HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-01-2024 Council Work Session Packet
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Monday, July 1, 2024
No Public Comment allowed at Work Sessions per the Rules of Decorum
COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers (not televised)
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items
3. Madinah Lakes PUD Concept Plan, Katie Larsen
4. EAB Update and Forestry Budget Amendment, Michael Grochala
5. Shenandoah Park Water Quality Improvement Project, Michael Grochala
6. RCWD/VLAWMO Boundary Adjustments, Michael Grochala
7. Notices and Communications, City Council
8. Labor Negotiations Strategy – Closed Meeting pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §13D.03
ADJOURNMENT
1
STAFF ORIGINATOR:
WORK SESSION DATE:
TOPIC:
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 3
Katie Larsen, City Planner
July 1, 2024
Madinah Lakes PUD Concept Plan
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
REVIEW DEADLINE:
Complete Application Date: April 25, 2024
60-Day Review Deadline:June 24, 2024
60-Day Extension Deadline:August 23, 2024
Environmental Board Meeting: May 29, 2024
Park Board Meeting: June 5, 2024
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: June 12, 2024
City Council Work Session: July 1, 2024
City Council Meeting: N/A
BACKGROUND
The applicant, Zikar Holdings, is proposing a master planned development located on the
Robinson sod farm property south of CSAH 14 (Main Street) and east of CR 53 (Sunset Avenue).
The development contains 4 parcels totaling approximately 156 gross acres and consists of mix
of residential housing types, commercial development, and a religious building. The proposed
development is called Madinah Lakes.
The Land Use Application is for the following:
•PUD Concept Plan/Concept Plan (“concept plan”)
Future land use applications may include:
•Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) or Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR)
2
• Rezone property from R, Rural to PUD, Planned Unit Development
• PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat
• PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
This staff report is based on the following submittals:
• Narrative prepared by Zikar Holding dated April 17, 2024
• Concept Plan prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. dated April 22, 2024
• Yield Plan prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. dated April 22, 2024
• Resource Inventory prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. dated April 22, 2024
This Council staff report provides edits to the June 12, 2024 Planning & Zoning staff report.
Changes are either narratively described or shown as strikethrough (deletions) or underline
(additions).
ANALYSIS
History
Robinson Lakes
In October 2006, a concept plan for Robinson Lakes submitted by Lino Lakes Development, LLC
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 homes, multi-family and active adult multi-family. Lakes, open space and
greenway system with parks and trails were incorporated throughout the development.
This project did not move forward due to the onset of a housing recession.
Promenade
In February 2022, a concept plan for Robinson Property submitted by Integrate Properties, LLC
was reviewed at a Council Work Session. The concept plan included 157 gross acres south of
CSAH 14 (Main Street) and consisted of a mix of housing types totaling 707 housing units.
In October 2022, the Council approved a Record of Decision and Making a Negative Declaration
on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement for Robinson Sod Farm EAW. The EAW
evaluated two (2) development scenarios, the PUD Concept Plan with 557 dwelling units and
the Yield Plan with 707 dwelling units.
3
In November 2022, a revised concept plan was reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Board. The
proposed development was renamed Promenade.
This project did not move past concept plan review.
Moratorium
On April 1, 2024 and May 28, 2024, the City Council discussed the consideration of a
development moratorium in light of two potential projects proposed in the northwest quadrant
of the City. These projects, Pulte/Del Webb and Madinah Lakes, include approximately 400
acres of the existing sod farm area north and south of Main Street.
The Planning & Zoning Board held a public hearing and considered the proposed interim
ordinance (moratorium) at the June 17, 2024 special meeting. The Board unanimously
recommended approval to proceed with the interim ordinance to complete a master plan and
prepare an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) covering approximately 980 acres in the
northwest quadrant of the City.
The City Council has a public hearing and 1st reading scheduled for June 24, 2024. The 2nd
reading is scheduled for July 8, 2024. No moratorium has been adopted by the City Council at
this time. The City will continue to review this PUD Concept Plan application. If a moratorium is
adopted, review may be discontinued.
The City’s review and comments on the proposed concept plan’s relation to the Comprehensive
Plan and development regulations does not grant any rights to the applicant to develop the
property as depicted by the concept plan. These are high level comments and depending on the
outcome of the proposed moratorium, the concept plan may change.
Current Proposal
Please see the attached applicant’s narrative for a detailed description of the project.
Residential
The applicant is proposing the following mix and number of housing types:
Housing Type
Lot
Width # Units
Single Family Lots = 75 ft 33
Single Family Lots = 65 ft 91
4
Single Family Lots = 55 ft 81
Townhomes (row) = 101
Apartment Units
(2 Buildings x 42 units)= 84
Townhomes (back to back) = 44
TOTAL = 434
Single family detached home neighborhoods are located in the northwest section and
southeast quadrant of the site. The townhome neighborhood is located in the northeast
quadrant. Trails, sidewalks, stormwater ponds and lakes are included throughout the
development. A 1.6 acre park is shown with pavilion, pickleball courts and tot lot.
Commercial
The applicant is proposing approximately 4.8 acres of commercial development in the
northeast quadrant of the site adjacent to CSAH 14 (Main Street). The concept plan shows a
commercial building (20,460sf footprint) with restaurant/coffee shop/retail on the first floor
and banquet hall on the second floor, a standalone grocery store (7,450 sf, and a daycare (5,500
sf) with play area.
Religious Building
The applicant is proposing a 48,400sf mosque in the center of the site.
Existing Conditions
The predominant existing land use is agricultural related to Robinson Sod Farm. The MLCCS
classification is sod on hydric soils. Public ditch ACD 10-22-32 and private ditches drain the site
south. Wetlands appear to be located along the ditch corridors. A majority of the site is in the
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. A 100ft wide pipeline easement and a 90ft wide
transmission utility bisects the southeast quadrant of the site.
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use
Direction Zoning Current Land Use 2040 Future
Land Use
5
North R, Rural Agricultural Mix of Residential
Densities
South PUD (Century
Farm North) Agricultural Medium Density
East R, Rural Rural Residential High Density &
Low Density
West
FR, Farm
Residence
(City of Blaine)
Wetland/Open Space LDR, Low Density
Residential
Surrounding land uses include medium density single family detached homes and townhomes
to the south in Century Farms North. Larger rural residential lots exist to the east and to the
southeast along Carl Street.
Comprehensive Plan
Land Use
The 156 acre site has multiple land use designations per the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan
creating somewhat of a checkerboard patterned look. These land uses include low density,
medium density, high density and planned residential/commercial. The checkerboard areas are
not intended to be strict land use and density boundaries but should be considered somewhat
flexible in order to accommodate development.
Per the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the site is located in Planning District 2 and includes Planned
Residential/Commercial areas. The Comprehensive Plan states:
• “Planning District 2 includes Planned Residential/Commercial areas.
o The Robinson Farm and Main Street site is planned to accommodate an 80/20
percent mix of residential and commercial. While allowed in all areas,
commercial development will be required in at least one quadrant. To ensure
implementation the City may choose to rezone land to a compatible
neighborhood commercial zoning district upon completion of a corridor plan. A
Master Plan for the Main Street Corridor between Sunset Avenue and 4th
Avenue should be completed.”
It is important to note the 80/20 percent mix is related only to the approximate 40 acres of land
guided for Planned Residential/Commercial. The Robinson Farm and Main Street site
referenced in the Comprehensive Plan includes property on both the north and south side of
6
Main Street. The proposed development is only on the south side of Main Street. It includes 20
acres of land guided for Planned Residential/Commercial which would support 4 acres of
commercial development (20 acres x 20% = 4 acres.) The proposed development includes 4.8
acres of commercial which is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Density
The following chart summarizes the site’s general density range per gross and net acres:
Allowed Units
per Acre Allowed # Units
Comp Plan Gross
Acres
Net
Acres Low High Low High
Low Density Res 76.16 54.25 1.6 3.0 87 163
Medium Density Res 23.84 20.73 4.0 6.0 83 124
High Density Res 39.44 28.67 6.0 8.0 172 229
Planned Res / Comm 16.30 5.21 8.0 10.0 42 52
TOTAL 155.73 108.86 383 569
GROSS DENSITY 2.5 3.7
NET DENSITY 3.5 5.2
The preliminary net density ranges would be 3.5 to 5.2 units per net acre which equates to a
range of 383 to 569 housing units. The applicant is proposing 434 housing units which is
consistent with the density range. It should be noted that net acreage will be re-calculated
based on post-development during the preliminary plat process.
Gateway
The intersection of Main Street and Sunset Avenue is identified as a Gateway location in the
City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Guidance for Planning District 2, states that a gateway should
be planned and created at this location. The City undertook a gateway planning process in
2023. The Sunset and Main Street intersection was included in this process and a preferred
concept was completed. The intersection is proposed to have a landscaped roundabout and
Lino Lakes monument sign. A seating area is also proposed in the southeast corner of the
7
intersection adjacent to the planned greenway connection. With the exception of a utility
conduit running to the RAB, no improvements are included in the current reconstruction
project. The existing rural section of roadway limited placement of new facilities at this time.
A more comprehensive design will need to be completed as development is considered north
and south of the intersection.
Growth Management Strategy
Page 3-17 of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan details the City’s Growth Management Strategy.
The strategy works in conjunction with the City’s utility staging plan.
One strategy criterion is that the City will plan to accommodate an annual average of 230 units
per year over each 5-year phasing period not to exceed 345 units in any one year. From 2010 to
2023, the City’s average annual number of units is 118. This is less the allowed 230 unit annual
allocation.
Current Zoning and Land Use
Current Zoning R, Rural
Current Land Use Agricultural
Future Land Use per
2040 Comp Plan
Low Density, Medium Density, High Density and
Planned Residential/Commercial
Utility Staging Area Stage 1A (2018-2025)
Stage 1B (2025-2030)
Rezoning
The property is currently zoned R, Rural. The R, Rural zoning is a holding district until municipal
water and sanitary sewer are available to the site and the property owner is interested in
having the property developed. The property would need to be rezoned to PUD, Planned Unit
Development in order to allow flexibility for lot widths and lot sizes and create a mixed used
development.
PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines
City Code Section 1007.024 details the PUD, Planned Unit Development requirements. The
purpose of the PUD is to provide a zoning district that grants flexibility from certain
conventional zoning regulations in order to achieve public benefits that may not otherwise be
obtained under standard zoning regulations. These public benefits are detailed in City Code
Section 1007.024(2) and discussed later in this report.
8
City Code Section 1007.024(4) details the PUD Land Use and correlating conventional zoning
district standards. These conventional zoning district standards serve as guidelines but may be
departed from to accomplish public value purposes.
A summary of PUD public benefit vs PUD flexibility is provided at the end of this staff report.
Staff Comments:
1. The applicant may need to provide additional public benefit in order to be considered
for PUD zoning. Examples could be more open space, enhanced greenway corridor,
wetland restoration, additional wetland buffers, higher architectural & building
standards etc.
Residential
Lot Size and Width
The attached PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines Chart details the PUD
Land Use and correlating conventional residential zoning district. The chart also compares the
proposed development to these guidelines.
The proposed lot widths for the detached single family homes are 75ft, 65ft and 55ft. Lot
depths appear to vary. PUD flexibility would be required for the 55ft and 75ft wide single family
lots and potentially varying lot depths.
Staff recommends establishing minimum lot width and lot depth requirements for the single
family homes. As discussed during the previous Promenade concept plan and implemented in
Lennar’s Watermark development, the following minimum lot sizes could be established:
• Lot Size = Lot Width x 130 ft Lot Depth
o Example: 55 ft lot width x 130 ft = 7,150 sf
65 ft lot width x 130 ft = 8,450 sf
75 ft lot width x 130 ft = 9,750 sf
Watermark also allowed for 120 ft lot depths on lots abutting open space. Per the attached
Madinah Lakes concept plan, these lots could be those abutting larger storm water ponds if on
wider greenways
9
Per the subdivision ordinance, minimum lot area for urban lots shall consist of buildable land
exclusive of utility transmission easements or water course easements that encumber lot
development. The minimum lot areas shall also consist of buildable land exclusive of oversized
easements or buffers.
The proposed townhomes and multi-family lot housing types appear to meet minimum lot size
and width requirements as detailed on the chart.
Setbacks
The following charts compare the conventional City ordinance requirements to the proposed
setbacks.
Residential Single
Family
City Ordinance
Requirement Proposed Setbacks PUD Flexibility
Required?
Street ROW R-1 = 30 ft
R-2 = 25 ft 30 ft No
Rear Lot Line R-1 = 30 ft
R-2 = 25 ft 30 ft No
Side Lot Line
R-1 & R-2 =
5 ft garage/
10 ft house
7.5 ft and 7.5 ft Yes
Townhomes City Ordinance
Requirement Proposed Setbacks PUD Flexibility
Required?
Private Street
R3 = 25 ft
R4 = 25 ft
R5 = 25 ft
30 ft No
Rear Lot Line
R3 = 30 ft
R4 = 30 ft
R5 = 30 ft
30 ft
No
(deck/patio
cannot extend
into setback)
Side Lot Line
R3 =10 ft
R4 = 20 ft
R5 = 20 ft
30 ft No
Multi-Family City Ordinance
Requirement Proposed Setbacks PUD Flexibility
Required?
10
Street ROW R4 = 30 ft
R5 = 30 ft 74 ft No
Rear Lot Line R4 = 30 ft
R5 = 30 ft 46 ft No
Side Lot Line R4 = 20 ft
R5 = 20 ft 40 ft No
PUD flexibility would be required to allow for reduced side lot line setbacks on the single family
lots.
Staff Comments:
1. City Code Section 1007.024(6) further details Urban Residential Planned Unit
Development requirements in regards to municipal water and sanitary sewer services,
density, open space, neighborhood performance standards and yards. The applicant
shall demonstrate these requirements are met.
2. The townhome decks/patios cannot extend into street setback.
3. A minimum 50-foot wide buffer shall be provided in compliance with § 1007.049 on the
single family and townhome lots abutting CSAH 14 (Main Street) and CR 53 (Sunset
Ave).
4. A minimum 20-foot wide buffer shall be provided in compliance with § 1007.049 on the
townhome lots abutting the street extending to the east lot line and on the single family
lots abutting Carl Street.
Commercial
City Code Section 1007.024(4) details the PUD Land Use and correlating conventional zoning
district Development Standards. Land guided Planned Residential/Commercial uses the
conventional R-5 zoning district as guidelines.
Per City Code Section 1007.115(11) R-5,
R-5 Requirements
Commercial
Proposed
Commercial
PUD Flexibility
Required?
Min. Lot Size 20,000 sf 4.25 acres
(base lot) No
Min. Lot Width (base lot) 100 ft 400+ ft No
Min. Lot Depth No minimum NA NA
11
Building Setback
From Streets
CSAH 14 (Arterial Collector)
40 ft 50 ft No
Local and
Minor Collector Streets 30 ft 30 ft No
Rear Yard Principal Structure 30 ft 50 ft No
Side Yard Principal Structure 20 ft 60 ft No
Impervious Surface 75% TBD TBD
Lot size and setbacks appear to meet requirements. PUD flexibility is not required for the
commercial development.
Staff Comments:
1. City Code Section 1007.024(7) details Commercial or Industrial Planned Unit
Development in regards to municipal water and sanitary sewer services, open space,
and design standards that shall be met.
Religious Building
The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) is a federal law that was
passed in 2000. It was enacted to address perceived problems in local governments using land
use authority in a manner that discriminated against places of worship, and that imposed
burdens on religious exercise. RLUIPA applies to all religions.
Per City Code Section 1007.001, religious buildings are defined as:
PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL, AND RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS. Public or semi-public recreational
buildings and neighborhood or community centers; limited to nursery, elementary, junior high
and senior high schools; and religious institutions such as churches, chapels, temples, mosque,
and synagogues
Religious buildings are permitted by conditional use in the City’s rural and residential zoning
districts.
The mosque is generally located on land guided Planned Residential/Commercial. City Code
Section 1007.024(4) details the PUD Land Use and correlating conventional zoning district
Development Standards. Land guided Planned Residential/Commercial uses the conventional R-
5 zoning district as guidelines.
12
Per City Code Section 1007.115(11) R-5,
R-5 Requirements Proposed
Mosque
PUD Flexibility
Required?
Min. Lot Size 20,000 sf 7.45 acres No
Min. Lot Width (base lot) 100 ft 600+ ft No
Min. Lot Depth No minimum NA NA
Building Setback
From Streets
CSAH 14 (Arterial Collector)
40 ft NA NA
Local and
Minor Collector Streets 30 ft 200+ ft No
Rear Yard Principal Structure 30 ft 50 ft No
Side Yard Principal Structure 50 ft
(per CUP) 200 ft No
Impervious Surface 75% TBD TBD
The conditional use permit for the religious building (mosque) would be processed as part of
the PUD. City Code Section 1007.115(11)(f) further details specific conditional use permit
requirements such as 50 ft side yard setback, adequate screening, and adequate off-street
parking.
Lot size and setbacks appear to meet requirements. PUD flexibility is not required for the
religious building.
Staff Comments:
1. The mosque should be located closer to CSAH 14 (Main Street) to minimize traffic
impacts and conflicts through the residential neighborhoods on Century Trail and
Robinson Drive.
Yield Plan
As required per City Code Section 1001.026(4), the applicant submitted the attached yield plan.
The yield plan shows the maximum number of dwelling units that would be permitted given the
13
minimum lot size and lot widths for conventional subdivisions and other requirements of the
Lino Lakes Zoning and Subdivision Chapters.
The submitted yield plan indicates 127 single family lots (80ft wide), 362 townhomes, and 132
rowhomes for a total of 621 housing units.
The proposed concept plan is 434 housing units.
Staff Comments:
1. Under the Yield Plan Data chart, 84 apartment units are listed but the yield plan does
not include apartments. The chart shall be revised.
Building Design Standards and Other Performance Standards
Building and architectural design standard review is not required at concept plan level. City
Code Section 1007.043 details minimum residential, commercial and institutional building
design standard requirements. The conventional residential zoning districts also provide
addition requirements.
Performance standards (architecture, parking spaces, lighting, landscaping, etc.) will be fully
evaluated in with the complete submittal of PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat.
Staff Comments:
1. Staff suggests the applicant could submit preliminary architectural plans for concept
plan review.
Subdivision Ordinance
Blocks and Lots
The proposed development provides a mix of residential and commercial uses and a religious
building. The single family residential lots vary in width, depth, and lot size as may be allowed
per the PUD flexibility. Outlots would contain wetlands, buffers, stormwater ponds etc.
Per City Code Section 1001.097 (1) Length. The maximum length of blocks shall be 1,500 feet
and the minimum length 400 feet. Blocks over 900 feet long may require pedestrianways at
least ten feet wide at their approximate center. The use of additional pedestrianways to
schools, parks and other destinations may be required.
14
Pedestrian connection and trails to Sunset Avenue are provided at the street and northwest
corner of the site.
The existing house at 7902 Sunset Avenue should be incorporated into the development as
large 2 acre lot. A ghost plat shall be submitted as part of the preliminary plat process.
Connection of the existing house to municipal utilities shall be evaluated.
Staff Comments:
1. A minimum 30-40ft wide pedestrianway/trail connection shall be made to CSAH 14
(Main Street) to break up the block.
Streets and Alleys
CSAH 14 (Main Street) is Principal Arterial road. CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) is a Major Collector
road. Anoka County is constructing a roundabout at the intersection of CSAH 14 and CR 53.
Internal streets consist of local streets and private streets intended to serve the site. Sidewalks
are provided along streets.
Per the City’s 2040 Transportation Plan and Planning District 2:
• Plan for the extension of Sunset Road (CR 53) north to Pine Street.
Development of the Robinson property to the north of Main Street will need to consider this
extension.
• Continue to implement the Main Street (CSAH 14) Access Management Study.
• Work with Anoka County on the creation of a new full-access intersection on Main
Street at a new road at the 200 block.
A new full-access intersection will be constructed at this location.
• An east/west minor collector road extending to 4th Avenue is required.
Per the 2040 Transportation Plan and the Access Management Plan, Robinson Drive is shown to
extend east to 4th Avenue as the east/west minor collector. This serves as an important
backage road to CSAH 14 (Main St), provides connectivity and efficient emergency response
between neighborhoods, and distributes traffic throughout the area. Under the proposed plan,
Robinson Drive is not a continuous roadway. It terminates at an intersection with another
street that extends to the east lot line. However, due a large wetland complex, connection to
15
4th Avenue at this location may not be viable and it may have to shift north or south. The City
completed a wetland delineation on property to the east in 2023. These factors should be
reviewed as part of the street alignment evaluation.
A secondary east/west connection to 4th Avenue shall be evaluated at Carl Street. The
connection of local streets and neighborhoods is a standard transportation design practice and
has been implemented throughout the City. For example, with the Saddle Club development
and the connection of Fox Road and the St. Clair Estates connection to Hokah Drive and Sioux
Lane.
The Carl Street connection is also supported by Lino Lakes Public Safety-Police Division and Fire
Division in order to provide faster and more direct emergency response to the entire area.
Street connectivity is further supported by the following City Code Sections:
§ 1001.096 LAND REQUIREMENTS.
(2) Proposed subdivisions shall be coordinated with surrounding properties and/or
neighborhoods so that the city as a whole may develop efficiently and harmoniously.
§ 1001.100 STREETS AND ALLEYS.
(3) Streets, continuous. Except for cul-de-sacs, streets shall connect with streets already
dedicated in adjoining or adjacent subdivisions or provide for future connections to adjoining
unsubdivided tracts, or shall be a reasonable projection of streets in the nearest subdivided
tracts. The arrangement of thoroughfares and collector streets shall be considered in their
relation to the reasonable circulation of traffic, to topographic conditions, to runoff of storm
water, to public convenience and safety, and in their appropriate relation to the proposed uses
of the area to be served.
Private streets are proposed in the townhome neighborhoods. City Code Section 1007.054
Private Streets details private street requirements that shall be met.
Based on comments received during the Main Street/Sunset Roundabout design process Anoka
County is planning a reconstruction of Sunset from Main Street to 109th. The design of these
improvements may have an impact on traffic patterns within the adjacent developments. The
internal and external collector system will need to be evaluated in light of this project.
Staff Comments:
1. Local road right-of-way shall be a minimum of 60 ft wide.
2. Cul de sacs shall not exceed 500 ft in length and bulbs shall meet City standards.
3. Private streets shall be a minimum of 26 ft wide.
16
4. Private streets shall not exceed 300 ft in length.
5. Driveways onto private streets shall be a minimum of 25 ft in length.
6. The alignment of the internal local street and street accessing CR 53 shall be evaluated.
7. The location of the street extension to 4th Avenue shall be evaluated due to wetlands
and ditch.
8. Access to CSAH 14 (Main Street) at Century Trail is required.
9. The access spacing from CSAH 14 (Main Street) to the local street and religious building
driveway shall be evaluated.
10. Access and connection to Carl Street shall be evaluated.
11. A traffic study shall be required.
12. A noise study shall be required.
13. Lots shall not directly access Robinson Drive which is a minor collector street.
Easements
Staff Comments:
1. Standard drainage and utility easements at least 10 feet wide shall be provided along all
lot lines.
2. Drainage and utility easements shall also be dedicated over stormwater management
facilities.
3. Conservation easements and wetland buffers shall be required over wetlands, ditches,
and greenway corridors.
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control
The concept plan shows 10 stormwater ponds throughout the development. A multi-purpose
greenway corridor incorporating trails, stormwater management, floodplain, ditches, open
space has been incorporated into the development.
Staff Comments
1. Deeper rear yard buffers along the stormwater ponds and lake shall be incorporated.
2. Public ditch ACD 10-22-32 shall have an average 50 ft wide (minimum 25ft wide) buffer
from top of bank.
a. This buffer shall be platted in an outlot owned and maintained by an HOA.
Utilities
Public water, sanitary, and storm sewer utilities will be installed within the development.
Utilities exist along Robinson Drive and Century Trail.
17
The site is located in Sanitary Sewer District 2 (Sub-district 2I). Flow is collected southward to
MCES Meter M211 and Gravity Interceptor 8361 along North Road which passes southwest
through Circle Pines.
The site is located in Utility Staging Area 1A (2018-2025) and 1B (2025-2030). By resolution, the
Council may move the one (1) parcel from Stage 1B (2025-2030) to Stage 1A (2018-2025).
The site is proposed to be served by the municipal water system. The City’s 2040
Comprehensive Plan anticipates expansion of the system to serve this property and
infrastructure is planned to accommodate the increased demand. However, ongoing litigation
and water appropriation permit restrictions, related to White Bear Lake, have placed limitations
on the system expansion and the City’s ability to implement its water supply plan. Dry weather
conditions have placed greater than expected demands on the City’s production system over
the past three years. Water quality concerns related to high level of manganese have resulted
in plans to construct a water treatment plant and the need for replacement of well no. 2 Each
of these factors must be considered when evaluating expansion of municipal utilities.
The site provides opportunity to implement a stormwater reuse system for irrigation purposes.
The system should be evaluated and implemented to the extent feasible to offset the use of
municipal water for irrigation.
The attached WSB City Engineer memo details additional information.
Parks, Greenways and Trail Plan
Per the June 5, 2024 Park Board staff report:
Figure 10-2, Neighborhood Service Areas of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan depicts Century Farm
North Park to serve as the neighborhood park for this area. The City acquired approximately 6.3
acres of park back in 2011 when the Century Farm North development was platted.
The 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies a proposed Greenway System extended across the
subject site. The PUD process provides the 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
18
• Major and minor drainage routes and other elements of the local surface water
management system (including stormwater ponds)
• Floodplain management
A greenway/park system was initially established to the south of the development site with the
Century Farm North subdivision. That system was stubbed to the north from Robinson Drive
and to the east from Century Trail.
The developer has attempted to expand this system throughout the project. Opportunities for
enhancement of the greenway system remain. The County Ditch corridor is the priority
component of this greenway system. A connection should be made from the Century Trail
connection across the County ditch.
An Anoka County regional trail is planned to run along Main Street. This needs to be
accommodated as part of the project development, as well as a trail on Sunset Avenue. Trail
connections to the existing internal trail system should be provided. The developer has
incorporated a link from the northwest corner of the site. Connections will also need to be
added mid-block of the north road running parallel to Main Street, from Century Trail to the
trail section shown running along the gas line easement, and to the eastern perimeter of the
site.
It should also be noted that a public value gained with a PUD is more fees collected through
negotiated parkland dedication. Typically, in a PUD, only parkland dedication and trail
construction costs are credited back to the developer. The actual land costs of trail corridor
land is not credited back to the developer. This results in more parkland dedication fees
collected by the City to be utilized in developing the park system.
Staff Comments:
1. The June 5, 2024 Park Board staff report details recommendations.
2. The trail shall loop around the larger stormwater ponds on the west side of the
development.
3. Trail corridors should be a minimum 30-40 feet in width above the high water level of
ponds.
Tree Preservation and Landscaping
A Tree Preservation Plan and Landscape Plan in compliance with Section 1007.043 (17),
Required Screening, Landscaping and Buffer Yards shall be submitted. Additional landscaping
may be required as a condition of the PUD.
19
Staff Comments:
1. A berm and landscaping will be required along the perimeters shared with Main Street,
Sunset Avenue and Carl Street.
2. A noise study will be required with the PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat.
3. Berm and/or any noise mitigation requirements shall be measured from rear yard
ground elevation near the house to top of berm or fence.
Environmental Review Record
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is required. The threshold computation of 205
unattached units and 229 attached units is greater than one (1).
As discussed at the May 28, 2024 Work Session regarding a potential moratorium on residential
development, an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) and master plan for the greater
northwest quadrant of the City is being considered. This AUAR would replace the need for an
individual EAW.
Wetlands
Per the May 29, 2024 Environmental Board staff report:
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 average width of
50 ft. and a minimum width of 25 ft. will be required per Rice Creek Watershed District rules.
A 50-foot buffer should be included adjacent to the County ditch system.
Filling and mitigating for the private ditches running along the north and south perimeters even
with Robinson Drive should be considered. These ditches are likely low quality wetlands, and
this space could be utilized to better effect by adding the space to the greenway system
components.
The proposed east/west collector street stubbed to the eastern property line appears to run
into a large wetland complex that lies off-site on the rural lots. This road should be rerouted to
run south of the wetland to minimize impacts to this Wetland Management Corridor.
20
Floodplain
The 2015 FEMA Floodplain Map indicates Zone A flood plain on a large portion of the site.
Floodplain management shall be incorporated into the overall design of the site. The site will
need to accommodate the same volume of flood storage currently on the site. Floodplain
mitigation will be achieved through the construction of stormwater ponds and through raising
site elevations. Floodplain impacts are subject to both City and Rice Creek Watershed District
requirements.
Staff Comments:
1. A Base Flood Elevation is required to be determined, using detailed methods acceptable
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
2. A FEMA CLOMR and LOMR are required for development.
3. A FEMA CLOMR shall be submitted with a PUD Preliminary Plan application.
Shoreland District
The subject property is not located within the Shoreland Management Overlay District.
Additional City and Government Agency Review Comments
Anoka County
Anoka County Highway Department comments are provided in the attached letter.
Anoka County Parks Department recommends the regional trail along the south side of Main
Street be installed with this development.
School Districts
The Forest Lake Area School district comments are provided in the attached letter.
Lino Lakes Public Safety
Police Division comments are provided in the attached letter.
Fire Division comments are provided in the attached letter.
City Engineer
21
City Engineer comments are provided in the attached memo.
Environmental Board
The Environmental Board reviewed the concept plan on May 29, 2024. Board
recommendations are provided in the attached memo.
Park Board
The Park Board reviewed the concept plan on June 5, 2024. Board recommendations are park
dedication cash in lieu of land and additional trail connections throughout the development.
Planning & Zoning Board
The Planning & Zoning Board reviewed the concept plan on June 12, 2024. Board comments
include:
• Applicant should have neighborhood meeting
• Shift the mosque closer to Main Street
• Provide public access to lake
• Mixed support for density
• Mixed support for lot widths and lot sizes
• Mixed support for proposed natural buffers in side yards
PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat
The City’s review and comments on the concept plan’s relation to the Comprehensive Plan and
development regulations does not grant any rights to the applicant to develop the property as
depicted by the concept plan.
A land use application for PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat shall be required. If required
by the City Council, the developer shall have a neighborhood meeting prior to submittal of a
PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat.
PUD Public Benefit vs PUD Flexibility Summary
Per City Code Section 1007.024:
22
(2) The PUD, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this ordinance related to
setbacks, heights, lot area, width and depths, yards, etc., may be considered by the City
when it would result in one or more of the following public benefits:
(a) Implementation of a master plan consistent with the Planning District objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan.
The need for a master plan for the Main Street Corridor between Sunset Avenue and 4th Avenue
is identified in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. At the May 28, 2024 Work Session, Council
directed staff to initiate the process to consider a residential moratorium which could include an
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) and master plan for the greater northwest quadrant
of the City.
(b) Innovations in development that address growing demands for all styles of economic
expansion, greater variety in lot size, configuration, home type, design, enhanced
architectural standards, and siting of structures through the conservation and more
efficient use of land in such developments.
The commercial component supports economic expansion.
The development proposes a mix of residential housing types on a greater variety of lot sizes.
The housing consists of single family houses, townhomes, rowhomes, and apartments. This
variety in housing types supports life-cycle housing.
The flexible site design configuration allows for the construction of an extensive greenway
corridor and storm water management system and provides for a more efficient use of land.
(c) Preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as wildlife
habitat, unique natural resources, existing vegetation, natural topography, geologic
features and reduction of negative impacts on the environment.
The site has limited natural desirable site characteristics. Topography is flat agricultural land
with poorly drained hydric soils, private ditches, and minimal significant trees. The existing
public ditch and associated wetlands will be enhanced into an extensive multi-purpose
greenway corridor and storm water management system. The corridor will also be protected by
a vegetative buffer.
The applicant is proposing green infrastructure and phytoremediation to further reduce
negative impacts on the environment.
23
(d) Creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and
orderly transition of varying land uses in close proximity to each other.
The applicant is proposing 55-65ft wide single family detached lots adjacent to existing 62ft
wide single family lots in Century Farm North. Adjacent to the larger rural residential lots along
Carl Street, 55ft wide lots are proposed; however, a landscaped berm and buffer provide
separation from the varying land uses. Townhomes and apartments are proposed in the
northeast section of the development near arterial and collector roads.
(e) Efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby
lowering development costs and public investments.
Allowing lot widths to be based on the specific housing products versus a one size fits all lot
width provides an efficient use of land and lowers development and public costs. Private streets
also result in efficient, smaller networks of utilities and streets.
(f) Mix of land use types.
The development proposes a mix of residential housing types, commercial development, and a
religious building.
(g) Provision of a housing type or target housing price that is desirable to the City.
The housing consists of single family houses on varying lot sizes, townhomes, rowhomes, and
apartments. This variety in housing types supports life-cycle housing that is desirable to the City.
(h) Other public benefits and values as recognized in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Per the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, page 3-3 of the Land Use Plan: Goal 1, Policy e. details the
following additional public values that are achieved in the Madinah Lakes concept plan:
• Preserving open space, providing park dedication and trails, and/or providing
stormwater management areas, in excess of minimum standards to implement the
Greenway System, as amended, and Rice Creek Watershed District’s Lino Lakes
Resource Management Plan, as amended
• Using “Green” building and low impact development techniques
• Restoring/enhancing ecological systems
• Managing stormwater using natural filtration and other ecologically based approaches
• Providing life-cycle and affordable housing
• Diversifying the tax base to lessen the tax burden on residential properties
24
Summary
Public Benefit Gained:
1. Economic expansion
2. Greater variety of lot sizes and home types
3. Multi-functional greenway corridor and storm water management system
4. Vegetative buffer along public ditch
5. Landscaped berm and buffer separation from existing land uses
6. Efficient use of land and private streets resulting in smaller network of utilities and
streets
7. Mix of residential and commercial land uses
8. Life-cycle housing supported by variety of housing types
9. Creation of more open space that is accessible to the public
10. More parkland dedication fees available for park development
11. Less dense residential development
12. Wider landscape buffers and trail corridors
Flexibility Provided:
1. Lot Sizes < 10,800 sf (R-1) and 7,500 sf (R-2)
2. Lot Widths < 80ft (R-1) and 60ft (R-2)
3. Lot Depths < 135ft
4. Building Side Lot Line Setbacks (7.5 ft side)
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
Staff is requesting feedback from the City Council.
1. Thoughts on PUD flexibility for lot widths, lot sizes, setbacks?
2. Should the applicant hold a neighborhood meeting prior to PUD Preliminary
Plan/Preliminary Plat submittal?
ATTACHMENTS
1. Site Location and Aerial Map
2. Applicant’s Narrative
3. 2040 Future Land Use Plan Map
4. Concept Plan, Surrounding Area Aerial Map, & Phasing Plan
5. Land Use Plan and Areas
25
6. Yield Plan
7. PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines Chart
8. City Engineer Memo dated June 6, 2024
9. Environmental Coordinator Memo dated May 30, 2024
10. Fire Division Memo dated June 5, 2024
11. Police Division Memo dated June 5, 2024
12. Anoka County Transportation Division-Highway letter dated June 6, 2024
13. Forest Lake Area School District letter received April 26, 2024
53
Robinson
D
r
Cent
ury
Tr
l
Stallion Ln
Morgan
L
n
14
CarlSt
Century Trl
4t
h
Ave
Lo
i
s
Ln
Carl St
Lois
Ln
Legend
Parcels
City Mask
June 5, 2024m
Map Powered By Datafi
1 in = 600 Ft
Madinah Lakes Site Location & Aerial MapƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚ ϭ͗ ^ŝƚĞ >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ Θ ĞƌŝĂů aĂƉ
-1 –
4/17/2024
"Madinah Lakes" - Vision for Development
Nestled within the picturesque landscape of Lino Lakes lies a visionary community
known as Madinah Lakes. Spanning approximately 156 acres, this development promises
to redefine modern living by seamlessly blending residential, commercial, and communal
spaces.
The cornerstone of Madinah Lakes is its commitment to fostering a sense of belonging
and community spirit. At its heart stands a magnificent Mosque, serving as a symbol of
unity and faith for all Lino Lakes’ residents and visitors alike. Surrounding this focal
point, a carefully curated mix of detached single-family homes, townhomes, rowhomes,
and apartment buildings offer diverse housing options to suit every lifestyle, including
senior living accommodations.
In addition to thoughtfully designed residences, Madinah Lakes boasts an array of
amenities aimed at promoting an active and vibrant lifestyle. A sprawling public park
invites all Lino Lake’s residents to reconnect with nature, while interior trails and
sidewalks encourage leisurely strolls and invigorating bike rides. By integrating these
recreational spaces seamlessly into the fabric of the community, Madinah Lakes
cultivates a sense of harmony between modern living and natural beauty.
Central to the community's ethos is the vibrant commercial area, offering an array of
amenities that meet the needs of both residents and the greater Lino Lakes community.
Here, charming restaurants, inviting coffee shops, and essential services such as daycare
and a grocery store create a bustling hub of activity. Additionally, a spacious banquet
space provides a much-needed venue for gatherings and events, serving as a cornerstone
of community life.
Furthermore, Madinah Lakes is committed to environmental stewardship, evidenced by
the conscientious restoration of the land. Currently the Robinson Sod Farm, the site's
transformation includes the filling of private ditches and the preservation of vital
wetlands, ensuring the preservation of local ecosystems. Notably, the preservation of
public ditch 10-22-32 underscores the development's dedication to responsible land
management and sustainable growth.
Strategically situated within the thriving municipality of Lino Lakes, Madinah Lakes
offers residents the best of both worlds: a tranquil retreat from the bustle of city life,
coupled with unparalleled access to urban conveniences. With seamless connectivity to
the region's transportation network, residents enjoy effortless commutes and convenient
access to a myriad of amenities, both local and regional.
In essence, Madinah Lakes represents more than just a residential development; it
embodies a vision of inclusive, sustainable living where community, culture, and nature
converge. Welcome to Madinah Lakes, where every day unfolds as a celebration of
harmony, diversity, and possibility.
Attachment 2: Applicant's Narrative
-2 –
4/17/2024
“Madinah Lakes”
Development Team:
Developer –
Zikar Holdings
Faraaz Yussuf
12301 Central Ave NE, #205
Blaine, Minnesota 55449
Telephone: 651-497-7937
Email: Faraaz@zikarholdings.com
Civil Engineering, Surveying & Land Planning –
Sathre-Bergquist, Inc.
Eric Johnson, P.E.
Colyn Tvete, P.L.S.
14000 25th Ave N
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Telephone: 952-476-6000
Email: ejohnson@sathre.com
-3 –
4/17/2024
Property Ownership:
The property is currently owned by Robinson Landscaping Inc, a company unaffiliated
with the Developer, Zikar Holdings.
Zoning/ Comprehensive Plan / Guiding
This land is currently zoned Rural.
The developer is requesting to submit a Planned-Unit Development (PUD zoning) for the
site that aligns with City’s Comprehensive Plan/guiding.
The land is currently guided 4 different uses (Low Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, High Density Residential, and Planned Residential/Commercial) in the 2040
Comprehensive Plan. The developer plans to develop the property to include aspects
from each of the 4 guided land uses.
Lot Sizes and Setbacks
Single Family Residential Lots
There are 3 sizes of single family lots proposed:
75’+ - 33 Lots
65’ – 91 Lots
55’ – 81 Lots
Townhome Units – 101
Back to Back/Rowhome Units – 44
Apartment units – 84
Total = 434
Side Yard Setback: 7.5’/7.5’ (to garage and living). The Developer is proposing 7.5-foot
and 7.5-foot side yard setbacks rather than 5’ and 10’ side yard setbacks in 3 Zoning.
Front Yard Setback: 30 feet
Corner Yard Setback: 30 feet
Rear Yard Setback: 30 feet
Site Analysis:
The site is currently being used as a sod farm as part of Robinson Landscaping, Inc. The
site is bordered on the north by Main Street (CSAH 14) and on the west is Sunset Ave
(CR53). To the south is Century Farms (single family neighborhood). The property is
also bordered to the south & east by larger lot residential properties.
-4 –
4/17/2024
The site currently has existing buildings that service the Robinson Landscaping, Inc
business, that access Main Street (CSAH14). As part of the development the office &
buildings will be removed.
Based on the USDA Web Soil Survey. The site has the following soils:
-5 –
4/17/2024
A full geotechnical evaluation will be completed on site to determine what soils and how
deep the water table is on site. This will be completed prior to the Preliminary Plat
application.
Being the site is currently being used as a sod farm, there will be minimal cutting/clearing
of trees on the property. A tree inventory will be completed at the time of the
Preliminary Plat application to determine the removal of trees and the required
replacement per the City of Lino Lakes.
Street Design:
The proposed project will have local public streets that will be 30’ back to back within a
60’ ROW and 46.0’R cul-de sac within a 60’ ROW. Century Trail is proposed to be a
Parkway with 80’ ROW and a median divided street section. A portion of the
development includes private streets (24’ back to back) for the townhome/rowhome units.
All streets will be constructed to the City of Lino Lakes standard street section. Parking
lot areas are proposed for the Mosque, Commercial buildings, and apartment buildings.
Utility Services:
City sanitary sewer & water is available to service the proposed development through the
existing Century Farms neighborhood.
Stormwater:
Stormwater modeling and a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) will be prepared to
satisfy City of Lino Lakes & Rice Creek Watershed District requirements. Runoff from
the site will be directed to storm sewer inlet locations, collected, and conveyed to the
proposed treatment pond(s) and retention/filtration area(s). The ponds and filtration
areas/basins will provide temporary storage of stormwater runoff, treatment of
stormwater and sediment removal.
Wetlands:
Per the National Wetland Inventory (NWI), there are 2 wetlands on site, a series of
private ditches, and a public ditch (10-22-32). The concept plan shows impacts to the
wetland and private ditch areas. The public ditch 10-22-32 will remain intact and provide
the required buffer/access needed. A wetland delineation report will be completed to
determine the actual wetland areas on site. The impacts will be made accordingly after
the report.
-6 –
4/17/2024
Traffic:
The Developer notes that a traffic study will be prepared/provided for review as part of
the development process.
Landscape Plan, Monuments, & Entrance:
The Developer will work with the City to provide a landscape plan that meets City
requirements and provides an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood. The project also
includes a possible landscaped center median that will divide Century Trail.
Homeowner’s Association and Restrictive Covenants:
A Homeowners Association (HOA) will be created for this development. The Developer
will prepare restrictive covenants and standards that will apply to the entire neighborhood
during both the initial development and the overall operation of the subdivision once
future homeowners control the HOA Board. A select group of builders will participate in
the community. The restrictive covenants will be tailored to the Developer’s vision of
the project. Each builder will be required to meet the specifics of building types,
landscaping, and overall goals of the development.
The developer is asking for feedback from City staff, based on the provided documents
included in the Concept Plan Application package.
53
Robinson
D
r
Cent
ury
T
r
l
Morgan
L
n
Stallion
L
n
14
Century Trl
Carl St
4t
h
Av
e
Lo
is
Ln
Carl St
Lo
is
L
n
Legend
Parcels
Urban Reserve
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Planned Residential / Commercial
Parks and Open Space
Private Airfield
City Mask June 5, 2024m
Map Powered By Datafi
1 in = 600 Ft
Madinah Lakes-2040 Future Land Use PlanƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚ ϯ͗ ϮϬϰϬ &ƵƚƵƌĞ >ĂŶĚ hƐĞ tůĂŶ aĂƉ
Attachment 4: Concept Plan, Surrounding Area Aerial Map & Phasing Plan
Attachment 5: Land Use Plan & Areas
Attachment 6: Yield Plan
MADINAH LAKES
PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines
PUD Concept Plan dated April 22, 2024
Correlating Conventional Lot Lot Lot Lot Lot Lot PUD Flexibility
PUD Land Use Zoning District Housing Type Width (ft) Depth (ft) Size (sf) Width (ft) Depth (ft) Size (sf) Required?
Low Density Res R-1, Single Family single family 80 135 10,800 75 130 9,750 Yes
R-1X, Single Family Executive single family 90 135 12,825
R-2, Two Family Residential single family 60 125 7,500 65 130 8,450 No
R-2, Two Family Residential single family 60 125 7,500 55 130 7,150 Yes
R-2, Two Family Residential two-family (unit lot)50 150 7,500
Medium Density Res R-2, Two Family Residential single family 60 125 7,500 65 130 8,450 No
R-2, Two Family Residential single family 60 125 7,500 75 130 9,750 No
R-2, Two Family Residential two-family (unit lot)50 150 7,500
R-3, Medium Density Residential two-family (unit lot)50 NA 7,000
R-3, Medium Density Residential max. 8 unit townhome (base) 100 NA 24,000 500+ NA 10 acres No
High Density Res R-4, High Density Residential two-family (unit lot)50 NA 6,000
R-4, High Density Residential townhome or other multi-family (base) 100 NA 20,000 300-600 NA 3-9 acres No
Planned Res/Comm R-5, High Density Residential and Business townhomes (base)100 NA 14,000 300+ NA 1 acre No
R-5, High Density Residential and Business multi-family (base)100 NA 20,000
TOTAL =
Development Standards/Guidelines Proposed Development
6/5/2024 City of Lino Lakes PUD Land Use & Conventional Zoning-Madinah Lakes PUD Concept Plan
Attachment 7: PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines Chart
17
8
E
9
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
|
SU
I
T
E
2
0
0
| SA
I
N
T
P
A
U
L
,
M
N
|
55
1
0
1
|
65
1
.
2
8
6
.
8
4
5
0
|
WS
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
Memorandum
To: Katie Larsen, Lino Lakes City Planner
From: Kris Keller PE, WSB Diane Hankee PE, Lino Lakes City Engineer
Date: June 6, 2024
Re: Madinah Lakes Concept Plan Review 025482-000
As requested by City staff, WSB reviewed the Concept Plans for the Madinah Lakes Addition for
a PUD prepared by Sathre-Bergquist and received April 29, 2024. The site is located south of Main Street (CSAH 14), east of Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53), and north of Robinson Drive and Carl
Street. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet was not provided and should be completed for this site. Our comments were made on the following documents:
•Madinah Lakes Concept Plan prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, received April 23, 2024.
Engineering
•Grading
The Madinah Lakes development site grading will include grading for roads, stormwater facilities and rough lot grading. Site grading will need to meet all City requirements and match into the existing elevations of the surrounding County roads and private parcels.
Comments:
1.Provide development grading plan meeting City requirements with preliminaryplat submittal2.There is a significant elevation difference between the northern lots and Main
Street (CSAH 14) that will impact the required screening and affect the proposedgrading plan lot depth.
•Stormwater Management
The proposed Madinah Lakes development is drained by a series of private ditches and roadway ditches west of Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) and south of Main Street (CSAH 14) that tie into Anoka County public ditch 10-22-32 (ACD 10-22-32). ACD 10-22-32 flows
south through the proposed Madinah Lakes development to Carl Street. ACD 10-22-32 continues south under Carl Street and ultimately discharges to Marshan Lake.
Anoka County and Rice Creek Watershed District should review the preliminary drainage design concurrent to the City’s preliminary plat reviews.
Attachment 8: City Engineer Memo dated June 6, 2024
Ms. Katie Larsen 06/06/2024 Page 2
Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
This would include coordinating with Anoka County with regards to the proposed roundabout at Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) and Main Street (CSAH 14) at the northwest corner of the site and integrating the associated stormwater management features (ponds,
ditches, etc.) into the design of the development.
Most of the site is within the City’s General Floodplain District (FEMA Zone A) and, according to a previous Geotechnical Report, groundwater levels range from 4-feet to 9-feet in depth. The applicant will be required to meet all City of Lino Lakes ordinances and RCWD rules for surface water management.
The proposed Madinah Lakes development is in the Marshan Resource Management Unit (RMU) according to the City of Lino Lakes 2018 Local Water Management Plan (WMP). The WMP noted several issues within the Marshan RMU, including the following issue
pertinent to the then Robinson Property: “ACD 10-22-32 is ineffective for future urban runoff volumes.” (Appendix B). A strategy for mitigating this issue specific to the Robinson
Property noted in the WMP was: “Proposed master community plan for sod fields” (Appendix B). In addition, the WMP identified existing and future flooding and pollutant loading concerns within the RMU, including Marshan Lake and adjacent wetlands and ACD 10-22-32 (Table 2-21).
WMP Goal 4.1 is to “Provide adequate storage and conveyance of runoff to protect public
safety and minimize property damage.” To address the City’s flooding concerns in accordance with this goal, implementing stormwater rate and volume control practices
where feasible throughout the Robinson Property will be critical. Sufficient freeboard must be provided for proposed structures above the seasonal high groundwater levels and
floodplain elevations in compliance with City Ordinance Chapter 1102 (Stormwater, Erosion and Sediment Control) and RCWD Rule C (Stormwater Management). Ditch conveyance
capacity along Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) and Main Street (CSAH 14) should be maintained and street entrance ditch crossings should utilize large and/or multiple pipe or
box culverts. City and RCWD regulatory floodplain management requirements will also need to be met (See Floodplain below).
WMP Goal 7.2 is to “Ensure that well-planned, quality residential...development
accommodates the City’s projected growth needs and occurs in a manner that also conserves and enhances the City’s natural resources and amenities.” To assist the City in
meeting this goal, the applicant should provide the following for the proposed stormwater ponds and lakes: 1) shoreline geometry that more closely resembles natural bodies of
water, 2) buffers for natural vegetation and high-water level bounce, 3) areas for future maintenance activities (e.g., pond/lake dredge material removal and dewatering) and 4)
differentiation of the water quality and quantity function, goal, and design of both.
Comments:
1. Based on groundwater levels, infiltration basins are not likely on site, filtration orsedimentation basins appear to be more appropriate. Care should be taken todesign systems that avoid floatation concerns within the high groundwater levels.
2.All stormwater features must be easily accessible for future maintenance, thecurrent concept plan shows an isolated basin on the far east side of the site thatwould require either access through a private road or via a long overlanddistance to a public road.
Ms. Katie Larsen 06/06/2024 Page 3
Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
3.The City anticipates that a stormwater reuse system will need to be installed aspart of the project which will require a water balance study be included with thenext submittal.
•Water Supply
The City’s water supply system well firm capacity should meet or exceed its maximum day demand. This criteria is currently constrained by poor water quality in some wells, the White
Bear Lake court orders and ongoing litigation, and annual variability in water use due to drought and other factors. Based on the water supply capacity and well trigger analysis completed in April 2024, excluding Well No. 2 due to poor water quality, if the City is able to add Well No. 7 then the system could serve approximately 7,300 households (about 1,400
households more than the existing 5,900 households) before Well No. 8 is needed. The final number of available households will need to be determined as the project progresses.
The City has begun conversations with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) about permitting Well No. 7 and is awaiting confirmation whether it can be constructed at this time given the ongoing White Bear Lake litigation.
The existing properties are identified as a Stage 1A and 1B Planned Service Areas in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The City will need to evaluate the timing of expansion particularly into service area 1B. There is existing 12-inch diameter ductile iron pipe (DIP)
water main along Robinson Drive and Century Trail south of the site and a 8-inch DIP water main on Carl Street (west cul-de-sac). There is a 10-inch DIP water stub for the Robinson
Property off of Cardinal Way and two 12-inch diameter DIP water main stubs at the intersection of Robinson Drive and Century Trail.
Applicant to verify water pressure is adequate for all locations within the development
including commercial and multifamily locations. The watermain will need to be looped through the site, and the watermain will need to include a 12-inch diameter trunk watermain
as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. All proposed units are required to be on the municipal water supply.
Comments:
1.Provide development utility plan meeting City requirements with preliminary
plat submittal
•Sanitary Sewer
The 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies future 10-inch diameter and 15-inch diameter trunk lines within the site. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan also identifies future forcemain along Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) to the west of the site and future 10-inch and 12-inch trunk lines along Main Street (CSAH 14) north of the site.
The existing properties are identified as a Stage 1A and 1B Planned Service Areas in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and they are located in the 2I sanitary sub-district. There is existing 12-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) sanitary sewer along Robinson Drive and 15-inch diameter PVC sanitary sewer along Century Trail. A sewer stub extends to the north from the manhole at the intersection of Robinson Drive and Century Trail with an invert of 879.78. There is a sanitary manhole at the north end of Cardinal Way with an
Ms. Katie Larsen 06/06/2024 Page 4
Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
invert of 883.18. The sanitary sewer on Cardinal Way is 10-inch diameter PVC. Inverts are according to record plans for the Century Farms North development.
Existing gravity sewers and lift stations downstream of the site whose capacity is largely consumed by existing flows would require additional evaluation. This would include at a minimum survey data to confirm elevations, flow meters to obtain accurate flows, and lift station pump runtime data to determine the residual capacity in these facilities in the near term. As identified in 2040 Comprehensive Plan Table 8-12, these sewers will require improvements to support future flows. Current computer modeling of the sanitary sewer
system, which should be corroborated with the additional evaluation described above, suggests that the existing system would have capacity for 300-500 more units in the entire Sanitary Sewer District 2.
The 2040 Comprehensive Plan includes a West Side Relief interceptor to serve the northwest portions of Sanitary Sewer District 2. If the additional evaluation described above
determines that additional capacity is needed for this development, the West Side Relief interceptor or additional downstream improvements may be considered with this project.
All proposed units will be required to connect to the City’s sanitary sewer system.
•Transportation
The Robinson Property is located south of Main Street (CSAH 14), east of Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) north of Robinson Drive and east of Century Trail. The concept plan includes an extension of Century Trail from Robinson Drive to Main Street (CSAH 14), extension of Robinson Drive to the east property line, a connection from the site to Robinson Drive at Cardinal Way and a new street access to Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) between Robinson Drive and Main Street (CSAH 14).
•A Traffic Study is required.
o Traffic Study should highlight the following:
Segment and intersection operational and safety impacts of theproposed development.
Determine the type of accesses and connections to existing arterialand collector roadways
Intersection traffic control and the need for turn lanes and appropriatestorage lengths at the adjacent intersections and site access streets.o Additional commercial and religious uses should be directed to Main Street tolimit impacts to existing and proposed local roads.
Primary access to high traffic generators should be from higherclassification roads.
As a high traffic generator, the location of the religious use within theproposed site should be evaluated further.o Phasing of roads will need to be incorporated into the study
•Need to ensure there is ample storage area on collector streets that access arterial.Provide necessary spacing between arterial and parallel local roadways.
•Address all comments in the Anoka County review letter for Madinah Lakes dated June6, 2024.o Note, Anoka County is planning on improving Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) whichmay impact the traffic patterns and available access to the Madinah Lakes site.
Ms. Katie Larsen 06/06/2024 Page 5
Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
•Previous reviews of the area by Anoka County indicated they would restrict access toSunset Avenue (CSAH 53) south of Main Street (CSAH 14) by eliminating or reducingservice to right-in/right-out.
•Robinson Drive should be extended to 4th Avenue as shown in Figure 6.5 of the City’s2040 Comprehensive Plan.o Robinson Drive extension shall be aligned further south to avoid wetlands inthe adjacent property. A conceptual alignment will need to be developed to 4th
Avenue.
•Carl Street connection from Century Trail through to 4th Avenue should occur
regardless of development
•Offset north and south connections to the multi-family area and adjacent to the park isnot desired.
•Additional access to the multi-family area may be necessary dependent on the trafficstudy.
Trails and sidewalks
Trails and sidewalks are shown extending on at least one side of all public streets with a series of trails crossing around the central stormwater ponds.
Comments:
1.City Parks and Planning departments to review all trail corridors
2.Sidewalks will be required on all streets. Whether sidewalks are required on bothsides will be determined based on traffic volumes.3. Anoka County advises that construction of a trail should be considered alongboth CSAH 14 and CR 53 for the length of the site and that the City consider
further trail construction.
•Wetlands and Mitigation Plan
An approved wetland delineation will be required. The applicant will need to work with Rice Creek Watershed District for Wetland Conservation Act regulations.
The site includes wetlands along the ditches and in the area north of Carl Street. There is a
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 average width of 50 ft. and a minimum width of 25 ft. will be required per RCWD rules.
A wetlands and mitigation plan will be reviewed during the Preliminary Plat and approved
through RCWD.
•Landscaping
The landscaping will be reviewed by staff and the City’s Environmental Coordinator with
future submittals. The Environmental Coordinator will provide separate comments.
Comments with Preliminary Plat submittal:
Ms. Katie Larsen 06/06/2024 Page 6
Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
1.Consideration for the required screening from Main Street (CSAH 14) and
the significant elevation difference with northern lots
2.Trees shall not be placed over utility pipes. Applicant to review boulevard
tree locations to make sure they are planted an adequate distance (ideally
10 ft) from water and sanitary services.
3.Elevated landscaping (fences, trees, shrubs, etc.) will need to be kept out of
the sight triangles at each of the intersections
•Floodplain
Most of the site is within FEMA’s General Floodplain District (FEMA Zone A). A Base Flood Elevation will need to be determined and approved by FEMA. A CLOMR and subsequent LOMR will be required. RCWD will require floodplain mitigation. The applicant will need to provide a detailed floodplain mitigation plan to demonstrate compliance with RCWD Rule E.
•Drainage and Utility Easements
Comments with Preliminary Plat submittal:
1.Per City Code, the City requires 10-ft wide drainage and utility (D&U) easements
along plat boundaries and along lot lines. Drainage and utility easements along lot
lines are allowed to be centered on common rear and side lot lines.
2.All trails will be required to be within easements at the time of platting. Separate
trail easements will need to be documented after the plat has been approved.
3.The right-of-way for local collector roadways, Century Trail and Robinson Drive,
shall be a minimum 66-ft wide depending on the function and pedestrian amenities.
All other local roads shall have designated right-of-way that is 60-ft wide.
4.Additional drainage and utility easement will need to be provided for Anoka County
Ditch (ACD) 10-22-32
•Development Agreement
A development agreement will be required with the final platting process.
•Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
A Stormwater Maintenance Agreement will be required with the final plat. Public facilities will be covered by the City’s Programmatic Maintenance Agreement.
•Permits Required
1.NPDES General Construction Permit2.City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Grading3.Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
4.Minnesota Department of Health
5.Rice Creek Watershed District Permit
Ms. Katie Larsen 06/06/2024 Page 7
Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
6.Anoka County Right-of-Way and Access Permit
7.USACE for Wetland Alteration
8.FEMA CLOMR/LOMR
9.Additional permits may be required as part of the
development process.
If you or the applicant have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Kris Keller at (612) 419-3083 or kkeller@wsbeng.com. You may also contact Diane Hankee at (651) 982-2430 or dhankee@linolakes.us.
Page 1
To: Katie Larsen
From: Andy Nelson
Date: 5/30/24
Re: Environmental Comments/Madinah Lakes PUD Concept Plan
Environmental Board had the following comments at the 5/29/24 EB meeting:
1.The project meets the mandatory threshold for an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet. This document must be completed prior to submittal of a
preliminary plat application.
2.Native plants should be utilized wherever feasible to maximize habitat benefits
and promote biodiversity. In areas where native plants may not be suitable, low-
maintenance alternative turfgrass types should be considered that minimize
water consumption needs.
3.Existing hydric soils on the site should be salvaged for utilization on site,
particularly in open space areas seeded or planted with native species.
4.A Natural Heritage Information System request must be submitted to the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to identify any rare, threatened, or
special concern species documented in the vicinity of the project. Because any
required survey work may be seasonal and time-sensitive, it is recommended
that the NHIS request be submitted as soon as possible.
5.The Information for Planning and Consultation tool should be utilized to
streamline the United States Fish and Wildlife Service environmental review
process. It is recommended to perform this step as early as possible. The
Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) range is in this area, which may
impact tree removal timelines and necessitate additional surveys.
Environmental Memo
Attachment 9: Environmental Coordinator Memo dated May 30, 2024
Page 2
6.Stormwater pond design should incorporate forebays or other pretreatment
means for water discharging to them.
7.Incorporate a stormwater reuse system for irrigation to minimize water
consumption.
8.Native vegetation buffers should be included around all ponds, preserved
wetlands, and the County ditch.
9.Floodplain management shall be incorporated into the project design that meets
City and Rice Creek Watershed District requirements. Also, a Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) are required for this site.
10.Greenway system components/Trail Connections to incorporate into the design:
•Trail corridors should be a minimum of 30-40 feet in width above the high
water level of ponds. The slope to ponds should be minimized where
possible and not exceed 3:1, but 6:1 would be preferable.
•Connection is needed from Century Trail to the trail segment running
along the gas line easement.
•A connection to the future Anoka County regional trail is needed
midblock of the north road running along Main Street.
•A trail is needed along Sunset Avenue.
•The County Ditch corridor is the priority component of the greenway
system. Stormwater filtration and wildlife habitat should be incorporated
in a 50-foot buffer running along the ditch. This buffer should be on both
sides of the ditch, for 100-ft. total buffer width.
11.The private ditches running along the north and south perimeters of the site
even with Robinson Drive should be filled and mitigated. This space could be
used to better effect for greenway system components.
12.The proposed east/west collector street stubbed to the eastern property line
appears to run into a large Wetland Management Corridor component. This
road should be shifted south to minimize impacts.
13.A Tree Survey, Tree Preservation and Mitigation Plan, and Landscape Plan must
be submitted with a preliminary plat application.
Page 3
14.A berm and landscaping will be required along the perimeters shared with Main
Street and Sunset Avenue.
15.An Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) should be performed for the entire
Northwest quadrant of Lino Lakes, an area defined as west of 4th Avenue, south of
Pine Street, north of Carl Street and east of Sunset Avenue.
Date: June 5, 2024
To: Katie Larsen, AICP
City Planner
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
From: Daniel L’Allier
Deputy Director of Public Safety-Fire Division
640 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Subject: Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan Fire Division Concerns
I have listed the concerns that we have found with the Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan.
Feel free to contact us with questions.
1.A traffic study should be completed to determine traffic volumes
2. A second entrance/exit from the commercial area (grocery store, restaurant,
and daycare).
3. A second entrance/exit for the multi-family area in the north east area of the
project. This area is to the east of the commercial/retail area.
4. We have concerns with the length of the cul-de-sac in the south east area of the
project.
5. The two sections of Carl Street need to be connected.
Public Safety Director John Swenson
640 Town Center Parkway • Lino Lakes, Minnesota • 55014-1182 Public Administration and Records: (651) 982-2300 www.linolakes.us
Attachment 10: Fire Division Memo dated June 5, 2024
LINO LAKES
PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT
POLICE DIVISION
TO: Katie Larson, City Planner
FROM: William Owens, Captain
DATE: June 5, 2024
RE: Madinah Lakes – Concept Plan Review
City Planner Larson,
I’ve received the concept plans for the Madinah Lakes project and have the following
recommendations from the police division:
1.Traffic study on Main Street and Sunset Ave to better understand impacts of the
development.
a.The addition of 434 residential units will increase the amount of vehicular traffic
in the area on a regular basis. Also, the addition of commercial buildings within
the development will likely increase the amount of vehicular traffic, not only from
residents, but also visitors. One of the commercial buildings is a religious service
building and will likely draw an increase in vehicular traffic during service times. A
traffic study will help us better understand anticipated increases in vehicular
traffic in the area and specific times of any influx in traffic volumes. With this
knowledge we can better make recommendations for road improvements and
speed limit considerations to accommodate the increase in vehicular traffic and
leverage road design to mitigate crashes and traffic safety related injuries.
2.Establish a direct connection to the development from the southeast.
a.The concept plans don’t include any direct access to the development from the
east or the southeast. This has the potential to delay a police response to any
emergency within the development, but specifically the southeast portion. A
direct connection to Century Trail from 4th Ave could be accomplished by
connecting Carl Street. Additionally, a direct access to the southeast portion of
the development from Carl Street should be considered for a more expedited
response to the homes there in the event of a police emergency
Attachment 11: Police Division Memo dated June 5, 2024
Attachment 12: Anoka County Transportation Division-Highway letter dated June 6, 2024
City of Lino Lakes
Katie A. Larsen, AICP, City Planner
Dear Ms. Larsen,
As superintendent of Forest Lake Area Schools, I continually monitor housing developments and population
trends that influence school enrollment. Along with my staff, we are grateful for the prior meetings and
conversations we have had with the Lino Lakes planning team. You have been extremely gracious in sharing
information regarding potential residential housing growth in Lino Lakes that may have an impact on
enrollment at Lino Lakes Elementary School.
I have taken the opportunity to review both the Madinah Lakes Development project and the Natures Refuge
and Natures Refuge North projects. The Forest Lake Area School District supports both of these projects and
the potential student enrollment growth that may come with this development. As the projects move forward
in the planning process, we welcome the opportunity to collaborate with the City and the project developers to
support families in transitioning to a new school.
Lino Lakes Elementary offers a dynamic and innovative learning environment rooted in STEM education.
Students also have the opportunity to enroll in the school’s Spanish Immersion Plus program. Additionally,
the school playground and outdoor recreational space provides exciting play spaces for children and families.
Additional school district information can be found at flaschools.org.
In partnership,
Steve Massey, Ed.D.,
Superintendent
Excellence for Every Student Every Day
Forest Lake Area Schools •Independent School District 831 •Equal Opportunity Employer
Attachment 13: Forest Lake Area School District letter received April 26, 2024
1
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 4
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
WORK SESSION DATE: July 1, 2024
TOPIC: EAB Update and Forestry Budget Amendment
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
The City has been proactive in preparing for Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) by completing a plan in
early 2010 and beginning a methodical annual ash tree treatment and removal process. Tree
removals due to Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) has significantly increased as the infestation has
reached it peak. This has strained the City staff’s ability to keep up with problem trees. The
2024 Forestry Budget for removals and replacements, increased to $50,000 in 2023, has already
been expended. Additional problem areas continue to be identified.
Staff currently prioritizes removals based on proximity to structures, places of congregation and
roadways/trails. Depending on the degree of difficulty, removals are completed either by City
staff or contracted out.
To continue management of this issue staff is proposing the following actions:
1) Amend the Forestry Budget to increase contracted services by $50,000.
2) Add an additional seasonal employee (4 months) at cost of $13,200.
3) Delayed replacement of boulevard trees. Tree replacement is generally completed
concurrent with removals or the following year. This reduces funding for removals by
approximately 60 - 70%. Under this scenario a priority list would be created, and
replacement would be completed when funding becomes available.
With the proposed increase staff would be able to target multiple high priority areas and
complete additional removals in 2024. Staff is proposing to fund the changes through two
avenues. Due to other unforeseen hiring priorities the Community Development Specialist
position has not been filled as of July 1st. Staff is proposing to use unspent personnel funding
in the Community Development Department for the Forestry adjustments. Any shortfall would
be covered by reserves.
2
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
Staff is requesting City Council direction regarding the proposed budget adjustments and
consideration of delaying boulevard tree replacement.
ATTACHMENTS
None.
1
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
WORK SESSION DATE: July 1, 2024
TOPIC: Shenandoah Park Water Quality Improvements Project
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
In 2022 the City Council authorized a partnership with the Rice Creek Watershed District to
identify potential water quality improvements to reduce volume and sediment/nutrient loading
to Rice Lake. Rice Lake is designated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) as an
impaired water. The study evaluated potential improvements to Shenandoah Park.
A private ditch system maintained by the City runs through the park, under Birch Street, and
discharges into Rice Lake. The ditch serves as the primary stormwater outlet for the residential
neighborhood extending south to Coyote Trail. Most of the park area is comprised of partially
drained wetland. Staff is of the opinion that opportunity exists for a restoration project that
would enhance water quality and provide an improved greenway element to the park.
The final report was completed in December of 2022. The report included four alternatives of
which 2, options 3 and 4 were recommended by the Environmental Board for future
consideration. Each of the concepts provided water quality and volume improvements,
ecological restoration, and floodplain mitigation. Options for future trail connections were also
evaluated. Due to the estimated cost of the projects, it was recommended that the City pursue
grant funding through RCWD or other agencies. The City’s 5-year Capital Improvement Plan
identified this project for implementation in 2025.
The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) has established the Watershed Based
Implementation Funding (WBIF) Grant Program. The grant program allocates funding to each
watershed area for allocation in a collaborative local process. City staff and RCWD have
proposed the Shenandoah project for funding through this program. We are currently seeking
funding that would include alternative selection and preparation of plans and specifications,
estimated at $55,000. Once design is completed, the City and RCWD would pursue additional
construction funding through the program. Depending on the alternative selected total project
costs could range from $250,000 to $500,000.
2
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
Staff is requesting City Council concurrence for staff to pursue funding and act as the lead party
in cooperation with Rice Creek Watershed District for the project.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Shenandoah Park Feasibility Study.
2. Shenandoah Greenway Concept.
Shenandoah Improvements
Feasibility Report
December 7, 2022
Prepared for:
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
WSB PROJECT NO. 018901-000
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................. 1
2.0 Project Location ....................................................................................... 1
3.0 Site Description ....................................................................................... 1
4.0 Identification of Issues.............................................................................. 4
4.1 Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes TMDL ............................................................ 4
4.2 Invasive/Nuisance Vegetation ................................................................. 4
4.3 Inefficient Use of Space ......................................................................... 4
4.4 Floodplain ............................................................................................ 4
5.0 Modeling Methodology .............................................................................. 5
6.0 Concept 1 ................................................................................................ 7
6.1 Modeling Results ................................................................................... 9
6.2 Construction Estimate ............................................................................ 9
6.3 Permit Table ........................................................................................ 10
7.0 Concept 2 ............................................................................................... 10
7.1 Modeling Results .................................................................................. 12
7.2 Construction Estimate ........................................................................... 12
7.3 Permit Table ........................................................................................ 13
8.0 Concept 3 ............................................................................................... 13
8.1 Modeling Results .................................................................................. 15
8.2 Construction Estimate ........................................................................... 15
8.3 Permit Table ........................................................................................ 16
9.0 Concept 4 ............................................................................................... 16
9.1 Modeling Results .................................................................................. 18
9.2 Construction Estimate ........................................................................... 18
9.3 Permit Table ........................................................................................ 19
10.0 Summary/Recommendation .................................................................... 19
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 1
1.0 Introduction
This report provides the City of Lino Lakes and the Rice Creek Watershed District
(RCWD) with a series of four (4) conceptual designs and associated water quantity
and quality models for implementation of best management practices (BMPs) within
Shenandoah Park. These designs address water quality within an aged part of the
City of Lino Lakes’ stormwater conveyance system draining to Rice Lake (AUID 02-
0008-00) which was listed as impaired for nutrients (total phosphorous) in 2010.
Shenandoah Park was identified as a location for the installation of BMP retrofits to
improve stormwater quality and reduce the volume of stormwater runoff as part of
the Rice Lake Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Assessment completed in 2010.
While this assessment provided site specific information and load reductions, the
assessment report indicated that additional modeling was required for the
Shenandoah Park stormwater improvements.
In addition to developing the conceptual designs discussed in this report, WSB also
updated the existing InfoSWMM model used by RCWD, developed a P8 model,
generated construction estimates for each of the four (4) concepts, and drafted a list
of required permits from local, state, and federal entities.
Through a series of meetings with City and Watershed District staff, WSB developed
the four (4) concepts discussed in this report to meet the following goals:
1. Reduce total phosphorous (TP) and total suspended solids (TSS) loading
within the ditch system and to downstream waterbodies, specifically Rice
Lake .
2. Enhance the amenities, aesthetics, and recreational opportunities within the
park.
3. Increase floodplain volume within the subwatershed.
4. Restore and rehabilitate park vegetation that w ill provide wetland functional
lift.
2.0 Project Location
The proposed improvements are located within the City owned parcels for
Shenandoah Park, in the southwestern corner of Lino Lakes. The street addresses
for the parcels containing the proposed work are 4 75 Arrowhead Dr on the south and
498 Birch St on the north. The surrounding properties are either residential or public
right of way, with the exception of an existing stormwater pond east of the park. The
project location is within the watershed for Rice Lake, which is situated
approximately 1,800 feet north of the park.
3.0 Site Description
The project is proposed on City park property. Currently the southern portion of the
site is largely mowed turfgrass with a play area to the east and a grove of trees to
the north. Beyond this grove of trees, the majority of the site is vegetated with reed
canary grass and nettle. A stormwater BMP was constructed in the upland northern
portion of the project location to treat runoff from the reconstruction of Birch St in
2021.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 2
The site is relatively flat, with an elevation difference of approximately 4 feet across
the areas of proposed work. A main feature of the site, and driver of this project, is a
drainage ditch that flows across the site from south to north. The ditch c omes in
from a culvert under Arrowhead Dr and takes multiple 90 degree turns, running
north, east, north, west, and finally north to a culvert under Birch St. The channel is
well vegetated and there don’t appear to be any major areas of slope failure or
excessive erosion. The upstream culvert from Arrowhead Dr comes in at an elevation
of 886.15 feet while the downstream culvert under Birch St has an elevation of
886.05 feet . The 0.1 foot elevation difference across the ditch means it functionally
behaves as flat and the drainage in it is essentially ponded and draws down as such.
A site visit in September 2022 was used to record the existing natural resources and
vegetation conditions of the site. The land north of the east-west portion of the ditch
within the project area consists of a Type 2 Fresh Wet Meadow wetland dominated
by cattails, likely narrow -leaved (Typha angustifolia ). Reed canary grass (Phalaris
arundinacea ) is dominant along the ditch and banks. The land south of the east-west
portion of the ditch within the project area is a Type 1/2 Seasonally Flooded/Fresh
Wet Meadow wetland dominated by stinging nettle (Urtica dioica ). An Aster spp. was
also observed in low abundance throughout the site. The southeast stretch of the
ditch has native red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea) along it in moderate density.
Overall, the herbaceous layer within the project area has little diversity. A map of the
delineated wetland is below.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 3
The very south end of the project area consists of a manicured turf area adjacent to
a play structure. Just north of the play structure is an area of mounded soil (of an
unknown origin) and mature tree growth.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 4
To the west of this mound is an area containing tree species typical of a transition
zone such as aspen (Populus tremuloides). These trees are distressed and rotting.
The west side of the turf area has large conifers that provide a screen from the
adjacent residential home. Along the west edge of the project area are some existing
box elder trees (Acer negundo) and silver maple (Acer saccharinum ) and other small
to medium sized diverse trees in good condition.
4.0 Identification of Issues
The project area is sited at the intersection of a number of issues facing the City
and RCWD. The proposed improvements can be leveraged to address multiple
problems at once, the solutions provided by the project will balance the needs of
these issues and provide a well-rounded benefit.
4.1 Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes TMDL
Many of the lakes connected by Rice Creek in Lino Lakes fall under a TMDL for
excess nutrients. This includes a 2010 TMDL for Rice Lake, the receiving water
downstream of the project location. This TMDL estimates a 68-80 percent reduction
in TP loading to meet desired nutrient levels. This comes to an approximate
reduction of over 9,300 pounds of TP. Much of this loading improvement may come
from addressing upstream or internal phosphorous loading, however any reduction in
TP is a net positive. As proposed, this project will result in a considerable reduction
of TP loading to Rice Lake.
4.2 Invasive/Nuisance Vegetation
The existing wetlands within the project area are domina ted by monotypic stands of
cattails (likely invasive or hybrid) or stinging nettle with very low diversity and
species richness. Along the ditch, invasive reed canary grass has prevented the
growth of native vegetation.
4.3 Inefficient Use of Space
The project space is currently very segmented, with the ditch, wetland, and park
components separate from each other. There exists a great opportunity for a
multifaceted approach at this site for water quality, ecological, floodplain,
recreational, and educational benefits. However, these benefits are either not being
realized or only realized on an individual basis as -is.
One major issue outlined by the City is a lack of connection between the well-
developed trail system to the south and the trail system along Birch St to the north.
Connecting these systems would also allow for better pedestrian access through the
City and help to achieve its planning goals.
4.4 Floodplain
As the downstream end of a stormwater system serving over 200 acres of drainage
area, the site has h igh potential for flooding. As modeled in existing conditions, the
100-year flood elevation is 892.15 feet. This high-water level approaches the lowest
floor elevations of homes on Totem Trl. and Arrowhead Dr., putting these homes at
risk of flooding. Prop osed project basins would lower this high -water level and
decrease the risk of homes flooding.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 5
5.0 Modeling Methodology
One of the major components of stormwater design for this project is hydrologic and
hydraulic modeling. This consists of modeling to understand how much water is
flowing through the site, what the peak rates and velocities of the flow reaches are,
and how high flood levels will be. InfoSWMM software was used for this modeling in
the project. RCWD has developed an InfoSWMM model for the project location and
upstream stormwater infrastructure. A part of this project was updating the model
based on City as -builts and stormwater system updates since its original creation.
There were two existing ponds added to the model. BAL-012-A and an unnamed pond
in Birchwood Acres Park. BAL-012-A was assumed to flow west to Baldwin Lake but
based on City as -builts it actually outlets south to pond RLA-012-A and ultimately
reaches Shenandoah Park and Rice Lake. The unnamed pond does not have as -built
documents, so storage was estimated based on Anoka County LiDAR data flown in
2011. Another update to model existing conditions was a change to the outlet of the
Shenandoah ditch under Birch St. The 36 inch RCP in the model was changed to
reflect the 24 inch RCP that is there currently. Other smaller changes included
updating basin storage based on as-built contours if available or 2011 LiDAR data
otherwise. An overview map of the model area in question is below.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 6
InfoSWMM modeling was also generated for the proposed project improvements.
This was done to understand the benefits to outflow rates and flood levels in the
pond system that may be realized as a result of this project. Generally, it was found
that adding storage d ownstream in Shenandoah Park resulted in flow rate decreases
under Birch St and reductions in flood levels through the system. These flood
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 7
elevation reductions were greatest at the project location but decreased in effect for
ponds further upstream.
The other major component of stormwater design for this project was in water quality
improvements. This modeling seeks to understand what pollutant loading and
removals can be expected based on the watershed characteristics and stormwater
basins in the system. P 8 software was used for water quality modeling. This involved
creating an existing conditions P8 model from scratch as there was not one already
generated for this drainage area. Pollutant loading was determined based on
subwatershed areas and impervious surface fractions. Pollutant removals were
determined based on pond as -built conditions. Under existing conditions, the
drainage system upstream of the ditch removes nearly 22,500 lb of TSS and
approximately 48.5 lb of TP each year.
For proposed conditions, the P8 models were updated to include the proposed
improvements with each concept. For the sake of water quality modeling, these
BMPs were assumed to function as infiltration basins, where captured pollutant
volumes are fully removed from the stormwater s ystem. Existing soils onsite are
likely silty sands, providing an infiltration rate of approximately 0.45 in/hr based on
the MN Stormwater Manual.
However, based on past soil borings and County groundwater data, it is assumed
inconsistent and minimal infiltration will be achievable in the basins due to the
shallow depth of the water table in the area. Modeling conservatively assumed an
infiltration rate of 0.01 in/hr, the minimum allowable in P8. Actual infiltration
averaged over the year may be higher than this based on water table fluctuations.
Additionally, P8 modeling does not factor in pollutant removals from
evapotranspiration and vegetation uptake, both of which will be emphasized with
proposed improvements. Therefore, it is likely that pollutant removals, TP in
particular, will be higher than the results given but are difficult to quantify. The
results of the modeling described above are summarized in the proposed concepts
below.
6.0 Concept 1
Concept 1 is based directly on the proposed improvements from the 2010 Rice Lake
Subwatershed Assessment developed by the Anoka Conservation District. There are
three wetland basins of roughly similar sizes that receive water from the ditch during
medium to high flow events. Water is allowed to equalize between the basins and
draws down very slowly over time via evapotranspiration and slow infiltration through
the hydric soils. Captured water is kept in the basins after ditch levels draw down by
virtue of one-way flap gates or duckbill valves on the inlets from the ditch.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 8
This system is not optimized for the full benefits that the site has to offer. It does not
use all the space available that the City has to work with and does not provide any
improvements to the ditch system.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 9
Construction Cost - Option 1
Description Units Contract Quantity Unit Price Total Price Comments
MOBILIZATION LS 1 $10,000 $10,000 ~10% of total budget
COMMON EXCAVATION C Y 3000 $17.50 $52,500 Essentially all cut and removal from site
RANDOM RIPRAP CL III C Y 20 $120.00 $2,400 For inlets
12" RCP L F 190 $90 $17,100 Based on OneOffice
12" RCP APRON EACH 2.00 $1,500 $3,000 Based on OneOffice
FLAP GATE/DUCKBILL VALVE EACH 2.00 $3,000 $6,000 Based on OneOffice, no duckbill estimate
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 1.00 $1,500 $1,500 Likely off Arrowhead Dr
SILT FENCE L F 810 $3.50 $2,835
Need around grading + 40' to double up at
culvert outlet
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET S Y 3000 $3 $9,000
Placed on all pond slopes (top contour area -
bottom contour area)
SEEDING ACRE 1.4 $2,000 $2,800
Assume seeding occurs within full limits of
disturbance plus over access route
SEED MIX 25-151 LB 24 $10 $240 Seeding over access road
SEED MIX 34-261 LB 40 $75 $3,000 Seeding wetland/pond areas
1.5" CAL TREE - BALLED AND BURLAPPED TREE 60 $400 $24,000 Based on OneOffice
SHRUB - 5 GAL POT SHRB 100 $75 $7,500 Based on OneOffice
5 YEAR MONITORING/MAINTENANCE LS 1 $42,880 $42,880
20% Contingency $28,375
Total:$170,250
It does afford space for a pathway between the wetlands and educational interaction
points. Concept 1 generally works , but can be improved upon to achieve the greatest
site benefits.
6.1 Modeling Results
TSS Removal
(lb/yr)
TP Removal
(lb/yr)
Ditch 100-yr HWL HWL Decrease (ft)
758 4.21 891.43 0.72
The results above are based on the P8 and InfoSWMM modeling for this project. The
proposed wetland basins provided water quality improvements in accordance with
their footprint and volume, TSS and TP removals shown are increases over existing
modeled pollutant removals. The drop in ditch high water level is also a function of
basin volume. As such, Concept 1 shows the least benefits of all options due to its
smaller basin footprint.
6.2 Construction Estimate
The main driver of costs for all the provided concepts are excavation costs. Concept
1 calls for approximately 3000 cubic yards of excavation, driving about 50 percent of
the construction costs. Other major costs include the construction of associated
storm sewer and vegetation restoration across the site. T he total estimated concept
cost, including a 20 percent cost contingency, is $170,250.
Monitoring and maintenance of the site’s natural resources will be key to
establishing a diverse, native plant community. Site maintenance includes a
minimum of two site visits (spring and fall) for five years to conduct mowing and
herbicide spot treatments, and supplemental seeding during one of the
recommended five years. The cost of maintenance for five years as described is
$34,380. Monitoring the vegetation each year would provide the City with an
adaptive management approach to maintenance. The cost of monitoring one time per
year for five years is $8,500.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 10
6.3 Permit Table
Permit Agency Timeline to Approval
Federal
Section 404 NWP 27 US Army Corps 60-90 days
Local
Rice Creek Watershed
District Permit
Rice Creek Watershed
District
40 days
Wetland Conservation
Act No Loss
Rice Creek Watershed
District
60 days
7.0 Concept 2
Concept 2 builds on the wetland basins described in Concept 1, but with an
emphasis on maximizing water quality benefits. The proposed basins are maximized
to fill as much of the available space and provide the largest area for
evapotranspiration and infiltration. One-way inlets are again proposed to allow water
to flow in from the ditch but prevent backflow once water levels draw back down in
it. The ditch channel is not proposed to be shifted in this concept.
This concept results in the greatest pollutant removal and increase in floodplain
capacity. However, that comes at the cost of losing educational and recreational
opportunities with the basins. In addition, maximizing basin volume does not provide
much diversity in potential wetland improvements as much of it will consist of wet
marsh conditions.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 11
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 12
Construction Cost - Option 2
Description Units Contract Quantity Unit Price Total Price Comments
MOBILIZATION LS 1 $20,000 $20,000 ~10% of total budget, slightly lower b/c simpler
COMMON EXCAVATION C Y 14750 $17.50 $258,125 Essentially all cut and removal from site
RANDOM RIPRAP CL III C Y 10 $120.00 $1,200 For inlets
12" RCP L F 70 $90 $6,300 Based on OneOffice
12" RCP APRON EACH 2.00 $1,500 $3,000 Based on OneOffice
FLAP GATE/DUCKBILL VALVE EACH 2.00 $3,000 $6,000 Based on OneOffice, no duckbill estimate
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 1.00 $1,500 $1,500 Likely off Arrowhead Dr
SILT FENCE L F 1,060 $3.50 $3,710
Need around grading + 40' to double up at
culvert outlet
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET S Y 3620 $3 $10,860
Placed on all pond slopes (top contour area -
bottom contour area)
SEEDING ACRE 2.6 $2,000 $5,200
Assume seeding occurs within full limits of
disturbance plus over access route
SEED MIX 25-151 LB 24 $10 $240 Seeding over access road, 120 lb/ac
SEED MIX 34-261 LB 80 $75 $6,000 Seeding wetland/pond areas, 31.5 lb/ac
1.5" CAL TREE - BALLED AND BURLAPPED TREE 30 $400 $12,000 Based on OneOffice
SHRUB - 5 GAL POT SHRB 100 $75 $7,500 Based on OneOffice
5 YEAR MONITORING/MAINTENANCE LS 1 $42,880 $42,880
20% Contingency $68,327
Total:$409,962
7.1 Modeling Results
TSS Removal
(lb/yr)
TP Removal
(lb/yr)
Ditch 100-yr HWL HWL Decrease (ft)
1,416 9.05 891.28 0.87
The results above are based on the P8 and InfoSWMM modeling for this project. The
proposed wetland basins provided water quality improvements in accordance with
their footprint and volume, TSS and TP removals shown are increases over existing
modeled pollutant removals. The drop in ditch high water level is also a function of
basin volume. As such, Concept 2 shows the greatest benefits of all options due to
its largest basin footprint.
7.2 Construction Estimate
Again, the main driver of costs is excavation, even more so for this concept since
basin size is maximized . Concept 2 calls for nearly 15,000 cubic yards of
excavation, driving about 80 percent of the construction costs. As with Concept 1,
other major costs include the construction of associated storm sewer and vegetation
restoration across the site. The total estimated concept cost, including a 20 percent
cost contingency, is $410,000.
Monitoring and maintenance of the site’s natural resources will be key to
establishing a diverse, native plant community. Site maintenance includes a
minimum of two site visits (spring and fall) for five years to conduct mowing and
herbicide spot treatments, and supplemental seeding during one of the
recommended five years. The cost of maintenance for five years as described is
$34,380. Monitoring the vegetation each year would provide the City with an
adaptive management approach to maintenan ce. The cost of monitoring one time per
year for five years is $8,500.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 13
7.3 Permit Table
Permit Agency Timeline to Approval
Federal
Section 404 NWP 27 US Army Corps 60-90 days
Local
Rice Creek Watershed
District Permit
Rice Creek Watershed
District
40 days
Wetland Conservation
Act No Loss
Rice Creek Watershed
District
60 days
8.0 Concept 3
Concept 3 involves the most holistic improvements for the project, providing benefits
to water quality, floodplain management, site ecology, recreation, and education.
There are four proposed basins of varying size and depth, providing a variety of
wetland environments and water levels. As with the other concepts, water is
proposed to enter the basins via one -way inlets. The larger bas ins are proposed to
be of greater depth, allowing for increased water quality volumes to be treated and
further reductions in flood elevations.
Another major component of this concept is the realignment of the ditch channel
through the park. The proposed channel would be approximately the same length,
but follow a more natural and winding route instead of the sharp 90 degree turns,
reducing drastic velocity changes and the associated potential erosion.
Concept 3 would also allow for the playground area in the park to be more easily
accessible to Arrowhead Trail and also potentially afford some parking spaces in the
space freed up by the ditch realignment. The concept also has potential space for
boardwalks or trails through much of the park, provid ing recreational and
educational opportunities through the large and varying spaces of restored wetlands,
and providing a pedestrian connection from Arrowhead Tr. to Birch St.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 14
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 15
Construction Cost - Option 3
Description Units Contract Quantity Unit Price Total Price Comments
MOBILIZATION LS 1 $30,000 $30,000 ~10% of total budget
COMMON EXCAVATION C Y 12500 $17.50 $218,750 Essentially all cut and removal from site
COMMON EMBANKMENT C Y 600 $17.50 $10,500 Fill old channel
RANDOM RIPRAP CL III C Y 20 $120.00 $2,400 For inlets
12" RCP L F 240 $90 $21,600 Based on OneOffice
12" RCP APRON EACH 5.00 $1,500 $7,500 Based on OneOffice
FLAP GATE/DUCKBILL VALVE EACH 4.00 $3,000 $12,000 Based on OneOffice, no duckbill estimate
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 1.00 $1,500 $1,500 Likely off Arrowhead Dr
SILT FENCE L F 400 $3.50 $1,400
Need around grading + 40' to double up at culvert
outlet
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET S Y 9500 $3 $28,500
Placed on all pond slopes (top contour area -
bottom contour area)
SEEDING ACRE 3.6 $2,000 $7,200
Assume seeding occurs within full limits of
disturbance plus over access route
SEED MIX 25-151 LB 55 $10 $550
Seeding over access road and old channel, 120
lb/ac
SEED MIX 34-261 LB 100 $75 $7,500 Seeding wetland/pond/channel areas, 31.5 lb/ac
LIVE STAKES EACH 210 $3 $544 Stabilization along erosive edge of realigned ditch
1.5" CAL TREE - BALLED AND BURLAPPED TREE 55 $400 $22,000 Based on OneOffice
SHRUB - 5 GAL POT SHRB 100 $75 $7,500 Based on OneOffice
5 YEAR MONITORING/MAINTENANCE LS 1 $42,880 $42,880
20% Contingency $75,889
Total:$455,333
8.1 Modeling Results
TSS Removal
(lb/yr)
TP Removal
(lb/yr)
Ditch 100-yr HWL HWL Decrease (ft)
1,297 8.37 891.30 0.85
The results above are based on the P8 and InfoSWMM modeling for this project. The
proposed wetland basins provided water quality improvements in accordance with
their footprint and volume, TSS and TP removals shown are increases over existing
modeled pollutant removals. The drop in ditch high water level is also a function of
basin volume. As such, Concept 3 shows the slightly decreased benefits compared to
Concept 2, but they are still significant.
8.2 Construction Estimate
Excavation costs still dominate the estimate project total under this concept, but
less so than Concept 2. 12,500 cubic yards of excavation are proposed, but this
would be slightly offset with the proposed embankment volumes to fill in the old ditch
channel. Earthwork estimates account for about 70 percent of total improvement
costs. The total estimated concept cost, including a 20 percent cost contingency, is
$455,350. It should be noted the construction estimate does not include potential
recreational improvements such as a boardwalk or trail.
Monitoring and maintenance of the site’s natural resources will be key to
establishing a diverse, native plant community. Site maintenance includes a
minimum of two site visits (spring and fall) for five years to conduct mowing and
herbicide spot treatments, and supplemental seeding during one of the
recommended five years. The cost of maintenance for five years as described is
$34,380. Monitoring the vegetation each year would provide the City with an
adaptive management approach to maintenance. The cost of monitoring one time per
year for five years is $8,500.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 16
8.3 Permit Table
Permit Agency Timeline to Approval
Federal
Section 404 NWP 27 US Army Corps 60-90 days
Local
Rice Creek Watershed
District Permit
Rice Creek Watershed
District
40 days
Wetland Conservation
Act No Loss
Rice Creek Watershed
District
60 days
9.0 Concept 4
Concept 4 would consist of improvements largely focused on water quality benefits.
Improvements would involve construction of an iron -enhanced sand filter (IESF) to
treat the currently untreated runoff from Totem Tr., Hokah Dr., and Rice Ct., west of
Shenandoah Park. This concept is proposed in conjunction with Concept 3, but it
could also work in a modified capacity on its own or with Concept 1 or 2. All
removals, floodplain benefits, and cost estimates factor in Concept 3 base elements
and the IESF.
As proposed, the IESF BMP would cover approximately 5,000 square feet with a
basin bottom elevation of 887.4 feet . This elevation is based on a slightly raised
invert of the outlet pipe for drainage coming off the roadway. Incoming stormwater
would gravity flow through the filter media and outlet to the ditch via draintile. The
manhole upstream of this outlet pipe is proposed with a 3 feet sump to provide
pretreatment prior to flows reaching the IESF.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 17
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 18
9.1 Modeling Results
TSS Removal
(lb/yr)
TP Removal
(lb/yr)
Ditch 100-yr HWL HWL Decrease (ft)
5,688 19.75 891.30 0.85
The results above are based on the P8 modeling for this project. The IESF is
proposed primarily for water quality benefits, as proposed it would have a negligible
impact on floodplain volumes and water levels and therefore, they were unchanged
from Concept 3. As shown in the results, this concept would greatly increase TSS
and TP removals while taking up a relatively small footprint within the overall project
area. Combined with Concept 3, TP removals are near 20 pounds per year.
9.2 Construction Estimate
As with Concept 3, excavation costs still dominate the estimated project. Earthwork
quantities are slightly increased with the proposed IESF, but its volume is much less
than the other wetland basins. Other major costs include the specialized iron -
enhanced filter media and replacement of storm sewer. The total estimated concept
cost, including a 20 percent cost contingency, is $601,000. Again, this construction
estimate does not include potential recreational improvements such as a boardwalk
or trail. Refer to the budget table at the end of this section for the base construction
cost line item breakdown.
Monitoring and maintenance of the site’s natural resources will be key to
establishing a diverse, native plant community. Site maintenance includes a
minimum of two site visits (spring and fall) for five years to conduct mowing and
herbicide spot treatments, and supplemental seeding during one of the
recommended five years. The cost of maintenance for five years as described is
$34,380. Monitoring the vegetation each year would provide the City with an
adaptive management approach to maintenance. The cost of monitoring one time per
year for five years is $8,500.
Current design standards assume an approximate 10-year lifespan for effective
pollutant capture of an I ESF BMP. This lifespan can be extended with filter media
replacement. The estimated cost of replacement is $45,000. This includes costs for
removal of old media, installation of new iron-enhanced sand, and a 20 percent
contingency.
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 19
9.3 Permit Table
Permit Agency Timeline to Approval
Federal
Section 404 NWP 27 US Army Corps 60-90 days
Local
Rice Creek Watershed
District Permit
Rice Creek Watershed
District
40 days
Wetland Conservation
Act De Minimis
Exemption and No
Loss
Rice Creek Watershed
District
60 days
10.0 Summary/Recommendation
All concepts described in this report provide improvements to the existing site
vegetation, water quality, and floodplain levels. However, each concept strikes a
difference balance of the above in addition to providing potential consideration to
recreational benefits for residents on Lino Lakes. The site stormwater benefits are
summarized for consideration in the table below.
Construction Cost - Option 4
Description Units Contract Quantity Unit Price Total Price Comments
MOBILIZATION LS 1 $50,000 $50,000 ~10% of total budget
COMMON EXCAVATION C Y 13000 $17.50 $227,500 Essentially all cut and removal from site
COMMON EMBANKMENT C Y 850 $17.50 $14,875 Berm and old channel fill
SELECT GRANULAR BORROW C Y 100 $30.00 $3,000 Filter sand
FILTER MEDIA SPECIAL C Y 170 $175.00 $29,750 5% by weight iron enhanced sand
RANDOM RIPRAP CL III C Y 30 $120.00 $3,600 For inlets/outlets
6" PERF HDPE PIPE LF 250 $24.00 $6,000 BMP underdrain
6" PERF HDPE PIPE CLEANOUT EACH 2 $500.00 $1,000 Underdrain cleanout
12" RCP L F 250 $90 $22,500 Based on OneOffice
12" RCP APRON EACH 6 $1,500 $9,000 Based on OneOffice
30" RCP L F 148 $150.00 $22,200 Based on OneOffice, replace pipe from Totem
30" RCP APRON EACH 1 $2,500 $2,500 Based on OneOffice
FLAP GATE/DUCKBILL VALVE EACH 4 $3,000 $12,000 Based on OneOffice, no duckbill estimate
48" OCS EACH 1 $7,500 $7,500 Based on OneOffice, IESF outlet
60" MH L F 7 $1,000 $7,000 Based on OneOffice, replace in Totem
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC S Y 800.00 $3 $2,400 Between IE sand and regular sand
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 1 $1,500 $1,500 Likely off Arrowhead Dr
SILT FENCE L F 900 $3.50 $3,150 Around filter and downstream of grading
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET S Y 10000 $3 $30,000 Placed on graded slopes
SEEDING ACRE 3.6 $2,000 $7,200
Assume seeding occurs within full limits of
disturbance plus over access route
SEED MIX 25-151 LB 55 $10 $550 Seeding over access road and old channel, 120
SEED MIX 34-261 LB 100 $75 $7,500 Seeding wetland/pond/channel areas, 31.5 lb/ac
LIVE STAKES EACH 210 $3 $544 Stabilization along erosive edge of realigned ditch
1.5" CAL TREE - BALLED AND BURLAPPED TREE 55 $400 $22,000 Based on OneOffice
SHRUB - 5 GAL POT SHRB 100 $75 $7,500 Based on OneOffice
5 YEAR MONITORING/MAINTENANCE LS 1 $42,880 $42,880
20% Contingency $100,154
Total:$600,923
Shenandoah Improvements Feasibility Report City of Lino Lakes, MN
WSB Project No. 018901-000 Page 20
BMP Option Ditch 100-yr
HWL
HWL
Decrease (ft)
TSS Removal
(lb/yr)
TP Removal
(lb/yr)
Existing 892.15 N/A N/A N/A
Concept 1 891.44 0.72 758 4.21
Concept 2 891.29 0.87 1,416 9.05
Concept 3 891.31 0.85 1,297 8.37
Concept 4 891.31 0.85 5,688 19.75
A major component of assessing BMP cost efficiency is the estimated cost divided by
the provided pounds of TP removal. The proposed improvements were evaluated with
a 25-year lifespan. Costs over the lifetime included full construction cost, 5 years of
vegetation maintenance, annual BMP maintenance, and any major maintenance
costs. These costs and the price per pound of TP are summarized in the table below.
BMP
Option
Annual TP
Removal
(lb)
Construction
Cost
5-year
Vegetation
Maintenance
Cost
Annual BMP
Maintenance
Cost
Major
O&M
Cost
25-year
Cost/Pound
TP
Concept 1 4.21 $170,250 $42,880 $100 $0 $2,049
Concept 2 9.05 $410,000 $42,880 $200 $0 $2,024
Concept 3 8.37 $455,350 $42,880 $200 $0 $2,405
Concept 4 19.75 $601,000 $42,880 $300 $45,000 $1,410
All concepts proposed provide improvements in varying degrees. Concept 1 provides
lower benefits but comes at a lower cost and would entail a smaller amount of
disturbance to existing site conditions. Concept 2 maximizes basin size and
associated pollutant removals, but at an increased cost and with no broader
improvements to the park. Concept 3 provides large basin sizes, ditch realignment
similar to a natural channel, and potential recreational benefits, but with a greater
cost and major site disturbance. Concept 4 provides similar benefits in addition to
the best cost per pound of TP removal, but at a significant upfront cost and higher
long term maintenance needs.
This report recommends the City consider the improvements in Concept 4. The
proposed work w ould allow for high degrees of wetland improvements in large basins
that would also serve to reduce flood levels. Ditch realignment would further serve
to enhance these natural resources benefits while also providing options for a
greenway trail system and educational opportunities around the merits of stormwater
treatment and wetland ecosystems. Finally, the proposed IESF would provide
exceptional pollutant treatment and the best price per pound of TP removed. With
the wide degree of benefits and greatest price-quantified water quality improvement,
Concept 4 would also be a strong candidate to receive grant funding to help the City
offset its construction costs. However, WSB will be happy to support the City in
pursuing further design of any concept proposed.
K:
\
0
1
8
9
0
1
-
0
0
0
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
0
1
8
9
0
1
-
0
0
0
S
h
e
n
a
n
d
o
a
h
Shenandoah Drainage Concept Plan
Lino Lakes, MN
September 15, 2023 | WSB Project number: 018901-000 Scale in Feet
0’100’50’25’
ARROWHEAD DRIVE
TO
T
E
M
T
R
A
I
L
BIRCH STREET
RICE C
T
HOKAH
D
R
PROPOSED HIGH WATER LEVEL ELEVATION 891.31
WETLAND BASIN (TYP)
COUNTY STORM WATER BASIN
PROPOSED CHANNEL ROUTE
EXISTING POND
EXISTING PLAY
AREA
SHENANDOAH PARK
IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER
TRAIL
TRAIL
BOARDWALK
1
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 6
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
WORK SESSION DATE: July 1, 2024
TOPIC: RCWD/VLAWMO Boundary Adjustments
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
In 2022 the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) undertook a hydrologic boundary review
within Ramsey, Anoka and Hennepin Counties. The purpose of the review was to align the
jurisdictional boundary more closely to the hydrological boundary between the respective
water management organizations.
The process identified boundary discrepancies in need of modification. A total of 38 parcels, 3
of which are owned by the City of Lino Lakes, will be effected by the boundary adjustments. 12
parcels will switch from RCWD to VLAWMO and the balance will revert to RCWD jurisdiction.
In each case the determination is that more than 50% of the property drains to RCWD
jurisdiction.
State law requires that RCWD submit and petition for the change to the Board of Water and Soil
Resources (BWSR). The petition must be accompanied by letters of concurrence from the
individual local units of government. RCWD has requested a letter of concurrence by August 9,
2024. Public notice of the proposed boundary adjustment is provided by BWSR upon receipt of
the petition from RCWD. Staff has requested additional information on the notification
process.
City comments, coordinated with VLAWMO, appear to have been incorporated into the
proposed boundary adjustment. VLAWMO is completing a final review and is anticipating
consideration in August. Staff anticipates bringing the item for consideration by the City
Council in late July or early August.
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
Staff is requesting City Council discussion and comments regarding the proposed adjustments.
2
ATTACHMENTS
1. Lino Lakes Changing Parcel List
2. Lino Lakes Map Book
Lino Lakes-Changing Parcel List
PIN Owner Address City Old District New District Reasoning Mapbook Page Map ID
353122140005 BERGMAN JOHN M & SUSANNE A 6364 20TH AVE Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 30 & 31 1320
363122220003 PETERSON, BRANDON 2090 64TH ST Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 30 1321
363122220002 LINDQUIST MATTHEW W 2098 64TH ST Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 30 1322
363122210008 AVILES ROLANDO & NANCY M 2116 64TH ST Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 30 1323
363122210005 BULLIS S J & FELLMAN P C 2112 64TH ST Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 30 1324
353122220010 KRONZER MICHAEL JOSEPH 1624 HOLLY DR Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1325
353122220009 GOIFFON DENISE C 1620 HOLLY DR E Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1326
353122220008 RICHTER TRUSTEE, ARLEN J 1616 HOLLY DR E Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1327
353122220007 WANDERSEE GLENN E 1608 HOLLY DR Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1328
353122220006 BORYCZKA ELIZABETH W Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1329
353122220005 RENNER, RODERICK M 1621 HOLLY DR Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1330
353122220004 GONDEK, JAMES P 6391 CENTERVILLE RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1331
353122220003 HOULE MARLENE A 6389 CENTERVILLE RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1332
353122220002 AMES TRUSTEE, DORIS A 1631 HOLLY DR Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1333
353122220001 MICKLE, BRENDA 6383 CENTERVILLE RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 28 1334
343122430002 EDDY, VICTORIA A 6097 ASH ST Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 27 1335
343122420004 BACHMAN SR, WARREN D 1487 ASH ST Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 27 1336
343122420003 WRUCK, GARY D 1443 ASH ST Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 27 1337
263122140100 LINO LAKES CITY OF 600 TOWN CENTER PARKWAY Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1338
263122140099 PETERSON TIMOTHY 1962 WILLIAM LN Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1339
263122140098 CHAPMAN DAVID 1958 WILLIAM LN Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1340
263122140081 PALKOVICH ERIC 6652 HERITAGE AVE Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1341
263122140008 NU DAH 1969 BIRCH ST Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1342
263122140007 HECK JAMES 6625 20TH AVE Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1343
263122140005 HART MICHAEL E 1989 BIRCH ST Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1344
263122140004 SCHLUNDT, ROBERT 1997 BIRCH ST Lino Lakes Rice Creek WSD Vadnais Lake Area WMO <50% in RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1345
253122420086 LINO LAKES CITY OF 600 TOWN CENTER PKWY Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1346
253122420081 HELSETH, BRENDA L 2224 TART LK RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1347
253122420080 LARSON, KELLIE 2230 TART LK RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1348
253122420079 GERDES, TRINETTA M 6545 LANGER LN Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1349
253122420078 JARVIS PATRICK T & VOSS JANA L 6539 LANGER LN Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1350
253122420077 RILEY THOMAS & PAMELA 6533 LANGER LANE Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1351
253122420076 HAIDER, JON 6527 LANGER LN Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1352
253122420007 POWELL JEFFREY 2231 TART LAKE RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1353
253122420006 KRUSE TRUSTEE JIMMY 2225 TART LAKE RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1354
253122420005 ARMSTRONG, ANDREW M 2219 TART LAKE RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1355
253122310013 LINO LAKES CITY OF 600 TOWN CENTER PKWY Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 29 1356
353122430002 BJORK, BONNIE L 6206 OTTER LAKE RD Lino Lakes Vadnais Lake Area WMO Rice Creek WSD >50% drains to RCWD, hydro boundary change 31 & 32 1357
An
o
k
a
Wa
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
Anoka
Ramsey
Centerville
North Oaks
Lino Lakes
No
r
t
h
O
a
k
s
Wh
i
t
e
B
e
a
r
T
w
p
.
Li
n
o
L
a
k
e
s
Hu
g
o
Lino Lakes
White Bear Twp.
29
28 30
27
32
33
31
²
0 0.25 0.50.13 Miles
Surrounding WMO
Hydrologic Boundaries
RCWD Hydrologic
Boundary
County Boundary
City Boundaries
1 of 41
Sheet:
5/8/2024
Date:
5555-0293
Project No :
CCO
Checked by:
KRB
Drawn by:
1:16,487
Scale:
Legal Boundary Review - Page 1 of 41
H:
\
J
B
N
\
5
5
0
0
\
5
5
5
5
\
5
5
5
5
_
0
2
9
3
R
a
m
s
e
y
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
\
G
I
S
\
D
a
t
a
\
5
5
5
5
-
0
2
9
3
_
M
a
p
b
o
o
k
s
\
Legal Boundary Review
Anoka
Ramsey North Oaks
Lino Lakes
RICE CREEK
WATERSHED
DISTRICT
1335
1336
1337
²
0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles
Areas Called Out in Memo
RCWD Hydrologic Boundary
Current RCWD Legal Boundary
Recommended RCWD Legal
Boundary
City Boundaries
County Boundary
New Watershed
RCWD
Sheet:
5/8/2024
Date:
5555-0293
Project No :
CCO
Checked by:
KRB
Drawn by:
1:5,000
Scale:
H:
\
J
B
N
\
5
5
0
0
\
5
5
5
5
\
5
5
5
5
_
0
2
9
3
R
a
m
s
e
y
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
\
G
I
S
\
D
a
t
a
\
5
5
5
5
-
0
2
9
3
_
M
a
p
b
o
o
k
s
\
Legal Boundary Review
27 of 41
Legal Boundary Review Page 27 of 41
RICE CREEK
WATERSHED
DISTRICT
1325132613271328
1329 1330
1331
1332
1333 1334
²
0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles
Areas Called Out in Memo
RCWD Hydrologic Boundary
Current RCWD Legal Boundary
Recommended RCWD Legal
Boundary
City Boundaries
County Boundary
New Watershed
RCWD
Sheet:
5/8/2024
Date:
5555-0293
Project No :
CCO
Checked by:
KRB
Drawn by:
1:5,000
Scale:
H:
\
J
B
N
\
5
5
0
0
\
5
5
5
5
\
5
5
5
5
_
0
2
9
3
R
a
m
s
e
y
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
\
G
I
S
\
D
a
t
a
\
5
5
5
5
-
0
2
9
3
_
M
a
p
b
o
o
k
s
\
Legal Boundary Review
28 of 41
Legal Boundary Review Page 28 of 41
Ce
n
t
e
r
v
i
l
l
e
RICE CREEK
WATERSHED
DISTRICT
1338
13391340
1341
1342
1343
1344 1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
²
0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles
Areas Called Out in Memo
RCWD Hydrologic Boundary
Current RCWD Legal Boundary
Recommended RCWD LegalBoundary
City Boundaries
County Boundary
New Watershed
RCWD
VLAWMO
Sheet:
5/8/2024
Date:
5555-0293
Project No :
CCO
Checked by:
KRB
Drawn by:
1:5,000
Scale:
H:
\
J
B
N
\
5
5
0
0
\
5
5
5
5
\
5
5
5
5
_
0
2
9
3
R
a
m
s
e
y
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
\
G
I
S
\
D
a
t
a
\
5
5
5
5
-
0
2
9
3
_
M
a
p
b
o
o
k
s
\
Legal Boundary Review
29 of 41
Legal Boundary Review Page 29 of 41
RICE CREEK
WATERSHED
DISTRICT
1321 1322 1323
1324
1320
13501351
1352
²
0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles
Areas Called Out in Memo
RCWD Hydrologic Boundary
Current RCWD Legal Boundary
Recommended RCWD LegalBoundary
City Boundaries
County Boundary
New Watershed
RCWD
VLAWMO
Sheet:
5/8/2024
Date:
5555-0293
Project No :
CCO
Checked by:
KRB
Drawn by:
1:5,000
Scale:
H:
\
J
B
N
\
5
5
0
0
\
5
5
5
5
\
5
5
5
5
_
0
2
9
3
R
a
m
s
e
y
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
\
G
I
S
\
D
a
t
a
\
5
5
5
5
-
0
2
9
3
_
M
a
p
b
o
o
k
s
\
Legal Boundary Review
30 of 41
Legal Boundary Review Page 30 of 41
Anoka
Ramsey
Lino Lakes
White Bear Twp.
RICE CREEK
WATERSHED
DISTRICT
1357
1320
430
428786
1313
979
981
²
0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles
Areas Called Out in Memo
RCWD Hydrologic Boundary
Current RCWD Legal Boundary
Recommended RCWD Legal
Boundary
City Boundaries
County Boundary
New Watershed
RCWD
Sheet:
5/8/2024
Date:
5555-0293
Project No :
CCO
Checked by:
KRB
Drawn by:
1:5,000
Scale:
H:
\
J
B
N
\
5
5
0
0
\
5
5
5
5
\
5
5
5
5
_
0
2
9
3
R
a
m
s
e
y
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
\
G
I
S
\
D
a
t
a
\
5
5
5
5
-
0
2
9
3
_
M
a
p
b
o
o
k
s
\
Legal Boundary Review
31 of 41
Legal Boundary Review Page 31 of 41
Anoka
RamseyNorth Oaks
Lino Lakes
No
r
t
h
O
a
k
s
Wh
i
t
e
B
e
a
r
T
w
p
.
Lino Lakes
White Bear Twp.
RICE CREEK
WATERSHED
DISTRICT
1357
533554
938
553544
557532
528531
527524
523541 550536
509
508
444
489
429
502
386
718
510
443
427
494
453
452
451
488
442
426
381
430
428786
1313
979
981
²
0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles
Areas Called Out in Memo
RCWD Hydrologic Boundary
Current RCWD Legal Boundary
Recommended RCWD Legal
Boundary
City Boundaries
County Boundary
New Watershed
RCWD
Sheet:
5/8/2024
Date:
5555-0293
Project No :
CCO
Checked by:
KRB
Drawn by:
1:5,000
Scale:
H:
\
J
B
N
\
5
5
0
0
\
5
5
5
5
\
5
5
5
5
_
0
2
9
3
R
a
m
s
e
y
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
\
G
I
S
\
D
a
t
a
\
5
5
5
5
-
0
2
9
3
_
M
a
p
b
o
o
k
s
\
Legal Boundary Review
32 of 41
Legal Boundary Review Page 32 of 41