT YARD SETBACK··5'/10 OR 7.5'/7.5' SIDE YARD SETBACK··25' SIDE YARD SETBACK TO ROW··50' SETBACK TO COUNTY ROADS (SINGLE FAMILY) SETBACKWETLAND ONSITE ASSUMED AS HIGHEST CLASSIFICATION·TOWNHOME /ROWHOME DETAILS··22' MIN. DRIVEWAY··20' MIN. BUILDING SEPARTION··24' BB PRIVATE DRIVESLOT SUMMARY·65' WIDE LOTS = 98·55' WIDE LOTS = 82·50' WIDE LOTS = 83·ROWHOMES (BACK TO BACK AND ROW) = 64·ROW TOWNHOMES = 100·MULTI FAMILY HOUSING = 280·TOTAL HOUSING UNITS = 710 UNITSREVISION DATE: 12-13-2021DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARYPROPOSED RIGHT OF WAYPROPOSED LOT LINESPROPOSED SETBACKPUBLIC ROADWAYTOP BACK CURB/ROAD EDGE/STRIPINGPRIVATE ROADWAYTOP BACK OF CURB 8' PUBLIC TRAIL5' PUBLIC SIDEWALKPROPOSED POND AREA65' WIDE LOTS55' WIDE LOTS50' WIDE LOTSBACK-BACK ROWHOMESROW TOWNHOMESMULTI-FAMILY HOUSING (CONTINENTAL)LEGEND
S88°10'55"W 2598.53N88°06'43"E 2580.67S00°03'04"W 1327.67 MAIN STREET (C.S.A.H. NO. 14) (PUBLIC)SUNSET AVE (C.R. 53) (PUBLIC)ROBINSON DR (PUBLIC)CARDINAL WAY(PUBLIC)CENTU
R
Y
T
R
A
I
L
(
P
U
B
L
I
C
)733 Marquette Ave, Ste 700Minneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080 612.758.3099www.alliant-inc.comMAINFAXSignatureDate License NumberPrint NamePETER GOERSI hereby certify that this survey, plan, or reportwas prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the state ofMinnesota.LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA310 MAIN STREET10/29/2021PGJDTPG,RS,ELJOB NO.FIELD DATE ISSUEDCHECKED BYSCALEDRAWN BY1"=100'SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETSEXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY21-01801. The basis of bearings based on Anoka County Coordinate System NAD (96 Adj.)2. All distances are in feet.3. The property has vehicular access to Main Street via gravel drives.4. The locations of existing public utilities on or serving the property are depicted based on Gopher State One CallTicket No. 212651615, 212651616, 212651617 & 212651618, available city maps, records and observed evidencelocations. Lacking excavation, underground utility locations may not be exact. Verify critical utilities prior to constructionor design.5. Benchmark: Anoka County benchmark no. 2009, located in the NE 1/4 of Sec. 7, T. 31, R. 22, on the SW corner ofMain Street (C.S.A.H. No. 14) and Fourth Ave located on the NE corner of the fiberglass pad for the electric box andhas an elevation of 902.805 ft (NAVD 88).6. The area of the above described property is: 6,903,837 square feet or 158.490 acres Area minue R/W: 6,627,639 square feet or 152.150 acresNOTESPROPERTY DESCRIPTIONParcel AThe Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota.ANDThe Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, EXCEPT the south 250 ofthe west 250 feet thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota.ANDThe Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota.ANDThe Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota.Abstract PropertyParcel BThe south 250 of the west 250 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 31,Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota.LEGEND44110October 29, 202111-9-2021: TOP OF DITCH ADDED12-10-2021: PARCEL B ADDED
S88°10'59"W 1307.90S00°38'52"W 2646.81 MAIN STREET (C.S.A.H. NO. 14) (PUBLIC)733 Marquette Ave, Ste 700Minneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080 612.758.3099www.alliant-inc.comMAINFAXSignatureDate License NumberPrint NamePETER GOERSI hereby certify that this survey, plan, or reportwas prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the state ofMinnesota.LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA310 MAIN STREET10/29/2021PGJDTPG,RS,ELJOB NO.FIELD DATE ISSUEDCHECKED BYSCALEDRAWN BY1"=100'21-0180SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETSEXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEYLEGEND44110October 29, 202111-9-2021: TOP OF DITCH ADDED12-10-2021: PARCEL B ADDED
N88°02'27"E 1316.36S00°49'39"W 1325.23 CENTURY TRAIL (PUBLIC)CARL STREET (PUBLIC)S00°38'52"W 2646.81CARL STREET (PUBLIC)733 Marquette Ave, Ste 700Minneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080 612.758.3099www.alliant-inc.comMAINFAXSignatureDate License NumberPrint NamePETER GOERSI hereby certify that this survey, plan, or reportwas prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the state ofMinnesota.LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA310 MAIN STREET10/29/2021PGJDTPG,RS,ELJOB NO.FIELD DATE ISSUEDCHECKED BYSCALEDRAWN BY1"=100'21-0180SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETSEXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEYLEGEND44110October 29, 202111-9-2021: TOP OF DITCH ADDED12-10-2021: PARCEL B ADDED
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 1 of 13
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL NARRATIVE
ROBINSON PROPERTY
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
December 13, 2021
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 2 of 13
Integrate Properties, LLC is pleased to submit the Concept Plan for the Robinson Property south of
Main Street. We are interested in obtaining feedback and direction from the Commissions, City
Council and City Staff as the development of this property will leave a legacy in the community.
Included in this narrative are key items from the City Checklist.
DEVELOPMENT TEAM / CONSULTANTS:
Attorney:
Mr. Jeremy Duehr
Fredikson & Byron, PA
200 South Sixth Street, Suite 4000
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Surveyor:
Mr. Peter Goers, PLS
Alliant Engineering, Inc.
733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Land Planning:
Mr. Mark Rausch, PE
Alliant Engineering, Inc.
733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Engineering:
Mr. Mark Rausch, PE
Alliant Engineering, Inc.
733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Wetlands:
Mr. Mark Kjolhaug, PWS
Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc.
2500 Shadywood Road, Suite 130
Orono, MN 55331
Environmental:
Mr. Kevin Hoffman
Braun Intertec
11001 Hampshire Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55438
Geotechnical:
Mr. Henry Vloo, PE
Braun Intertec
11001 Hampshire Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55438
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 3 of 13
PROPERTY / DEVELOPMENT SITE INFORMATION:
Legal Description:
Parcel A
The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
AND
The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, EXCEPT the
south 250 of
the west 250 feet thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota.
AND
The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
AND
The Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel B
The south 250 of the west 250 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7,
Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Address: 310 Main Street, Lino Lakes, MN.
PIDs: Parcel A:
073122220001 = 37.5115 acres
073122210001 = 39.8440 acres
073122120001 = 39.7865 acres
073122130001 = 39.9127 acres
Total Acres “A”: = 157.055 acres
Parcel B:
073122220002 = 1.4356 acres
Total Acres: 158.4903 ac
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 4 of 13
Existing Site Description
The development site is currently in use as part of the Robinson Landscaping, Inc. sod farm
agricultural use. The property also includes a residence and buildings used for operation of the sod
farm. The site topography is very flat with multiple ditches to provide drainage and an irrigation
source.
The property is bound by Main Street (CSAH 14) to the north and Sunset Ave (CR 53) to the west.
We have been working with the Anoka County Highway Department regarding their right of way
needs for each roadway and to request preliminary feedback on potential roadway access points. The
County has indicated roadway access will be made available to the property, and provided a general
guideline for locating new access points as depicted on the Concept Plan. Additionally, the County
has requested 75-feet of Right of Way dedication from the centerline of Main Street and 60-feet of
Right of Way dedication from the centerline of Sunset Avenue; both requests are depicted on the
Concept Plan.
Other roadway access points have been provided to the property through the Century Farm
development to the south at Cardinal Way, Robinson Drive, and Century Trail. Additionally, a
pedestrian trail has been stubbed to the property from Century Farm Addition to the south, just west of
the Cardinal Way street connection.
Adequate public water and sanitary sewer is available to the property from Century Farm development
to the south at Cardinal Way, Robinson Drive, and Century Trail.
The development site has been historically used for agriculture and currently has no significant tree
removal required to construct the development.
Braun Intertec performed a Geotechnical Evaluation Report, dated November 29, 2021, on the site.
The results are summarized below, with peat levels ranging from 0.5-feet to 8-feet in depth and water
levels ranging from 4-feet to 9-feet in depth.
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 5 of 13
Land use and Zoning Designations
The development property is guided for several different land uses within the City’s 2040
Comprehensive Plan including:
• Low Density Residential
• Medium Density Residential
• High Density Residential
• Planned Residential/Commercial.
Land uses for properties adjacent to the site are guided with consistent uses:
• To West: City limits with Blaine (Lino Lakes land use N/A)
• To North: Includes a similar combination of all 4 land uses on the development site
• To East: High density residential and low density residential
• To South: Medium density residential and low density residential.
The development site is currently zoned entirely as R - Rural. The requested zoning for the site will
establish a PUD zoning for the entire development site, compatible and consistent with the City’s
goals and objectives for the property.
The zoning for the properties abutting the site include:
• To West: City limits with Blaine (Lino Lakes zoning N/A)
• To North: R - Rural
• To East: R - Rural
• To South: PUD (mixed residential neighborhood)
DEVELOPMENT FEEDBACK REQUEST
The applicant proposes to provide the City of Lino Lakes with a residential development that includes
a variety of housing options catering to all spectrums of consumers from millennials to empty nesters
to satisfy the market demand. These housing styles will be grouped together within clusters or pods as
follows:
• 50-feet wide single-family lots
• 55-feet wide single-family lots
• 65-feet wide single-family lots
• Row style townhomes
• Back-to-back style townhomes
• Structured multi-family housing
The development will create substantial ponding and lake areas that will be an amenity to the various
housing types proposed within the project. The main County ditch system will be preserved and
protected while the newly created ponding and lakes will provide for stormwater management goals
and infrastructure improvements to the adjacent offsite roadway.
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 6 of 13
The allowable density range for the property is depicted below in the table by both Property ID and by
the Comprehensive Plan Guidance. The density ranges from a minimum of 531 units to a maximum
of 764 units at full development.
The proposed Concept Plan provides for a total of 710 units on the site, which falls within the density
range for the property provided in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Concept Plan provides for the
following diversification of housing types totaling the 710 units:
• 65-feet wide Single Family Lots: 98
• 55-feet wide Single Family Lots: 82
• 50-feet wide Single Family Lots: 83
• Row Townhomes: 100
• Rowhomes (Back to Back & Row): 64
• Structured Multi Family Housing: 280
• TOTAL HOUSING UNITS: 710 UNITS
We believe the proposed development plan is consistent with the City of Lino Lakes goals for the
property. The following is a summary of primary project elements currently proposed:
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 7 of 13
• 710 new housing units with a variety of types, sizes and affordability.
• Infrastructure improvements to adjacent County roadways.
• Public right of way dedication for Main St (CSAH 14) and Sunset Ave (CR 53).
• Preservation of most of the onsite ditch/wetland areas.
• Wetland buffer creation in accordance with requirements where necessary.
• HOA maintained community.
• Extension of sanitary sewer and water main for future development to the north and east.
• Installation of stormwater management facilities to provide volume control, water quality and
rate control for runoff from the new roadway surfaces prior to discharge.
• Extension of public trailways and sidewalks for pedestrian connectivity.
• Extension of collector roadways for regional transportation use.
• Comprehensive development landscape plan with perimeter fencing and landscaping.
HOUSING TYPE EXAMPLES
50’ wide single-family lots
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 8 of 13
55’ wide single-family lots:
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 9 of 13
65’ wide single-family lots:
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 10 of 13
Row style townhomes:
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 11 of 13
Back-to-back style townhomes:
Structured multi-family housing:
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 12 of 13
CONCEPT PLAN SUBMITTAL December 13, 2021
ROBINSON PROPERTY Page 13 of 13
TIMING/PHASING/STAGING
The entire site will be mass graded in one phase to allow for the creation of the storm water ponds and
lakes. Development of the neighborhood clusters with utilities and streets will be completed in
multiple phases based on market demand.
Mass grading is anticipated to begin Winter 2023 with the first phase of utilities and streets completed
by July 2023. Home construction is anticipated to begin July 2023 with a full build out of the
community taking place over four to five years.
CONCLUSION
The applicant respectfully requests feedback and direction on the concept plan and planned unit
development from the Commissions, City Council and City Staff. We believe the concept plan will
allow for a residential land use consistent with City’s goals and objectives for this area and create a
community that will enhance Lino Lakes and the surrounding area.
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Andy Nelson
MEETING DATE: January 4th, 2022
REQUEST: Discussion Only
TOPIC: 2021 Preparing for EAB Grant
Background
Emerald ash borer (EAB), a non-native, invasive beetle that kills ash trees, was first confirmed in
Lino Lakes in 2017. Since then, the rates of infestation and tree mortality have increased rapidly
throughout the city.
Our response to EAB includes removals of boulevard ash trees, replacement of these trees with a
diverse mix of species, and insecticide injections that allow us to stagger removals over time.
We currently remove and replace approximately 30 boulevard ash trees per year. It will take
approximately 10 years to complete removals and replacements at this rate.
Grant Details
The State of Minnesota has made grant funds available for the removal and replacement of ash
trees on public land through the 2021 Preparing for EAB Grant. Staff submitted a grant proposal
for this program that has been approved for funding. To accept these funds, the city must enter
into a contract with the state, ensuring that work is completed as described in the plan.
The City Council approved entering into the contract with the MN DNR at the December 13th,
2021 Council meeting, thus accepting the grant funds.
The plan includes 91 boulevard ash tree removals; 31 removals performed by Parks staff, and 60
removals performed by a contractor. Parks staff will be planting 91 bare root trees as
replacements. The grant funds will cover the 60 contracted removals and stump grinding, the 91
bare root replacement trees, and planting supplies. The 25% match required from the city will be
provided through staff time spent on removals, planting, watering, pruning, training, outreach,
and inspections.
Estimated project costs are included below:
Description Grant Funded City Match
Contracted removals $25,109.50
Staff removals $10,755.50
Trees $6,825.00
Planting materials $976.36
Maintenance, inspections $6,082.44
Total: $32,910.86 $16,837.94
Project Total: $49,748.80
Removals will begin as early as January 4th. Replacement trees are scheduled to be planted in
Spring of 2022. Replacement species include: Princeton elm, honey locust, Heritage oak,
Swamp white oak, and Redmond lindens.
The 2021 Preparing for EAB grant will allow the City to complete 3 years-worth of EAB
response in one year’s time.
Environmental Board Direction Requested: Discussion only.
Attachments
1. 2021 Preparing for EAB Grant Contract
2. EAB Grant Map
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 1
STATE OF MINNESOTA
GRANT CONTRACT
This grant contract is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Natural Resources,
Division of Forestry, 500 Lafayette Rd., St. Paul, MN 55155 (“State”) and the City of Lino Lakes, 600 Town
Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, MN 55014 (“Grantee”).
Recitals
1. Under Minn. Stat. §84.026, §84.085, Subd. 1, and Minnesota Session Law 2021, 1st Special Session,
Chapter 6, Article 1, Section 3, Subdivision 4(j), the State is empowered to enter into this grant.
2. The State is in need of Urban and Community Forestry Services.
3. The Grantee represents that it is duly qualified and agrees to perform all services described in this grant
contract to the satisfaction of the State. Pursuant to Minn.Stat.§16B.98, Subd. 1, the Grantee agrees to
minimize administrative costs as a condition of this grant.
Grant Contract
1 Term of Grant Contract
1.1 Effective date:
November 30, 2021, or the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minn. Stat.§16B.98,
Subd. 5, whichever is later. Per Minn.Stat.§16B.98 Subd. 7, no payments will be made to the Grantee
until this grant contract is fully executed.
1.2 Expiration date:
June 30, 2023, or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first.
1.3 Survival of Terms.
The following clauses survive the expiration or cancellation of this grant contract: 8. Liability; 9. State
Audits; 10. Government Data Practices and Intellectual Property; 12. Publicity and Endorsement; 13.
Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue; and 15 Data Disclosure.
2 Grantee’s Duties
The Grantee, who is not a state employee, will:
Comply with required grants management policies and procedures set forth through Minn.Stat.§16B.97,
Subd. 4 (a) (1).
Perform the duties specified in Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and Exhibit C, which are incorporated and made a part
of this agreement.
3 Time
The Grantee must comply with all the time requirements described in this grant contract. In the performance
of this grant contract, time is of the essence.
4 Consideration and Payment
4.1 Consideration.
The State will pay for all services performed by the Grantee under this grant contract as follows:
(a) Compensation
The Grantee will be paid compensation in an amount not to exceed $32,910.86 on a reimbursement
basis for qualifying purchases. The Grantee shall submit payment requests with required expenditure
documentation.
According to the breakdown of costs contained in Exhibit B, which is attached and incorporated into
this grant contract, the Grantee certifies that a minimum 25% matching requirement for the grant
will be met by the City of Lino Lakes. The total project cost is $49,748.80. Grantee agrees to match
at least $16,837.94 of this project cost.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 2
(b) Travel Expenses
Reimbursement for travel and subsistence expenses actually and necessarily incurred by the Grantee
as a result of this grant contract will not exceed $0.00; provided that the Grantee will be reimbursed
for travel and subsistence expenses in the same manner and in no greater amount than provided in
the current "Commissioner’s Plan” promulgated by the Commissioner of Minnesota Management
and Budget (MMB). The Grantee will not be reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses
incurred outside Minnesota unless it has received the State’s prior written approval for out of state
travel. Minnesota will be considered the home state for determining whether travel is out of state.
(c) Total Obligation.
The total obligation of the State for all compensation and reimbursements to the Grantee under this
grant contract will not exceed $32,910.86.
4.2 Payment
(a) Invoices
The State will promptly pay the Grantee after the Grantee presents an itemized invoice for the
services actually performed and the State's Authorized Representative accepts the invoiced services.
Invoices must be submitted timely and according to the following schedule:
1. 1. June 30, 2022
2. 2. December 30, 2022
3. 3. June 30, 2023
All project work must be completed and the final request for reimbursement (along with final
reports) must be submitted by June 30, 2023.
(b) Unexpended Funds
The Grantee must promptly return to the State any unexpended funds that have not been accounted
for annually in a financial report to the State due at grant closeout.
4.3 Subcontractors, Contracting, and Bidding Requirements
The Grantee agrees that if it subcontracts any portion of this project to another entity, the agreement
with the subcontractor will contain all applicable provisions of the agreement with the State.
Per Minnesota Statute 471.345, Municipalities as defined in Subd.1 must follow that Uniform
Municipal Contracting Law if contracting funds from this grant contract agreement for any supplies,
materials, equipment, or the rental thereof, or the construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance of real
or personal property.
(a) Support documentation of the bidding process utilized to contract services must be included in the
grantee’s financial records, including support documentation justifying a single/sole source bid, if
applicable.
(b) For projects that include construction work of $25,000 or more, prevailing wage rules apply per
Minnesota Statue 177.41 through 177.44. Consequently, the bid request must state the project is
subject to prevailing wage. These rules require that the wages of laborers and workers should be
comparable to wages paid for similar work in the community as a whole. A prevailing wage form
should accompany these bid submittals.
5 Conditions of Payment
All services provided by the Grantee under this grant contract must be performed to the State’s satisfaction,
as determined at the sole discretion of the State’s Authorized Representative and in accordance with all
applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The Grantee will not receive
payment for work found by the State to be unsatisfactory or performed in violation of federal, state, or local
law.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 3
6 Authorized Representative
The State's Authorized Representative is Emma Schultz, Community Forest Project Specialist, 500 Lafayette
Rd., St. Paul, MN 55155, (651) 259-5274, emma.schultz@state.mn.us, or her successor, and has the
responsibility to monitor the Grantee’s performance and the authority to accept the services provided under
this grant contract. If the services are satisfactory, the State's Authorized Representative will certify
acceptance on each invoice submitted for payment.
The Grantee’s Authorized Representative is Andy Nelson, Environmental Coordinator, 600 Town Center
Parkway, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, ANelson3@linolakes.us, (651) 982-2465. If the Grantee’s Authorized
Representative changes at any time during this grant contract, the Grantee must immediately notify the
State.
7 Assignment Amendments, Waiver, and Grant Contract Complete
7.1 Assignment
The Grantee shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this grant contract without
the prior written consent of the State, approved by the same parties who executed and approved this
grant contract, or their successors in office.
7.2 Amendments
Any amendments to this grant contract must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been
executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original grant contract, or
their successors in office.
7.3 Waiver
If the State fails to enforce any provision of this grant contract, that failure does not waive the provision
or the State’s right to enforce it.
7.4 Grant Contract Complete
This grant contract contains all negotiations and agreements between the State and the Grantee. No other
understanding regarding this grant contract, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party.
8 Liability
The Grantee must indemnify, save, and hold the State, its agents, and employees harmless from any claims
or causes of action, including attorney’s fees incurred by the State, arising from the performance of this
grant contract by the Grantee or the Grantee’s agents or employees. This clause will not be construed to bar
any legal remedies the Grantee may have for the State's failure to fulfill its obligations under this grant
contract.
9 State Audits
Under Minn. Stat. § 16B.98, Subd.8, the Grantee’s books, records, documents, and accounting procedures
and practices of the Grantee or other party relevant to this grant agreement or transaction are subject to
examination by the State and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of
six years from the end of this grant agreement, receipt and approval of all final reports, or the required
period of time to satisfy all state and program retention requirements, whichever is later.
10 Government Data Practices and Intellectual Property Rights
10.1 Government Data Practices
The Grantee and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch.
13, as it applies to all data provided by the State under this grant contract, and as it applies to all data
created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Grantee under this grant
contract. The civil remedies of Minn. Stat. §13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this
clause by either the Grantee or the State. If the Grantee receives a request to release the data referred to
in this Clause, the Grantee must immediately notify the State. The State will give the Grantee
instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. The
Grantee’s response to the request shall comply with applicable laws.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 4
10.2 Intellectual Property Rights - Not Applicable
11 Workers Compensation
The Grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. §176.181, Subd. 2, pertaining to workers’
compensation insurance coverage. The Grantee’s employees and agents will not be considered State
employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Act on behalf of these
employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of
these employees are in no way the State’s obligation or responsibility.
12 Publicity and Endorsement
The Grantee will publicly post and promote project information and purpose as pertains to this grant
contract.
12.1 Publicity
Any publicity regarding the subject matter of this grant contract must identify the State as the sponsoring
agency and must not be released without prior written approval from the State’s Authorized
Representative. For purposes of this provision, publicity includes notices, informational pamphlets,
press releases, research, reports, signs, and similar public notices prepared by or for the Grantee
individually or jointly with others, or any subcontractors, with respect to the program, publications, or
services provided resulting from this grant contract. All projects primarily funded by state grant
appropriations must publicly credit the State of Minnesota, including on the grantee’s website when
practicable.
12.2 Endorsement
The Grantee must not claim that the State endorses its products or services.
13 Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue
Minnesota law, without regard to its choice-of-law provisions, governs this grant contract. Venue for all
legal proceedings out of this grant contract, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court
with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
14 Termination
14.1 Termination by the State
The State may immediately terminate this grant contract with or without cause, upon 30 days’ written
notice to the Grantee. Upon termination, the Grantee will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro
rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed.
14.2 Termination for Cause
The State may immediately terminate this grant contract if the State finds that there has been a failure to
comply with the provisions of this grant contract, that reasonable progress has not been made or that the
purposes for which the funds were granted have not been or will not be fulfilled. The State may take
action to protect the interests of the State of Minnesota, including the refusal to disburse additional funds
and requiring the return of all or part of the funds already disbursed.
14.3 Termination for Insufficient Funding
The State may immediately terminate this grant contract if:
(a) It does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature.
(b) Or, if funding cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow for the payment of the services
covered here. Termination must be by written or fax notice to the Grantee. The State is not obligated
to pay for any services that are provided after notice and effective date of termination. However, the
Grantee will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily
performed to the extent that funds are available. The State will not be assessed any penalty if the
contract is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source,
not to appropriate funds. The State must provide the Grantee notice of the lack of funding within a
reasonable time of the State’s receiving that notice.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 5
14.4 Additional Alternate Termination Language
Additional alternate termination language may be negotiated on a case-by-case basis after the state
agency has consulted with their legal and finance teams.
15 Data Disclosure
Under Minn. Stat. § 270C.65, Subd. 3, and other applicable law, the Grantee consents to disclosure of its
social security number, federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification
number, already provided to the State, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved in the
payment of state obligations. These identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of federal and
state tax laws which could result in action requiring the Grantee to file state tax returns and pay delinquent
state tax liabilities, if any.
16 Non-Discrimination Requirements
No person in the United States must, on the ground of race, color, national origin, handicap, age, religion, or
sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under, any
program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Including but not limited to:
a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.) and DOC implementing regulations
published at 15 C.F.R. Part 8 prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin
under programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance; Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex under
Federally assisted education programs or activities;
b) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. § 794), and DOC implementing
regulations published at 15 C.F.R. Part 8b prohibiting discrimination on the basis of handicap under
any program or activity receiving or benefiting from Federal assistance.
c) The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq.), and DOC implementing
regulations published at 15 C.F.R. Part 20 prohibiting discrimination on the basis of age in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance;
d) Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 which prohibits discrimination against
qualified individuals with disabilities in services, programs, and activities of public entities.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 6
1. STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION
Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as
required by Minn. Stat. '' 16A.15 and 16C.05
Signed:
Date: November 24, 2021
SWIFT Contract/PO No(s). 204020 / 3-201037
2. GRANTEE
The Grantee certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the grant
contract on behalf of the Grantee as required by applicable articles, bylaws,
resolutions, or ordinances.
By:
Title:
Date:
By:
Title:
Date:
3. STATE AGENCY
By:
(with delegated authority)
Title:
Date:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
December 14, 2021
Mayor City of Lino Lakes
Division of Forestry Deputy Director
December 16, 2021
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 7
Exhibit A: Grant Project Deliverables
2021 Preparing for EAB Grants City of Lino Lakes Deliverables
Grant Sum Total: $32,910.86
Grant Contact Deliverables
• Adopting an EAB management plan through this grant process if the community does not yet have one
in place
• Each ash tree removed must be replaced with a newly planted tree
• Grantee must be willing to participate in work by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and
University of Minnesota to evaluate project impacts
Regardless of requests for reimbursement, a written update must be submitted by each reporting deadline, to
ensure project is moving forward and on track to completion. Add written reports below corresponding to each
reporting date:
June 30, 2022 Update:
December 30, 2022 Update:
June 30, 2023 Update:
As work is completed, thoroughly address all applicable bullet points below. Add in the date of reporting (i.e.
6/30/22) and change the font color of your update to red, to show where information has been added.
Continually add to this document over the lifetime of your grant, making sure that all bullet points are
addressed by the time of the grant’s completion.
Work with DNR to fully execute and report on the impacts of the work plan by meeting the requirements as
submitted in the City of Lino Lakes’s application:
Project Overview
Emerald ash borer was first confirmed in Lino Lakes in 2017. Since then, the rates of infestation and tree
mortality have increased rapidly throughout the City. Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park, a county park that our
City completely surrounds, has a large number of ash trees, many of which are currently infested. The
Department of Agriculture holds field sessions at Wargo Nature Center because there are plenty of infested
trees there to use as examples.
Our Parks crew has been aggressively removing ash trees from boulevards, parks, and natural areas since 2010.
We currently have 287 boulevard ash trees remaining. Resources allow us to treat 100 trees per year to allow
for staggered removals over time. Budget allows for removal and replacement of 30 boulevard ash trees per
year, along with additional removals and replacements of hazard trees of other species. At this rate, it will take
10 years to remove and replace all boulevard ash in the City. 2024 will be the first year that we can dependably
treat half of our remaining boulevard trees, so for the next three years, trees will be on a 3 year treatment cycle,
leaving trees less protected against ash borer damage.
While removals in parks and natural areas are ongoing, our inventory of these areas is far from complete. The
sooner we can complete removals and replacements of boulevard trees, the sooner we can focus our efforts
entirely on parks, trails, and natural areas.
• The plan we are submitting will allow for three years worth of removals and replacements in one year,
which will bring our number of remaining boulevard ash below 200 so we can continue to remove them
safely.
• The plan involves contracted removal of 60 trees that are large enough to be beyond the scope of what
can be safely handled with our aerial truck, which has a 30 foot reach.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 8
• Our Parks crew will be supplementing this contracted work with 31 removals of slightly smaller trees.
This crew will also be planting and maintaining all 91 replacement trees.
Timeline
• All 91 tree removals, stump grinding, and turf restoration will occur between October 1, 2021 and April
30th, 2022.
• Bare root trees will be ordered by January 1st, 2022.
• Trees will be delivered in Spring of 2022. Utility locates and planting locations will be determined a
week prior to delivery date. Trees will be kept moist and shaded, then installed, mulched, and watered
within two weeks of delivery.
• Residents will be encouraged in the informational letter to provide 20 gallons of water for every week in
which at least an inch of rain does not fall. This watering will be supplemented by our Parks crew with
a water tanker truck, which will run the route weekly throughout the growing season.
• Deer and rodent guards will be installed by August 1st of 2022 and removed by June 1st of 2023.
• Pruning will be performed at installation (only dead branches), at year 3, and every 5 years from that
point on (as needed and as dictated by resources). Pruning techniques employed by our crew follow the
Gilman method and ISA recommendations.
• Inspections for tree health, proper mulching, and pruning needs will be performed once at installation,
again by August 1st, and annually in Spring thereafter until final report submittal in 2024.
Project Budget Explanation
Our project involves 91 boulevard tree removals and replacements. A contractor will be performing 60 of the
removals and stump grinding. Parks staff will be removing 31 trees, grinding stumps and restoring turf. They
will also be planting all 91 bare root trees and performing maintenance thereafter.
• Our request is strictly for funds related to contracted removals, replacement trees, and planting
materials. We are asking for $32,910.86 to cover these three items.
• In turn, our in-kind match will be in labor, equipment use, and other staff time related to inspections and
maintenance of the trees. These efforts are valued at $16,837.94. Explanations of this amount is given
on the budget form, as well as an excel spreadsheet "Bonding Grant Plan" that will be included with our
submitted application materials.
• The price of 1.25-2" inch caliper bare root trees was approximated to $75.00 to allow for flexibility in
acquiring these trees and an acknowledgment that availability may force us to make minor changes in
size or species.
Project Impacts on Priority Landscapes and Populations
While Lino Lakes does not have notable disparities in health and environmental quality for diverse populations,
nor does the MPCA environmental justice interactive map identify any areas of concern related to income level
or ethnic background, there is still an exceptional need in our community for trees to replace the heavy losses
that EAB is currently inflicting. There is a strong level of support and commitment in Lino Lakes for ensuring
that our urban forest is managed with care for generations to follow, as evinced by 30 years of acknowledgment
as a Tree City USA.
• With the high level of growth that is expected to continue, our efforts to increase canopy cover and
maintain a resilient assemblage of species and plant communities remains a focal point of our
environmental efforts. These efforts will benefit all members of our community into the future.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 9
Communication
• Information about this grant will be included in the City newsletter, in letters to affected homeowners,
and on the City Facebook page.
• We include content on EAB and the newly founded discount tree injection program that is available to
residents in quarterly newsletters that are mailed to all households in the City. The newsletter also
includes content on other forestry-related matters, including proper mulching techniques and City-
coordinated tree sales.
• The letters to homeowners will include information about EAB, the grant itself, and proper mulching
and watering techniques.
• The City Facebook page will contain a post about the grant program and what residents should expect to
see as the program is executed.
• Additionally, the grant will be discussed during monthly Environmental Board meetings, which are
televised.
Personnel
Staff that will be directly involved with this project include:
• Andy Nelson-Environmental Coordinator. I have a B.S. in Conservation Biology from the U of MN,
ISA certified arborist (MN 4755-A), and a MN DNR tree inspector certification. I have 13 years of
forestry experience, including 10 years with Anoka County working on all aspects of forestry, 1.5 years
as City Forester for Mounds View, and over 1.5 years with the City of Lino Lakes as City Forester. I
will be working directly with the field crew on techniques, and coordinating outreach efforts for the
public.
• Mike Hoffman -Parks Supervisor. Mike has an Associate's degree in Natural Resource Conservation and
a MN DNR tree inspector certification. He has been working for the City for 37 years, and forestry has
always been an integral component of the position. He is adept at all aspects of forestry in the City,
including planting, pruning, maintaining and removing trees in parks and on boulevards. Throughout his
career, Mike has sought to increase his forestry knowledge through regular attendance at the Shade Tree
Short Course and other MnSTAC events. He will be supervising the field crew during removals,
planting, pruning, and maintenance.
• Tracey Urich-Parks Maintenance. In his 32 years with the City, Tracey has worked on all aspects of
forestry performed in the City. He will be working on all removals, planting, pruning, and maintenance.
• Taylor Drahota-Parks Maintenance. Taylor has been with the City for 3 years. He has a B.S. in Natural
Resources Management, and a DNR tree inspector certification. He will be working on all removals,
planting, pruning, and maintenance.
Tree Planting
Grant funds will not fund the purchase of trees that are over-represented in your community. Any genera that
comprise 10% or more of the community forest make-up will not be funded. Numbers derived from the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2010 Rapid Assessment will be used unless an updated inventory
is provided. For Lino Lakes this means grant funds cannot be spent on purchasing:
• Acer (maple): 25.9%
• Picea (spruce): 18.8%
All trees planted with grant funds are expected to be maintained based on the City of Lino Lakes’s Three Year
Tree Maintenance Plan submitted as Exhibit C. Trees that do not survive will need to be replaced prior to grant
close-out utilizing the warranty the city has with the nursery that stock was purchased from, or at the expense of
the City of Lino Lakes.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 10
Requesting Reimbursement
Accomplishment reports and maps of completed work will be submitted with all requests for reimbursement.
• Partial payment form along with invoices and proof of payment for grant-funded purchases, Cash Match
form along with proof of payment, and In-Kind Match form
• Partial payments may be submitted as needed and must include all up-to-date required documents and
accomplishment reports, including a relevant certification and/or declaration
• Accomplishment reports will include grant contract deliverables and their impacts
• Photo documentation of the project’s progress at appropriate phases, and illustrations, diagrams, charts,
graphs, and maps to show results
• Maps will:
o Identify the location of ash that have been removed
o Identify the location of ash stumps that have been ground
o Identify the location and species of trees that have been planted
• All trees removed, treated, and planted will be mapped and submitted as shapefiles, with the planted
trees identified by species, to obtain grand fund reimbursement. If your community does not have access
to shapefile-generating software, please notify your DNR Urban and Community Forestry Team
Member, and they will work to assist you.
Following the submission of invoices and accomplishment reports, a compliance check will be conducted by
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources staff. Staff will do a site evaluation ensuring that tree species
submitted on maps are correctly identified and planted in accordance with the standards set in the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources Pocket Guide to Planting Trees.
Staff will also ensure that the project adheres to the 20-10-5 guideline which means that following planting, a
community has no more than 20% of their trees within a single family, no more than 10% of their trees within a
single genus, and no more than 5% of their trees within a single species. Staff will confirm that planted tree
stock is 1-2” caliper bareroot or a container class size #20 or smaller.
Acknowledgment
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources needs to be acknowledged in publications, audiovisuals, and
electronic media developed as a result of this award.
• Including any publications or outreach materials related to this grant or agreement, a statement of
affiliation with Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, e.g., “This publication made possible
through a grant from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.” OR “This project was conducted
in cooperation with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.”
• Logo is permitted for use and can be obtained by contacting an Urban and Community Forestry Team
Member.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 11
Exhibit B: Project Budget
2021 Preparing for EAB Grants City of Lino Lakes
Item State Grant
Funds
Cash
Match In-kind Match Total
Personnel and
Owned Equipment $16,837.94 $16,837.94
Eligible Expenses $32,910.86 $32,910.86
Totals $32,910.86 $0.00 $16,837.94 $49,748.80
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
3-Year Tree Maintenance Plan Template for Newly Planted Trees
Year and Season of Planting:
Phone:
Size (caliper for deciduous, height for conifers): # of Trees to be Planted:
Type of Stock to be Planted (Bare root, etc.):
Describe how the activities below will be completed.
1.Tree Maintenance Personnel
a.Describe who is responsible for maintenance.
b.Volunteers, homeowners, or inexperienced staff that will provide maintenance should receive basic
training and literature on proper maintenance techniques. Is training needed and how will you do it?
c.How will you inspect tree maintenance work periodically to make sure it is being done correctly?
2.Tree Watering Process
Describe in detail how trees will be watered, the time period and frequency of watering. Trees should be
watered weekly for the first 3 to 5 years when the ground is thawed, unless it has rained 1 inch in a week.
Email:
Project Coordinator:
LUG:
ǣ
Ͷͷ
City of Lino Lakes
Spring of 2022City of Lino Lakes, MN
Andy Nelson, Environmental Coordinator
651-982-2465 ANelson3@linolakes.us
1.25"-2"91
Bare root
The City will be responsible for installation and maintenance of these 91 trees. Our crew will plant,
mulch, and prune these trees. The City Parks crew has an extensive background in maintaining
boulevard trees.
Training will not be needed for the Parks crew, as they have extensive experience working with planting
and maintaining boulevard trees. We will review planting, mulching, and watering practices just prior to
planting. Homeowners will have limited roles in tree maintenance, but they will receive instructions
regarding leaving mulch in place and about how frequently to water the trees.
I will be present at the first several plantings to refresh the crew on techniques. Inspections will follow
after all trees are planted, again by August 1st, and annually in spring thereafter. The "How to Plant
Trees" brochure will be provided to all staff involved in the project.
Trees will be kept moist until planting, then watered thoroughly directly after planting. All residents receive a
letter encouraging them to leave the mulch in place as installed and to provide 20 gallons of water per week
on weeks that don't receive an inch or more of rain. The efforts of the homeowners will be supplemented by
Parks crew members running a weekly route with a water tanker trunk, checking soil moisture and watering
accordingly. Extra care will be given during the hotter periods of the summer.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
3.Mulching Trees
Will you mulch your trees and if so, how will you maintain mulch?
4.Staking and Tying Trees
Explain if staking is necessary due to mowing, vandalism, or wind conditions, and describe plans for
inspection and removal.
5.Checking Tree Health
The grantee will check trees every 6 – 12 months to identify and address problems. Describe inspection
process and follow-up.
6.Tree Protection
Young trees in busy urban areas may be easily damaged by human activity, animals, and equipment.
Describe how planted trees will be protected.
7.Pruning
Newly planted trees should need little pruning, if they were properly cared for in the nursery. In the first
year after planting, remove only dead or broken branches. In later years, weakly attached limbs can be
removed, and corrective pruning can be done if needed. Describe your pruning maintenance cycle.
8.Tree Warranty
Tree planting should include a warranty from the nursery for replacement (due to poor condition or
mortality). The grantee should be prepared to fully replace all trees that are in poor condition or die
prior to inspection at the end of the project grant agreement, unless loss was due to natural disaster.
Describe your tree warranty or how trees will be replaced.
We will be applying roughly 0.25 cubic yards of mulch to each tree. Mulch will be 3-4 inches deep and
approximately 2.5 foot radius around each tree. Care will be taken to ensure that no mulch is touching
the trunk, and that mulch is level to avoid creating mulch volcanoes. Additionally, we distribute proper
mulching advice in our city newsletter and in a letter that all homeowners will receive to explain care of
the new boulevard trees. We will also post mulching advice on our facebook page closer to planting time.
Staking has not been required for most boulevard trees in the City. In the rare cases that wind makes
staking necessary, we use a three-point method with nylon straps and slack rope that will only become
taut with wind. These stakes are removed within one year to encourage proper root anchoring from the
tree itself. In cases of heavier leaning, we re-dig to make adjustments to soil levels to reposition the tree.
The inspection process will include visits to each tree by the Environmental Coordinator (ISA arborist
#4755-A). Any corrective actions needed will be noted during an inspection at installation, again by
August 1st, and annually in spring thereafter. Corrective actions will be performed by the Parks crew.
Deer/rodent guards will be installed by August 1st and removed by June 1st each year.
We will prune once at installation to remove dead or broken branches. Trees will be pruned in year 3 for
structure correction, removal of codominant stems, and removal of any dead branches. Trees will be
pruned every five years after that as needed and as resources allow. Pruning will follow the Gilman
method and ISA recommendations.
We will request a one-year warranty be included in the bare root stock that we purchase. The City
replaces all trees that die outside of the warranty period on any project. We will include any trees that die
outside of the warranty period in the planting that occurs the next spring.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 12
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Conflict of Interest:
A conflict of interest occurs when a person has actual or apparent duty or loyalty to more than one organization
and the competing duties or loyalties may result in actions which are adverse to one or both parties. A conflict
of interest exists even if no unethical, improper or illegal act results from it.
Actual Conflict of Interest:
An actual conflict of interest occurs when a person’s decision or action would compromise a duty to a party
without taking immediate appropriate action to eliminate the conflict. Examples include, but are not limited
to:
• One party uses his or her position to obtain special advantage, benefit, or access to the other party’s
time, services, facilities, equipment, supplies, badge, uniform, prestige, or influence.
• One party receives or accepts money (or anything else of value) from another party or has equity or a
financial interest in or partial or whole ownership of the other party’s organization.
• One party is an employee, board member or family member of the other party.
Potential Conflict of Interest:
A potential conflict of interest may exist if a person has a relationship, affiliation, or other interest that
could create an inappropriate influence if the person is called on to make a decision or recommendation
that would affect one or more of those relationships, affiliations, or interests.
Organizational Conflict of Interest:
A conflict of interest can also occur with an organization that is a grant applicant in a competitive grant
process or grantee of a state agency. Organizational conflicts of interest occur when:
• A grantee’s objectivity in carrying out the grant is impaired or compromised due to competing duties
or loyalties
• A grantee, potential grantee or grant applicant has an unfair competitive advantage through being
furnished unauthorized proprietary information or source selection information that is not available to
all competitors
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
Grant for Legislatively-named Municipality FY19: Updated November 2018 13
This section to be completed by Grantee’s Authorized Representative (AR):
I certify that we will maintain an adequate Conflict of Interest Policy, and throughout the term of our
agreement, we will monitor and report any actual, potential, individual, or organizational conflicts of interest to
the State’s Authorized Representative.
I also certify that I have read and understand the description of conflict of interest above and as of this date
(check one of the two boxes below):
I do not have any conflicts of interest relating to this project.
I have an actual, potential, individual, or organizational (indicate below) conflict of interest. The nature of
the conflict is as follows:
If at any time during the grant project I discover a conflict of interest, I will disclose that conflict immediately to
the State’s Authorized Representative.
Grantee AR’s Printed Name: Date:
Grantee AR’s Signature:
Organization Name: _____________________________________________________________
Project Name: __________________________________________________________________
Legal Citation: ML______, Chapter ______, Article ___, Section ___, Subdivision ____
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State AR’s Printed Name: ________________________________ Date:
State AR’s Signature: ____________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 065F83CA-61C8-441A-99AB-0093E546627C
GR Rafferty
none
City of Lino Lakes
2021 Preparing for EAB Grant
December 14, 2021
%&d(
%&c(
Rice Lake
Reshanau
Lake
Centerville
Lake
Marshan
Lake
George
Watch
Lake
Peltier
Lake
Baldwin
Lake
Rondeau
Lake
Amelia
Lake
Otter
Lake
County Road 14
Hodgson RoadCounty Road 34County Road 14County Road 54County Road 23County Road 21County Road 14
DNR Grant Tree (Standing) - 91 Total
DNR Grant Tree (Removed) - 0 Total
DNR Grant Tree (Restored) - 0 Total
Non-DNR Grant Trees - 7,333 Total
0 4,500
Feet
Trees Within MnDNR Grant Document Path: C:\Users\sgazdik.WSBA\Desktop\Lino Lakes Emerald Ash Borer Grant\ArcPro_EmeraldAshBorerGrant\ArcPro_EmeraldAshBorerGrant.aprx Date Saved: 12/9/2021Lino Lakes Emerald Ash Borer Grant
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
1 inch = 4,500 Ft
Behm Ln
Teckla Ct PalominoLnT3973 T3974
T3954
T3953
T3952
T3957
T3955
T3960
T3972
T3956
T3958T3959
T3961
Lacasse Ct
Clearwater Creek Cir
Lacasse DrEllen
C
tLacasse CirIverson Ct
Clearwater Creek Ct
Albert CtTart
L
a
k
e
R
d
Tele Dr
LacasseDr
A rth u r Ct
Clearwater
C
r
eekDr
Clearwater
Creek Park
T263
T4011
T4120
T261
T4012
T4113
T4117
T262
T4115
T4110
T4085T4082
T4078
T4086
T244
T4096
T4089T4087
T4074
T4075 T4072
T4069
T2455
T251
T247
T249
T4933
T4073
T250
T4931 T4081
T4080
T243
T241T242
T237
T236
T4055
T233
T239
T4367
Kingfisher
Ct
Hickory Pl
Ironw
o
o
d
C
i
r
Fox Rd
White Owl Dr
Painted
T
urtl
e
R
d
Prairie Flower Rd
W ShadowLakeDr
R iv e rB irch
P lT1808
T2599T2596
T2595
T2600
T2602
T2597T5062
T906T1807
T3296
T907
T3086
T1577
T1579
T2589
T2591
T2590
T3878
T1897
T1895
T1894
T2586
T2585
T3860
T2579
T3859
T2582
T2580
T3861
T2581 T2730
T2584
T7469
T9014
T9015
371
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7B
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Andy Nelson
MEETING DATE: January 4th, 2022
REQUEST: Discussion/Update Only
TOPIC: Water Quality Project Updates
Background
With support from the Environmental Board and in recognition of the critical importance of
water quality, City staff regularly pursue collaborations with other organizations for larger water
quality projects. Overviews of three potential projects that are currently being evaluated are
included here. Additional information and updates on the progress of these projects will be
provided to the Environmental Board in the future.
VLAWMO/Lake Amelia Drainage Area Collaboration
The City is working with VLAWMO to prepare a feasibility study for a water quality
improvement project for the drainage area northeast of Amelia Lake. The study will outline
some options for a potential project to improve the quality of water draining to Amelia Lake.
This area is currently served by an existing private drainage ditch. Surrounding properties have
experienced isolated flooding over the last 5 years. The study will outline a long-term
management plan to maintain and address water quality as the surrounding watershed develops.
Winters Wetland Bank
The City’s Natural Resources Revolving Fund Plan, approved in 2017, identified potential
wetland bank sites in the City. With the completion of the Wollan Park wetland bank, staff has
been evaluating opportunities to establish a new bank.
The Winter property is located in an area guided for office/residential use in the City’s
Comprehensive Plan, but also includes a large potential Greenway Corridor. The site was
previously evaluated by the Rice Creek Watershed District as a potential wetland bank site. Staff
recently completed a Draft Prospectus with the assistance of WSB and Associates. Once we
have received feedback from the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), the
Army Core of Engineers (ACOE), and Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) staff, City staff
will be performing a cost/benefit review to determine whether to move forward with the project
and pursue an agreement with the property owner.
Shenandoah Park
Staff is evaluating a potential water quality improvement project at Shenandoah Park. A 2010
Rice Lake Subwatershed Assessment identified this park as a site that could be suitable for a
water quality project involving wetland restoration. WSB and Associates staff performed a
wetland delineation on this site in 2021 and are in the process of preparing a proposal for a
feasibility study to evaluate options for this site.
Environmental Board Direction Requested: Discussion only.
Attachments
1. Lake Amelia Study Area Map
2. Winter Property Aerial Photo
3. Shenandoah Park Aerial Photo
Ameila RMU
CentervilleRMU
ClearwaterCreek RMU
Sherman RMU
Wilkinson RMU
City of Lino Lakes
Lake Amelia Legend
Private_Ditch
Study Area
Lake_Amelia_watershed
1 inch = 900 feet
Subwatershed Study Area
Winter Property
Legend
Wetlands
December 22, 2021
Map Powered By DataLink
1 in = 1,505 ft
±
Shenandoah Park
Legend
Wetlands
Parcels
December 22, 2021
Map Powered By DataLink
1 in = 188 ft
±