HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/12/2026 PZ Combined Packet
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA
Wednesday, August 12, 2026
Broadcast on Cable TV Channel 16
and northmetrotv.com/lino-lakes-stream
ADVISORY BOARD MEETING, 6:30 P.M.
Council Chambers (televised)
1.Call to Order and Roll Call
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Swearing in of Board Member
4.Public Comment (sign-in prior to start of meeting per Rules of Decorum)
5.Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items
6.Approval of Minutes: July 8, 2026
7.Action Items
A.Public Hearing: Wilkinson Water PUD Amendment #1-Single-family Lots
B.Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (ZOTA) –Landscape
Ordinance
C.Robinson South PUD Concept Plan/Concept Plan
D.Natures Refuge North Second Addition PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
E.Harvest Grange Final Plat
8.Discussion Items
A.Project Updates
ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES
DATE: July 8, 2026
TIME STARTED: 6:30 P.M.
TIME ENDED: 6:52 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT:Nathan Vojtech, Patrick Kohler, Suzy Guthmueller,
Perry Laden, Neil Evenson
MEMBERS ABSENT:Isaac Wipperfurth
STAFF PRESENT:Katie Larsen, Jessica Eller, Marissa Ertel
1.CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Chair Laden called the Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
on July 8, 2026.
2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3.NOMINATION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
Mr. Evenson made a motion to nominate Mr. Laden for Chair and Mr. Laden nominated
Mr. Evenson for Vice Chair. Motion carried 5 – 0.
4.PUBLIC COMMENT
Chair Laden declared public comment open at 6:37 p.m.
There was no one present for public comment.
Mr. Vojtech motioned to close public comment at 6:37 p.m. Motion was seconded by
Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 5 – 0.
5.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved as presented.
6.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 8, 2026
Page 2
Mr. Vojtech moved to approve the June 10, 2026 meeting minutes. Motion seconded
by Mr. Kohler. Motion carried 5 – 0.
7.ACTION ITEMS
A.Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes Second Addition PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
Ms. Larsen presented the staff report.
The applicant, Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes, LLC, submitted a land use application for
Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes Second Addition PUD Final Plan/Final Plat. The
development contains a 4-story mixed-use building at the southeast corner of the site.
The first floor will be commercial uses and resident amenity center. The other three
floors will be 59 market-rate independent living units for residents aged 55 and older.
Mr. Evenson asked if the commercial would be facing the street or the interior. Ms.
Larsen stated that access will be on the interior of the site, with signage on the interior
and street facing portion.
Ms. Guthmueller stated that the outdoor plaza being a private amenity for the
Lyngblomsten residents is disappointing as a gateway for the City. Ms. Guthmueller had
questions about the gateway City signage and whether there could be two signs.
Judd Fenlon, Grand Real Estate Advisors, was available for questions.
Mr. Vojtech had questions about access to the patio and whether this would be
screened. Mr. Fenlon stated that this would be private access that would be screened.
Mr. Vojtech asked where the patio for the restaurant would be located. Mr. Fenlon
stated it would be at the north end of the site.
Mr. Kohler motioned to approve the Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes Second Addition PUD
Final Plan/Final Plat with staff recommendations. Motion seconded by Mr. Vojtech.
Motion carried 5 – 0.
8.DISCUSSION ITEMS
A.Project Updates
Ms. Larsen provided project updates to the Board.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
July 8, 2026
Page 3
Mr. Evenson moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by Mr. Kohler. Meeting
adjourned at 6:52 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Marissa Ertel – Community Development Administrative Assistant
DRAFT MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner
MEETING DATE: August 12, 2026
TOPIC:PUBLIC HEARING: Wilkinson Waters PUD Amendment #1-Single-
family Lots
CASE NUMBER: PZC2026-0010
APPLICANT: Charles Cudd Co.
Attn: Robert Wachholz
rd
15050 23 Ave N
Plymouth, MN 55447
OWNER: Anoka Holdings, LLC
Attn: Lauren Grouws
5959 Centerville Road, Suite 200
North Oaks, MN 55127
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, Charles Cudd Co, submitted a Land Use Application for PUD Amendment #1.
They are requesting an amendment to the PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat (“PUD
Amendment #1”) to construct 13 single-family lots west of Wilkinson Way instead of the
approved 20 townhomes lots.
Tentative Review Schedule:
Complete Application Date:July 14, 2026
60-Day Deadline:September 12, 2026
Environmental Board Meeting:N/A
Park Board Meeting:N/A
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting:August 12, 2026
City Council Work Session:September 8, 2026
City Council Meeting:September 14, 2026
BACKGROUND
1
The Land Use Application is for the following:
PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat Amendment #1-Single-family Lots
This staff report is based on the following information:
Applicant Narrative prepared by ISG dated July 13, 2026
Anoka Holdings, LLC Wilkinson Waters Preliminary Plat Plan prepared by ISG dated July
13, 2026
Tree Survey prepared by ISG date July 30, 2023
Certificate of Survey prepared by ISG dated February 10, 2025
Preliminary Plat prepared by ISG dated February 10, 2025
Ash Street Traffic Impact Study prepared by October 14, 2024
Wetland Delineation Report prepared by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company,
Inc. dated October 19, 2021
Stormwater Management Report prepared by ISG revision date July 13, 2026
Previous Council Action
June 9, 2025: Ordinance No. 10-25 rezoning from R, Rural to PUD, Planned Unit
Development
May 27, 2025: Resolution No. 25-64 amending 2040 Comprehensive Plan
May 27, 2025: Resolution No. 25-65 approving PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat
April 27, 2026: Resolution No. 26-60 approving PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
July 13, 2026: Resolution No. 26-127 approving Second Addition PUD Final Plan/Final
Plat
ANALYSIS
Current PUD Preliminary Plan
Wilkinson Waters is a master planned development located in the northwest quadrant of Ash
Street/County Road J and Centerville Road/CSAH 21. The development contains 4 parcels
totaling approximately 76 gross acres and consists of a mix of 340 unit residential housing types
and commercial development.
Proposed PUD Preliminary Plan Amendment #1
PUD Amendment #1 proposes to change the 20 townhome units west of Wilkinson Way to 13
single-family lots. See attached Applicant’s Narrative for additional information. The total
number of housing units will decrease from 340 to 333.
2
May 2025 August 2026
Current PUD PlanPUD Amend #1
Housing Type# Units# Units
40 20
4-plex Townhomes =
(10 buildings)(5 buildings)
Single-family Lots =013
Market Rate Multi-Family =
200200
(2 buildings x 100 units)
Senior Living Multi-Family =100100
340333
The residential development transitions from single-family lots to townhomes to the
apartments adjacent to CSAH 21 (Centerville Road). A future senior living building is proposed
near Wilkinson Lakes. Trails, sidewalks and stormwater ponds are included throughout the
development.
Comprehensive Plan and Density
On May 27, 2025, as part of the PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat process, the City
amended the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and re-guided the developable area of the site to
Signature Gateway. This district allows residential at a density of 8.0 to 10.0 units per acre with
15 units per acre allowed if the project meets the City's housing goals. The range of allowed
housing units is 194-363. The proposed 333 housing units is within this range.
The site’s net density decreased slightly from 14.05 units per acre to 13.76 units per acre but is
still consistent with the Signature Gateway density requirements.
3
PID#34-31-22-44-0008
PID#35-31-22-33-0002
PID#34-31-22-43-0006PID#34-31-22-44-0001
NewSignature
GatewayParcel
SouthwestParcelNorthwestParcelMiddleParcelTotal
GrossArea(acres)15.1615.180.0045.4875.82
Wetlands&WaterBodies15.1612.110.009.4336.70
PublicParks&OpenSpace0.003.070.000.813.88
ArterialROW0.000.000.004.034.03
Other(UPAPowerlineEasement)0.000.000.002.112.11
Other(Commercial)0.000.000.004.904.90
NetArea(acres)0.000.000.0024.2024.20
GuidedLandUsePer
MediumDensityMediumDensity
SignatureGatewaySignatureGateway
ResidentialResidential
2040ComprehensivePlan
8.0-10.0upa;8.0-10.0upa;
RequiredNetDensity4.0to6.0upa4.0to6.0upa
max.15max.15
RequiredRange#HousingUnitsTotal
Low000194194
High000242242
High+SignatureGateway-Max15000363363
Proposed#HousingUnits333
GrossDensity(units/acre)4.39
NetDensity(units/acre)13.76
Zoning
Ordinance No. 10-25 rezoned the entire Wilkinson Waters development to PUD, Planned Unit
Development to implement the Signature Gateway land use. The conventional zoning district
for each use is as follows:
Conventional Zoning DistrictUse
R-4, High Density Residential DistrictTownhomes, apartments, and senior building
GB, General BusinessCommercial development
R-2, Two Family ResidentialSingle-family lots
Lot and Setback Requirements
The R-2, Two Family Residential will be used as the conventional zoning district for the single-
family lots. PUD flexibility is required for lot width and side setbacks.
4
R-2PUD Flexibility
Single-family LotsPUD Amend #1
RequirementsRequired?
Min. Lot Size 7,500 sf8,250 sfNo
Min. Lot Width
--Interior Lot60 ft55ftYes
--Corner Lot80 ft90 ftNo
Min. Lot Depth 125 ft150 ftNo
--Double Frontage135 ftNANA
Building Setback (ft)
-From Streets 25 ft25 ftNo
-Rear Yard
--Principal25 ft25 ftNo
-Accessory5 ft5 ftNo
-Side Yard
--Principal10 ft7.5 ftYes
--Accessory5 ft7.5 ftYes
Double Row of
Buffer Abutting Arterial St 15 ft wideNo
Trees
Impervious Surface 65% Max Allowed65% Max AllowedNo
30 ft to
Building Height 35 ftNo
roof peak
Impervious Surface Coverage
The subject property is located within the Shoreland Management Overlay District of both
Wilkinson Lake and Amelia Lake. Maximum allowed townhome impervious coverage is 35%
and commercial/multi-family is 60%. Per Sheet A0-12, Land Use & Density Plan, the overall
development’s total aggregate impervious coverage is 24.6%, which is less than the minimum
35% allowed.
The single-family lots will be allowed a maximum of 65% impervious coverage consistent with
R-2 zoning requirements. Overall development impervious coverage will still be less than 35%.
Building Requirements
5
The R-2 zoning district and City Code Section 1007.043(2) also has specific requirements for
garages.
Per R-2 City Code Section 1007.112 (4) Building Requirements:
(b) Garages. All single-family dwellings shall have a garage and shall comply with the
following:
3. If the garage door faces the street, the length of the garage wall facing the street shall
not be greater than 50% of the length of the entire front facade of the structure; except on
houses that comply with all of the following conditions:
a. The second floor living space extends over the two-car portion of the garage; and
b. The garage doors are decorative and have a strip of windows; and
c. Garages in excess of two stalls shall be broken up so the additional stalls are recessed
two feet from the main garage facade; and
d. Garage width does not exceed 32 feet.
All garages meet or exceed the required 520sf.
PUD flexibility is being requested related to the 50% garage wall/ front façade and second floor
living space requirement. Houses that do not have second floor living space over the garage will
have windowed massing over garage such as windows or dormers.
Architecture
Exterior materials are a combination of horizontal lap siding, shake, vertical board and batten,
and rugged stone masonry. Three color schemes include night gray, pearl gray, and evening
blue. See attached color renderings and concept designs.
Design Guidelines
Design Guidelines & Statement of Intent for Wilkinson Waters were prepared as part of the
original PUD Preliminary Plan. PUD Amendment #1 is consistent with the guidelines and will be
incorporated into the original Guidelines as an Addendum.
Preliminary Plat
The amended preliminary plat contains the following:
Lot or OutlotPurposeOwnership
Lots 1-13, Block 1Single-family LotsPrivate
Lot 6, Block 1Future senior living buildingPrivate
Lots 1-5, Block 2TownhomesPrivate
6
Lot 6, Block 22 multifamily buildingsPrivate
Lot 7, Block 2Future commercialPrivate
Open space, wetlands, buffer, lake,
Outlot APrivate
trail corridor
Outlot BPublic ParkCity
Outlot CPublic ParkCity
Open space, stormwater pond,
Outlot DPrivate
trail corridor
Traffic Study
Traffic impacts were analyzed with the original PUD Preliminary Plan for the entire
development. Road improvements are under construction and level of service requirements are
met. PUD Amendment #1 reduces the total number of housing units from 340 to 333. Further
traffic analyze is not required.
Landscaping
Buffer and Screen Standards
Screening is required between Ash Street public right of way and the single-family lots.
Fourteen (14) large trees are proposed along Ash Street. This requirement is met.
Boulevard Trees
Boulevard trees are required at a rate of 1 tree per lot. Eighteen (18) boulevard trees are being
planted for 13 new single-family lots. This requirement is met.
Easements
Portions of the trail easement and drainage & utility easements that were dedicated on the
rd
Wilkinson Waters Addition final plat need to be vacated in conjunction with the 3 Addition
final plat.
Additional City and Government Agency Review Comments
Lino Lakes Police Department received the plans and had no comments.
Lino Lakes Fire Department reviewed the plans and had no comments.
City Engineer comments are provided in the attached memo.
Environmental Coordinator comments are provided in the attached memo.
7
Findings of Fact
Planned Unit Development
Per City Code Section 1007.024:
(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.
A master plan for this area is not required per the 2040 Comprehensive Plan-Planning District 4.
Per Planning District 4, a gateway should be planned at the intersection of Centerville Road and
County Road J (Ash Street). The Lino Lakes Gateway Planning manual was prepared in June 2024
and includes this area.
PUD Amendment #1 continues to implement the Signature Gateway land use and Gateway
Planning.
(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 consisting of single-family homes,
townhomes, market rate apartments, and senior living. This variety in housing types supports life-
cycle housing.
The flexible site design configuration allows for the creation of a multi-functional greenway
corridor that incorporates storm water management, wetlands, open space, and trails. The
development also promotes conservation and a more efficient use of land.
PUD Amendment #1 continues to support innovations in development.
(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.
8
The site is within the shoreland districts of Lake Wilkinson and Lake Amelia and adjacent to a
large wetland complex. The large wetland will be preserved and enhanced into a multi-purpose
greenway corridor and storm water management system. The corridor will also be protected by
a vegetative buffer that provides additional protection to the natural resources.
A stormwater reuse system will be evaluated and implemented to the extent feasible to offset the
use of municipal water for irrigation.
PUD Amendment #1 continues to preserve and enhance these desirable site characteristics.
(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.
PUD Amendment #1 continues to transition development from low intense single-family homes
near Wilkinson Lake and the wetland to higher intense apartments near the arterial roads.
(e)Efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby
lowering development costs and public investments.
PUD Amendment #1 does not change the existing utility and street network.
(f)Mix of land use types.
PUD Amendment #1 continues to support a mix of residential housing types and commercial
development.
(g)Provision of a housing type or target housing price that is desirable to the City.
PUD Amendment #1 proposes a mix of residential housing types consisting of single-family lots,
townhomes, market rate apartments, and senior living. 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 may be achieved in the Wilkinson Waters 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
o 53% open space > than minimum 50% required by Shoreland PUD
Using “Green” building and low impact development techniques
Restoring/enhancing ecological systems
Managing stormwater using natural filtration and other ecologically based approaches
9
Providing life-cycle and affordable housing
Diversifying the tax base to lessen the tax burden on residential properties
PUD Amendment #1 continues to support these public benefits.
Preliminary Plat
Per City Code Section 1001.013, Premature Subdivision:
(1) General. Any concept plan, preliminary plat or final plat deemed premature pursuant to
the following criteria shall be denied by the City Council.
(2) Conditions for establishing a premature subdivision. A subdivision may be deemed
premature should any of the following conditions not be met.
(a) Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Including any of the following:
1. Land use plan;
2. Transportation plan;
3. Utility (sewer and water) plans;
4. Local water management plan;
5. Capital improvement plan; and
6. Growth management policies, including MUSA allocation criteria.
PUD Amendment #1 is consistent with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan
regarding resource management, land use, housing, transportation and utilities. The
development is also consistent with the local water management plan, capital improvement
plans and growth management policies.
(b) Consistency with infill policies. A proposed urban subdivision shall meet the city's infill
policies:
1. The urban subdivision must be located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA)
or the staged growth area as established by the city's Comprehensive Plan;
2. The cost of utilities and street extensions must be covered by one or more of the following:
a. An immediate assessment to the proposed subdivision;
b. One hundred percent of the street and utility costs are privately financed by the
developer;
c. The cost of regional and/or oversized trunk utility lines can be financed with available
city trunk funds; and
d. The cost and timing of the expenditure of city funds are consistent with the city's
capital improvement plan.
10
3. The cost, operation and maintenance of the utility system are consistent with the normal
costs as projected by the water and sewer rate study; and
4. The developer payments will offset additional costs of utility installation or future operation
and maintenance.
PUD Amendment #1 is consistent with infill policies. The residential and commercial
development is within Utility Staging Area 1A. One hundred percent of the street and utility
costs are privately financed by the developer The cost, operation and maintenance of the utility
system is consistent with the normal costs projected by the water and sanitary system plans. No
future utility costs are proposed.
(c) Roads or highways to serve the subdivision. A proposed subdivision shall meet the
following requirements for level of service (LOS), as defined by the Highway Capacity Manual:
1. If the existing level of service (LOS) outside of the proposed subdivision is A or B, traffic
generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service more than one grade;
2. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is C, traffic generated by a proposed
subdivision will not degrade the level of service below C;
3. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is D, traffic generated by a proposed
subdivision will not degrade the level of service below D;
4. The existing LOS must be D or better for all streets and intersections providing access to the
subdivision. If the existing level of service is E or F, the subdivision developer must provide, as
part of the proposed project, improvements needed to ensure a level of service D or better;
5. Existing roads and intersections providing access to the subdivision must have the structural
capacity to accommodate projected traffic from the proposed subdivision or the developer will
pay to correct any structural deficiencies;
6. The traffic generated from a proposed subdivision shall not require city street
improvements that are inconsistent with the Lino Lakes capital improvement plan. However,
the city may, at its discretion, consider developer-financed improvements to correct any street
deficiencies;
7. The LOS requirements in divisions (2)(c)1. to 4. above do not apply to the I-35W/Lake Drive
or I-35E/Main St. interchanges. At city discretion, interchange impacts must be evaluated in
conjunction with Anoka County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and a plan
must be prepared to determine improvements needed to resolve deficiencies. This plan must
determine traffic generated by the subdivision project, how this traffic contributes to the total
traffic, and the time frame of the improvements. The plan also must examine financing options,
including project contribution and cost sharing among other jurisdictions and other properties
that contribute to traffic at the interchange; and
8. The city does not relinquish any rights of local determination.
PUD Amendment #1 reduces the number of housing units. The overall development meets the
requirements for level of service (LOS). Existing roads and intersections providing access to the
11
subdivision will have the structural capacity to accommodate projected traffic from the
proposed subdivision upon completion of Ramsey and Anoka County intersections improvement.
No street improvements are proposed that are inconsistent with the City’s capital improvement
plan. The city does not relinquish any rights of local determination.
(d) Water supply. A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to have an adequate water supply
when:
1. The city water system has adequate wells, storage or pipe capacity to serve the subdivision;
2. The water utility extension is consistent with the Lino Lakes water plan and offers the
opportunity for water main looping to serve the urban subdivision;
3. The extension of water mains will provide adequate water pressure for personal use and
fire protection; and
4. The rural subdivision can demonstrate that each of the proposed lots can be provided with
a potable water supply.
PUD Amendment #1 will have an adequate water supply served by White Bear Township.
(e) Waste disposal systems. A proposed subdivision shall be served with adequate waste
disposal systems when:
1. The urban sewered subdivision is located inside the city's MUSA or is consistent with the
MUSA allocation criteria;
2. The city has sufficient MUSA and pipe capacity to serve the subdivision if developed to its
maximum density;
3. The subdivision will result in a sewer extension consistent with Lino Lakes sewer plan and
capital improvement plan;
4. A rural subdivision can demonstrate that each lot can be served by an adequate sanitary
sewer disposal system; and
5. A rural subdivision with a proposed communal sanitary sewer or water system has an
effective long range management and maintenance program with proper financing.
PUD Amendment #1 will be served with an adequate waste disposal system through White Bear
Township.
Public Land Dedication
Public land dedication fees will be determined with each final plat.
PUD Public Benefit vs PUD Flexibility Summary
Summary
12
Public Benefit Gained:
1.Economic expansion
2.Greater variety of housing types such as single-family lots, townhomes, market rate
apartments, and senior living that support life-cycle housing
3.Multi-functional greenway corridor and storm water management system
4.Transition from low intense residential development near natural resource to higher
intense development near arterial roads
5.Efficient use of land and streets resulting in smaller network of utilities and streets
6.Diversified tax base through a mix of residential and commercial land uses
7.Creation and preservation of open space that is accessible to the public
8.More parkland dedication fees available for park/trail development
9.Wider landscape buffers and trail corridors
Flexibility Provided:
1.Building height: 40 feet (3-story) and 55 feet (4-story) > allowed 36 feet height in
shoreland district.
2.Floor Area: 550 square foot studio apartment unit < required 700 square feet with
additional 100 square feet per bedroom
a.A maximum of 15% of all multi-family units can be studio apartments.
3.Single-family Lots
a.Lot Width: 55ft < 60ft
b.The length of the garage wall facing the street shall not be greater than 50% of
the length of the entire front facade of the structure; except on houses that
comply with all of the following conditions:
1.The second floor living space extends over the two-car portion of the
garage or there is windowed massing over garage.
2.The garage doors are decorative and have a strip of windows; and
3.Garages in excess of two stalls shall be broken up so the additional stalls
are recessed two feet from the main garage facade; and
4.Garage width does not exceed 32 feet.
4.Townhomes
a.Base Lot Width: 142ft < 150ft Shoreland PUD requirement
b.Base Lot Size: 18,239sf < 20,000sf R-4 requirement
5.Multifamily Buildings
a. Multifamily dwellings do not meet, “Distinct ground level(s). The ground level of
any 3-story building and the first two stories of a building four stories or taller
shall be visually distinct from the upper stories. This distinction shall be
articulated by at least one of the following: an intermediate cornice line; an
awning arcade or portico; a change in building materials, texture, or detailing; a
change in window shape or treatment; or other elements which meet the
objective.”
6.Setbacks
13
a.Single-family Lots
1.Principal Building/Attached Garage Foundation Side Lot Line: 7.5ft < 10ft
2.Principal Building Cantilever Side Lot Line: 5ft < 7.5ft
3.Front Entry Porch Foundation Side Lot Line: 6.5ft < 7.5ft
4.Air Conditioning Unit Side Lot Line: 5ft < 10ft
b.Multifamily
1.Building Side Lot Line: 15ft < 20ft requirement
c.Townhomes
1.Building Rear Lot Line: 15ft < 30ft requirement
2.Building Side Lot Line: 10ft < 20ft requirement
d.Public Easements
1.NOTE: In no event may any structure, eave, porch, air conditioning unit,
or any other element, fixture, or improvement associated with the house
encroach into a public easement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Wilkinson Water PUD Amendment #1 for 13 single-family lots
with the following conditions:
1.Ordinance No. 10-25, Resolution No. 25-64, Resolution No. 25-65, Resolution No. 26-60
approving PUD Final Plan/Final Plat are still in effect.
2.The Wilkinson Water Design Guidelines & Statement of Intent and Amendments shall
provide additional development guidance.
3.An anti-monotony plan shall be submitted with the building permit applications.
4.The maximum impervious surface coverage for the single-family lots is 65% of the lot
area.
5.Portions of the trail easement and drainage & utility easements that were dedicated on
rd
the Wilkinson Waters Addition final plat need to be vacated in conjunction with the 3
Addition final plat.
6.Wilkinson Waters Third Addition PUD Final Plan/Final Plat shall be based on as-built
plans.
The following comments shall be addressed:
st
1.City Engineer Memo dated July 27, 2027 (1 Addition comments) and August 5, 2026
(PUD Amend #1)
2.Environmental Memo dated July 22, 2026
3.Design Guideline & Statement of Intent for Addendum #1.
a.Create cover page similar to Design Guidelines
b.Add color renderings, floor plans, and exterior materials
c.Update density chart
4.All plan sheets:
14
a.Revision Schedule dates shall continue after latest version dated 11/3/25 and the
description shall be PUD Amend #1 (13 SF lots).
5.Sheet A0-17, Preliminary Plat:
a.Block number shall be added to Block 1.
b.Show lot widths and lot depths.
c.Drainage and utility easements shall be shown on all lot lines.
d.Add information under Proposed Zoning for R-2 requirements.
6.All plan sheets for Charles Cudd Co architecture plans:
a.Plans shall be to scale.
b.Plans shall represent house plans that are proposed for construction.
c.Air conditioning units shall not be in drainage & utility easements. These may
need to be moved to rear yard.
7.Sheet C3-10, Overall Site Plan:
a.Under Residential Setbacks R-2 Two Family District, change Side Lot Line to:
i.Principal Building and Attached Garage
ii.Detached Accessory Building
8.Sheet C3-13, Site Plan:
a.Show side lot line drainage & utility easements.
9.Sheet C3-14, Site Plan:
a. Change 30’ Building Setback to 25ft.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Applicant Narrative
2.Supplemental Narrative
3.Current Overall Land Use & Density Plan
4.Proposed PUD Amendment #1-Land Use & Density Plan
5.Current Preliminary Plat
6.Proposed PUD Amendment #1-Preliminary Plat
7.Architectural Renderings
8.Floor Plan Example
9.Engineering Memo dated July 27, 2026
10.Engineering Memo dated August 5, 2026
11.Environmental Memo dated July 22, 2026
15
Attachment A
Wilkinson WatersPreliminary PUD
Charles Cudd Co. Luxury Villa
Submittal Supplement
Attachments
Hand Rendered Wilkinson WayStreetscapewith Front Elevation Alternates
Hand RenderedNew Home Concept Designs (Side and Rear Elevations)
Exterior Material Board –Color Scheme A
Exterior Material Board –Color Scheme B
Exterior Material Board –Color Scheme C
Supporting Narrative
Tobring its popular luxury villa homes into greater alignment with the City of Lino
Lakes ordinance criteria, Charles CuddCo. has advanceddesign work to incorporate
sheltered front porch entry, alternate elevations each reinforcingsecond story
massing, and exterior material use to correspond with City and PUD expectations.
The attached colored, hand-rendered, streetscapepresents three different front
exterior elevationsto the same luxury villa home in proportion and at scale.
Additional hand renderingcarries imagery of intended exterior material use toside
and rear elevationswith generously scaled windows to take advantage of terrific long
views over marsh and water.
While interior floor plans remain subject to design considerationsandwill come
forward as consideration of the application progresses, the source plan most readily
adapts to extending a front entry porch, works structurallyand architecturallyin
varied configurations fromfullwalkout/lookoutbasement, to one-level slab, or slab
with loft up, and incorporates a desirable third garage stall in tandem configuration.
Custom designed for Wilkinson Waters, the dual-pitched main roofs of this home plan
whether built as a one level walkout, slab, or slab with loft upare anchored by steep
accent gables or shed roof elements with upper-level windowscontributing to bring
together an elegant, harmonious, streetscapeconsistent with the qualities of the site
and upscale intentions of the broader gateway development.
While typical to the character of anyCharles Cudd Co. home, exterior material use
exemplifies the objectives of the City’s ordinance with a thoughtful combination of
horizontal lap siding, shake, vertical board and batten, and rugged stone masonry
purposefully placed upon foundational elements of the home.
To complimentthe character of the neighborhood, the front entry of each home is
sheltered, expressive, welcoming, and detailed with the use of square masonry
columns, classically trimmed columns, or decorative timber columns accented with
corbels, other light-colored trim detail, and complimented by a richwood-toned front
entry door.
Three sample exterior material boards are provided as representative ofdistinctive
exterior material texture and color schemesfor the luxury villas. While ultimately
individualized to the stylepreferencesof the home buyer, Charles Cudd Co offerings
will ensure exteriors are made harmonious by common elementsand colors (shingles,
trim,railings, doors, windows) and bold stone textures all fullycomplimentary to the
exterior materials intended for rental, amenity, and commercial portions of the
Wilkinson Waters PUD project.
PUD Flexibility Considerations
Custom redesign of Charles Cudd Co luxury villa homes to comport with City of Lino
Lakes ordinance and intentions of the Wilkinson Waters PUD serves to reduce PUD
flexibility considerations to modest setback adjustments commonin transition from
attached multi-family to single-familyhousing.
Influenced by the mid-block imposition of a municipally required utility easement
corridor, and generally consistent with the City’s approach with detached single-family
housing, reduction of sideyard setbacks from 10’to 7.5’facilitatesa balanced
streetscape without undue loss of housing opportunity, while adjustment to front and
back setbacks from 30’to 25’retains ample driveway depth to curb while enabling
greater home design and streetscape flexibility.
Recent design work draws attention to the need for clarificationfrom the City(or
reconsideration as the case may be) regarding shallow, under-soffit, cantilevered wall
extensions. Cantilevered wall extensions under-soffitin width generally 10’or lessare
common to narrow home designfor the interior design flexibility and exterior sidewall
articulation such an architecturalelement can provide. Dimensions from foundation
wallto foundationwall(minimumof 15’) and eve to eve(minimum of 12’) with 1’6”
minimum soffit depth do not change. Consequently, for the significant benefitthese
minor wall extensions can provideinteriors and, especially,to exterior appearances
along sidewalls,permissions are commonplaceand fully supported by building code.
While the advantages of this architectural design technique are perhaps more evident
in the view of a floor plan, the supplied rendered images of the streetscape and side
elevations do show contemplatedunder-soffit cantilevered wall extensions in attempt
to demonstratebenefitsto sidewall shadow linesandopportunity for sensible siding
material transitionswith no actual setback conflictor negativearchitectural
consequence. Clarity on the permission to employ under-soffit wall extension into the
custom design of Charles Cudd Co luxury villas isrequested in connection with the
City’s consideration of this Preliminary PUD Plat submittal.
A0-16
A0-17
Memorandum
To:Katie Larsen, Lino Lakes City Planner
From:Kris Keller PE, WSB
Diane Hankee PE, Lino Lakes City Engineer
Date:July 27, 2026
st
Re:Wilkinson Waters 1 Addition
Final Plat Review
026515-000
WSB’s review of the Final Plat for the Wilkinson Waters development in Lino Lakes, MN,
prepared by ISG and received March 16, 2026. Our comments were made on the following
documents:
Wilkinson Waters Major Infrastructure 90% Plan Review prepared by ISG, dated July 9,
2026.
The following review comments should be responded to in writing by the applicant. This review is
only concerned with elements pertaining to City approval in its permitting authority on behalf of
VLAWMO, these comments are highlighted. Other comments will be reviewed with future
complete submittals, there may be additional comments generated at that time.
ISG Response (01/16/26)
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026)
ISG Response (02/27/26)
WSB Response/Comment (3/23/2026)
ISG Response (04/15/26)
WSB Response/Comment (4/22/2026)
WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026)
Engineering
•General
The Wilkinson Waters Development includes 76 acres south of Ash Street/County Road 32,
West of Centerville Road/County Road 21 and north of Wilkinson Lake Boulevard, the
border with the City of North Oaks. The current conceptual project proposes 40 Townhome
units, two (2) 100-unit apartments, one (1) 100-unit senior living facility and 33,000 square
feet of commercial retail space.
Comments:
1.Update Public and Private construction plans and/or Final PUD plans such that they
match. Currently the Final PUD plans match the approved preliminary PUD plans but
differ from the Public and Private construction plans. (see included overlay pages).
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Per phone call we will not submit a Final PUD plan and
the Final Construction Plans will serve as the Final PUD plans as well.
Ms. Katie Larsen
07/27/2026
Page 2
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
2.WSB Response/Comment (3/23/2026) A proposal has been made to shift the
property lines between L5B1 and the Commercial lot to the south, 15 feet to the
north.
a.Shift the storm sewer to the center of the revised easement and revise all
adjacent utilities (water reuse, etc.) and surface features (castings, trails, ped
ramps, etc.) to verify feasibility.
b. Show revised property lines between Lots 3 and 4 Block 1 with the 15’ shift
north from the south
i.Revise all adjacent utilities (water reuse, etc.) and surface features
(castings, trails, ped ramps, etc.)
ii.Maintain minimum 1:1 separation distance from building
structures/easement to invert of utilities
ISG Response (04/15/26) – Revised property lines are shown on plans. Trail was
revised to reflect updates per the lot line changes. Utilities were updated per the lot
line change, and the easements were updated for the utilities.
WSB Response/Comment (4/22/2026) The building pads have been removed and
the grading plan drainage between the lots has not been updated so the drainage
swale is not centered between lots. With the final plat, the grading plan will have to
be updated for the lot lines and the services updated to match the units of the
buildings
WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) The easements along the sanitary sewer
alignment through Outlot G as well as along the trail no longer match. These
easements may need to be vacated and rededicated with future additions
•Grading
The Wilkinson Waters Development includes site grading for the townhomes, apartments,
and retail space as well as the connecting roads, driveways, and parking areas.
Comments:
1. See redline plan sheets for Public, Private, and Turn Lane plans
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) See updated redline comments
ISG Response (02/27/26) -- Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (3/23/2026) Complete
2.WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Existing culvert under Ash St near the
proposed roundabout is no longer needed
a.Coordinate drainage with Anoka County
ISG Response (02/27/26) – Will coordinate with Anoka County and update callouts
and language in Turn Lane Plan Set.
WSB Response/Comment (3/23/2026) To be submitted with Turn Lane Plan Set
ISG Response (04/15/26) – Noted, received Anoka County comments 04/14 and will
resubmit after comments are addressed.
WSB Response/Comment (4/22/2026) Revised turn lane plans to be submitted
WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) Complete
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
07/27/2026
Page 3
3.WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) The grading in the area of Outlot G is
acceptable as an outlot but will need to be updated to match the future layout of the
single-family lots
•Stormwater Management
Stormwater management for the Wilkinson Waters site consists of a large sedimentation
basin and various smaller BMPs to provide additional treatment. There is a stormwater
reuse system being constructed with this project. Existing and proposed discharge rates are
summarized below.
Pre- and Post- Development Discharge Rates (cfs)
Condition2-Year10-Year100-Year10-Day Snowmelt
Needed if basins
Existing24.1255.09125.90
landlocked
Currently Needed if basins
12.1833.8785.71
Proposedlandlocked
Comments:
1.The site continues to be compliant with City stormwater requirements.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
2.Stormwater reuse agreement needed
ISG Response (01/16/26) –Will be supplied and a part of the Development
Agreement.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) To be included with the Development
Agreement
ISG Response (04/15/26) - Acknowledged
•Water Supply
The Wilkinson Waters Development proposes two connections with their design. A 12”
connection at the south end on the west side of the proposed roundabout which will be
extended along Wilkinson Way north to the north end for a future connection to Ash Street
(CR 32). The second connection will utilize the existing 8” stub as part of the existing
assumed White Bear Lake Township infrastructure that is located across the Rapp farmland
in Lino Lakes. With the connection to the White Bear Lake Township infrastructure,
bidirectional meters will be installed to measure the amount of water consumed from the
system. These meters will be replaced with interconnections when City water is extend to
the area in the future.
Otherwise, the development will include a water system with 8- inch diameter water main
and various stub sizes being extended to each lot depending on its use.
The City is still evaluating the ownership and future maintenance of the existing and
proposed utility infrastructure and will be clarified between the developer North Oaks Farms,
White Bear Lake Township, and the Cities of North Oaks and Lino Lakes.
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
07/27/2026
Page 4
Comments:
1.See attached water meter manual for water meter information.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
2.The applicant shall verify fire flow requirements are being met for the project.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Fire flow verification will be completed after construction
of the water main and in conjunction with building permit approval. Fire Hydrant Flow
test will be completed once watermain constructed. Currently no City of Lino Lakes
waterlines are adjacent to the site.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete following construction
ISG Response (02/27/26) – Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) Complete
3.See redline plan sheets for Public and Private plans.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted, responses added to redline plan sheets.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) See updated redline comments
ISG Response (02/27/26) – Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (3/23/2026)See updated redline comments
ISG Response (04/15/26) – Noted, responses added to reline plan sheets.
WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) Complete
4.WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) Water Meter Manholes and details to be
updated and finalized in coordination with Public Works
•Sanitary Sewer
There is an existing 18-inch sanitary sewer line located at the intersection of Wilkinson Lake
Blvd/CR J (81)/CSAH 21 that is owned and maintained by White Bear Township. The 18-
inch sanitary sewer line receives flow from North Oaks Lift Station #8 and ultimately Lino
Lakes sewer district 4 which includes the Wilkinson Waters Development. The City would be
open to extending the 18 inch through the site to serve as much of the development as
possible. However, due to depth, the site would still need to be connected to the deeper 8
inch line as proposed. Sanitary sewer collection for the Wilkinson Waters Development is
proposed to connect to the existing sewer line that runs from Rapp Farm Lift Station, located
westerly from the site, to the North Oaks Lift Station #8 just south of the site.
The project requires a Joint Powers Agreements between the developer North Oaks Farms,
White Bear Lake Township, and the Cities of North Oaks and Lino Lakes. Per the
Centerville Road Sanitary Sewer memo updated 4/22/21, the City of Lino Lakes service
district 4 has 354 GPM capacity reserved in the Centerville Road trunk line.
The developer completed an analysis of the existing North Oaks Lift Station #8 that will
receive flow from the Wilkinson Waters development and future flow from Lino Lakes sewer
District 4 western portion. It was determined that the North Oaks Lift Station #8 would need
to be upgraded to meet the future capacity. As a result, the developer has identified a future
lift station site and the forcemain in Wilkinson Way is upsized to a 10 inch. The lift station
near Rapp Farm should have capacity to serve the Lino Lakes area District 4 western
portion in the future.
There is an additional lift station planned in the future to serve the northern portion of sewer
District 4 that will pump into the 18” line located at the intersection of Wilkinson Lake
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
07/27/2026
Page 5
Blvd/CR J (81)/CSAH 21. There is an 8-inch forcemain being installed along the new
Wilkinson Waters road alignment for this future lift station. As mentioned above the 8-inch
forcemain gets upsized to 10inch.
The site will otherwise be served by 8- inch diameter main along with various sized service
pipes being extended to each lot depending on its use. An additional sanitary sewer stub
will be extended to the north at Ash Street (CR 32) for future connections.
The future lift station site is located within a drainage and utility easement. The HOA
documents should include allowance for a future city lift station within the Outlot owned by
the HOA.
Comments:
1.The new lift station site will need to be larger to accommodate an 80-foot radius
for installation.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Lift station site grading has been updated to be 80’
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
2.Upsize the forcemain to 10 inch diameter where the two combine.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Downstream Forcemain that was already
constructed was 8” in diameter and existing under the roundabout at Wilkinson
Lakes Blvd and Centerville Road.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
3.The HOA documents should include language for a future city lift station within
the Outlot owned by the HOA.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted, these will be included in the HOA documents
and a part of the development agreement.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) to be included with development
agreement
ISG Response (04/15/26) – acknowledged
4.See redline plan sheets for Public and Private plans.
ISG Response (01/16/26) -- Noted, responses added to redline plan sheets.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) See updated redline comments
ISG Response (02/27/26) – Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (3/23/2026) Complete
5.WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Sanitary meter manhole can be removed
following discussions with MCES
a.Flows will be measured using different methods
ISG Response (02/27/26) – Noted, sanitary meter was removed from plans.
WSB Response/Comment (3/23/2026) Complete
6.WSB Response/Comment (4/22/2026) Developer to provide a lift station generator.
Coordinate specifications with Lino Lakes and North Oaks public works.
7.WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) The sanitary sewer alignment shown
through Outlot G is not currently centered on the final easement. Easement to be
vacated and rededicated with future addition to be centered.
•Transportation
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
07/27/2026
Page 6
A traffic study was submitted and reviewed for conformance with City Ordinance Sections
1001.013 and 1007.0202. Adjacent intersections of Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CR J (81)/CSAH
21 and CSAH 32/CSAH 21 were included in a Traffic Study for the Ramsey County
SP6281-53 (TH 35E and CR J) project and the ICE Report for Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CR J
(81)/CSAH 21. There are no additional transportation comments. Turning movement
exhibits for the proposed design vehicle are to be provided at the site accesses.
Comments:
1.The Turn Lane plans should be reviewed by Anoka County.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Plans have been submitted to Anoka County and will
be approved by Anoka County as well.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Provide response letter to City
2.The applicant should consider a traffic calming bump out at the trail crossing.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Bumpout was added to the trail crossing.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
3.Show all accessible parking spaces on the site plan, a minimum of six are required
for a parking lot with 151-200 spaces.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – An additional accessible parking stall has been
provided on the site plan.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
4.Verify poles are not shown in the sidewalk or on retaining walls in the photometric
plan.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Pole locations have been updated.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
5.Install and pave trail between the Ash Street roundabout and Wilkinson Way with
Phase 1
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted, will be installed with Phase 1
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
6.WSB Response/Comment (4/22/2026) Move the boardwalk alignment so it is not
on top of the existing utilities
WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) Boardwalk adjusted with final public plans
but not with updated preliminary plat amendment. Verify that boardwalk/trail
alignment and easement are current and consistent.
•Wetlands and Mitigation Plan
The Vadnais Lake Area WMO (VLAWMO) (WCA LGU) issued a Notice of Decision (NOD)
(LGU No. 14.2021) approving the wetland boundaries on March 17, 2022 (Appendix A).
The decision is valid for 5 years. The WCA NOD also confirmed that Wetland 7 is an
incidental wetland and therefore not regulated-under WCA.
The USACE issued an Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) on April 6, 2022 for
Wetlands 8, 9 and 10 (File No. MVP-2015-03940-SSC) (Appendix A). The AJD is valid for 5
years.
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
07/27/2026
Page 7
A map of the site location is provided in Figure 1. Three wetlands (Wetlands 1, 7, and 10)
were delineated within the current project area in September 2021 by KES (Figure 2).
Previously submitted information discussed the delineation in more detail and included the
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and soil survey mapping. A copy of the previously
submitted delineation report (Hawkins-Rogalla Lino Lakes Wetland Delineation Report) is
available upon request.
A wetland replacement plan and no loss request (for incidental wetland) was submitted,
reviewed, and approved through VLAWMO and the City. The TEP in its WCA Notice of
Decision agreed that WL7 is incidental per WCA rules, WL10 is wetland based on new
guidance and the WL5 boundary was extended to the northwest. Per aerial photos in 3-9-
2022 addendum, WL9 and WL8 are wetland. No other changes were directed to all other
delineated wetland boundaries in the project area. Approved wetland boundaries are shown
in the 3-10-2022 Rogalla and Hawkins surveys from Kurth Surveying, Inc.
The proposed WCA-regulated 0.13 ac of impact to Wetland 10 will be replaced at a 2:1 ratio
via the debiting of wetland bank credits from the Rapp Farm and Anderson Slough wetland
bank (#170) located within major watershed 20 and Bank Service Area 7, which is the same
major watershed and Bank Service Area as the project location. This bank is owned by the
project applicant. A draft Standard Credit Withdrawal Form is included. Compensatory
mitigation is not proposed for USACE-regulated Wetland 7.
Wetland buffers meeting The Vadnais Lake Area WMO (VLAWMO) minimum and average
requirements will be required around all wetland areas following construction.
•Landscaping
A Landscape Plan for Wilkinson Waters Addition has been submitted and will be reviewed
by staff and the City’s Environmental Coordinator. The Environmental Coordinator will
provide separate comments.
•Floodplain
No current outstanding comments.
•Drainage and Utility Easements
Roadways are proposed within right-of-way and lots include standard drainage and utility
easements. Larger drainage and utility easements will be required to be provided over
any utilities outside the right of way and any surface water management features
The plan shows White Bear Lake Township easements (30’ and 50’) with the existing
sanitary sewer and watermain crossing the site. White Bear Lake Township has
commented that the Township has no easement and that the lines were installed and
owned by the North Oaks Company. Please update the linework or provide a record
showing the easements.
Comments:
1.Easements are being reviewed by City staff
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted.
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
07/27/2026
Page 8
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) Complete
WSB Response/Comment (7/27/2026) The easements along the sanitary sewer
alignment through Outlot G as well as along the trail no longer match. These
easements may need to be vacated and rededicated with future additions
Development Agreement
A development agreement will be required with the final plat.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted, Development Agreement will be established.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) In-process
Grading Agreement
Grading is in place.
•Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
Private stormwater facilities will be maintained through a Declaration for Maintenance of
Stormwater Facilities. The City of Lino Lakes shall be party to the Declaration. City
Engineer has provided a template.
ISG Response (01/16/26) – Noted, and will be a part of the Development Agreement.
WSB Response/Comment (2/13/2026) In-process
•Permits Required
Required permits may include some of the following and others:
1.NPDES General Construction Permit
2.City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Construction
3.Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
4.Minnesota Department of Health
5.Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization Permit
6.US Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit
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.
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Memorandum
To:Katie Larsen, Lino Lakes City Planner
From:Kris Keller PE, WSB
Diane Hankee PE, Lino Lakes City Engineer
Date:August 5, 2026
Re:Wilkinson Waters
st
Preliminary Plat Amendment Review
– 1
037531-000
st
’s review of the 1 Amendment to the Preliminary Plat for the Wilkinson Waters development
in Lino Lakes, MN, prepared by ISG and received July 13, 2026. Our comments were made on
the following documents:
Wilkinson Waters Preliminary Plat prepared by ISG, dated July 13, 2026.
Wilkinson Waters Stormwater Report prepared by ISG, dated July 13, 2026.
The following review comments should be responded to in writing by the applicant.
Engineering
•General
The Wilkinson Waters Development includes 76 acres south of Ash Street/County Road 32,
West of Centerville Road/County Road 21 and north of Wilkinson Lake Boulevard, the
border with the City of North Oaks. The revised conceptual project proposes 20 Townhome
units, 13 single family lots, two (2) 100-unit apartments, one (1) 100-unit senior living facility
and 33,000 square feet of commercial retail space.
Comments:
1. 40’ easement along the sanitary sewer alignment between single family Lots 8
and 9 is no longer centered on the sanitary sewer main. This easement may need to
be vacated and rededicated with future additions
•Grading
The Wilkinson Waters Development includes site grading for the townhomes, apartments,
and retail space as well as the connecting roads, driveways, and parking areas.
Comments:
1. See redline plan sheets
2.Include proposed house types (SOG/FB)
3.Label Lot and Block for single family homes
4.A proposed building pad is shown in the side drainage and utility easement
a.Show side drainage and utility easements for all lots
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 2
b.Building pads must be shown outside the drainage and utility easements
•Stormwater Management
Stormwater management for the Wilkinson Waters site consists of a large sedimentation
basin and various smaller BMPs to provide additional treatment. There is a stormwater
reuse system being constructed with this project. Existing and proposed discharge rates are
summarized below.
Pre- and Post- Development Discharge Rates (cfs)
Condition2-Year10-Year100-Year10-Day Snowmelt
Needed if basins
Existing24.1255.09125.90
landlocked
Currently Needed if basins
17.8253.05122.71
Proposedlandlocked
Comments:
1.Stormwater reuse agreement will need to be part of the development agreement
2.Stormwater report narrative must address proposed stormwater reuse system and
operational elevations. It appears that there is no proposed drawdown gate/valve in
the main basin OCS, applicant to confirm.
3.The OCS design and NWL/HWL elevations do not match between the plans and
stormwater report.
4.Applicant to revise storm sewer sizing calculations based on updated impervious
from single-family home layout.
•Water Supply
The Wilkinson Waters Development proposes two connections with their design. A 12”
connection at the south end on the west side of the proposed roundabout which will be
extended along Wilkinson Way north to the north end for a future connection to Ash Street
(CR 32). The second connection will utilize the existing 8” stub as part of the existing
assumed White Bear Lake Township infrastructure that is located across the Rapp farmland
in Lino Lakes. With the connection to the White Bear Lake Township infrastructure, water
meters will be installed to measure the amount of water consumed from the system. These
meters will be replaced with interconnections when City water is extend to the area in the
future.
Otherwise, the development will include a water system with 8- inch diameter water main
and various stub sizes being extended to each lot depending on its use.
There is a Joint Powers Agreement between White Bear Lake Township and North Oaks
and Lino for the supply of water from the White Bear Lake Township supply and North Oaks
and White Bear Lake Township watermain pipe systems.
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 3
Comments:
1.Water Meter Manholes and details to be updated and finalized in coordination with
Public Works
•Sanitary Sewer
There is an existing 18-inch sanitary sewer line located at the intersection of Wilkinson Lake
Blvd/CR J (81)/CSAH 21 that is owned and maintained by White Bear Township. The 18-
inch sanitary sewer line receives flow from North Oaks Lift Station #8 and ultimately Lino
Lakes sewer district 4 which includes the Wilkinson Waters Development. The City would be
open to extending the 18 inch through the site to serve as much of the development as
possible. However, due to depth, the site would still need to be connected to the deeper 8
inch line as proposed. Sanitary sewer collection for the Wilkinson Waters Development is
proposed to connect to the existing sewer line that runs from Rapp Farm Lift Station, located
westerly from the site, to the North Oaks Lift Station #8 just south of the site.
There is a Joint Powers Agreements between White Bear Lake Township and the Cities of
North Oaks and Lino Lakes for the use of existing Sanitary sewer trunk lines. Per the
Centerville Road Sanitary Sewer memo updated 4/22/21, the City of Lino Lakes service
district 4 has 354 GPM capacity reserved in the Centerville Road trunk line.
The developer completed an analysis of the existing North Oaks Lift Station #8 that will
receive flow from the Wilkinson Waters development and future flow from Lino Lakes sewer
District 4 western portion. It was determined that the North Oaks Lift Station #8 would need
to be upgraded to meet the future capacity. As a result, the developer has identified a future
lift station site and the forcemain in Wilkinson Way is upsized to a 10 inch. The lift station
near Rapp Farm should have capacity to serve the Lino Lakes area District 4 western
portion in the future.
There is an additional lift station planned in the future to serve the northern portion of sewer
District 4 that will pump into the 18” line located at the intersection of Wilkinson Lake
Blvd/CR J (81)/CSAH 21. There is an 8-inch forcemain being installed along the new
Wilkinson Waters road alignment for this future lift station. As mentioned above the 8-inch
forcemain gets upsized to 10inch.
The site will otherwise be served by 8- inch diameter main along with various sized service
pipes being extended to each lot depending on its use. An additional sanitary sewer stub
will be extended to the north at Ash Street (CR 32) for future connections.
Comments:
1. 40’ easement along the sanitary sewer alignment between single family Lots
8 and 9 is no longer centered on the sanitary sewer main. This easement may
need to be vacated and rededicated with future additions
2.The development agreement should include that the HOA documents have
language for a future city lift station within the Outlot owned by the HOA.
3.Developer to provide a lift station generator. Coordinate specifications with Lino
Lakes and North Oaks public works.
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 4
•Transportation
A traffic study was submitted and reviewed for conformance with City Ordinance Sections
1001.013 and 1007.0202. Adjacent intersections of Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CR J (81)/CSAH
21 and CSAH 32/CSAH 21 were included in a Traffic Study for the Ramsey County
SP6281-53 (TH 35E and CR J) project and the ICE Report for Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CR J
(81)/CSAH 21. There are no additional transportation comments. Turning movement
exhibits for the proposed design vehicle are to be provided at the site accesses.
Comments:
1.Boardwalk adjusted with final public plans but not with updated preliminary plat
amendment. Verify that boardwalk/trail alignment and easement are current and
consistent.
•Wetlands and Mitigation Plan
A wetland replacement plan and no loss request (for incidental wetland) was submitted,
reviewed, and approved through VLAWMO and the City.
Wetland buffers meeting The Vadnais Lake Area WMO (VLAWMO) minimum and average
requirements will be required around all wetland areas following construction.
•Landscaping
A Landscape Plan for Wilkinson Waters Addition has been submitted and will be reviewed
by staff and the City’s Environmental Coordinator. The Environmental Coordinator will
provide separate comments.
•Floodplain
No current outstanding comments.
•Drainage and Utility Easements
Roadways are proposed within right-of-way and lots include standard drainage and utility
easements. Larger drainage and utility easements will be required to be provided over
any utilities outside the right of way and any surface water management features
The plan shows White Bear Lake Township easements (30’ and 50’) with the existing
sanitary sewer and watermain crossing the site. White Bear Lake Township has
commented that the Township has no easement and that the lines were installed and
owned by the North Oaks Company. Please update the linework or provide a record
showing the easements.
Comments:
1. 40’ easement along the sanitary sewer alignment between single family Lots 8
and 9 is no longer centered on the sanitary sewer main. This easement may need to
be vacated and rededicated with future additions
2.Show single family drainage and utility easements on all plan sheets
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 5
Development Agreement
A development agreement will be required with the final plat.
Grading Agreement
Grading is in place.
•Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
Private stormwater facilities will be maintained through a Declaration for Maintenance of
Stormwater Facilities. The City of Lino Lakes shall be party to the Declaration. City
Engineer has provided a template.
•Permits Required
Required permits may include some of the following and others:
1.NPDES General Construction Permit
2.City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Construction
3.Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
4.Minnesota Department of Health
5.Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization Permit
6.US Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit
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.
Wilkinson Waters Development - Engineering Review
Environmental Memo
To:Katie Larsen, City Planner
From:Tom Hoffman, Environmental CoordinatorTom Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator
Date:July 22, 2026
Re: Environmental Comments – Wilkinson Waters PUD Amendment #1
Staff reviewed the Wilkinson Waters PUD Amendment #1 and had the following
comments/recommendations:
1.Confirm calculations are accurate for overall boulevard tree planting with the
additional residential lots.
a.Plan sheets currently show LT and do no not specify which species will be
planted where.
b.Sheet C5-15 has species of large trees but does not specify the number of
each species.
2.It appears that 18 boulevard trees are being planted for 13 new single family
lots. Boulevard trees are required at a rate of 1 tree per lot. Recommend
moving additional proposed trees outside of the boulevard to help prevent over
crowding and potential utility issues.
a.If trees cant be accommodated on private property they can be removed
as the boulevard tree requirements are being met.
Page 1
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7B
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jessica Eller, Community Development Specialist
MEETING DATE: August 12, 2026
TOPIC:PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (ZOTA) –
Landscape Ordinance
CASE NUMBER: TA2023-009
APPLICANT: City of Lino Lakes
OWNER: NA
INTRODUCTION
The City of Lino Lakes is evaluating updates to its Landscape Ordinance to improve clarity,
consistency, and overall effectiveness while continuing to protect the community's urban tree
canopy. Staff began working with HKGi on updates to Section 1007.049: Screening,
Landscaping, Buffer Yards, and Tree Preservation in January 2026. These updates were focused
on the tree preservation elements within Section 1007.049 and are intended to simplify
complicated and conflicting requirements while still maintaining roughly the same level of
preservation.
Staff anticipates returning with additional revisions to the buffer and screening provisions at a
later date.
Tentative Review Schedule:
Complete Application Date:N/A
60-Day Deadline:N/A
Environmental Board Meeting:May 27, 2026
Park Board Meeting:N/A
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting:August 12, 2026
City Council Work Session:September 8, 2026
st
1 Reading: September 14, 2026
City Council Meeting:
nd
2 Reading: September 28, 2026
1
BACKGROUND
As development continues throughout the City, the ordinance update is intended to simplify
preservation requirements and create a more user-friendly process. Proposed updates also
include revisions to ordinance definitions and terminology to improve clarity, consistency, and
interpretation for property owners, developers, and city staff.
Trees and natural canopy are important components of the community’s character and
environmental health. Preservation of the existing canopy provides benefits including
stormwater management, erosion reduction, and improved air quality. Maintaining tree canopy
also supports neighborhood aesthetics and contributes to overall quality of life within the
community.
The proposed ordinance updates are intended to balance environmental stewardship with
reasonable use of private property. The revisions aim to establish clearer preservation
standards and replacement requirements to help mitigate canopy loss when tree removal
occurs while also improving predictability and consistency during development review and
permitting processes.
ANALYSIS
Summary of Major Changes
1.Tree types are proposed to be defined as follows:
Common trees (i.e. aspen, elm), hardwood trees (i.e. birch, cherry, oak,
hackberry), and coniferous trees (i.e. pine, spruce)
For each of these tree types, significant and specimen trees have also been
defined:
TREE, SIGNIFICANT. A tree that is structurally sound and healthy and
that is either a common tree at least twelve (12) inches DBH, a
coniferous tree at least eight (8) inches DBH, or a hardwood tree at
least six (6) inches DBH.
TREE, SPECIMEN. A tree that is structurally sound and healthy and
that is either a common tree at least 30 inches DBH, a coniferous tree
at least 18 inches DBH, or a hardwood tree at least 24 inches DBH. A
specimen tree is a significant tree.
2.Definitions for Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESAs), natural resource conservation
area, natural resource enhancement area, and woodland area have been
consolidated into a single definition. The proposed definition reads as follows:
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA (ESAs). An area that contains native
vegetation, natural features, and/or natural resources including:
Land within the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Wetland
Management Corridor (WMC);
2
The shore impact zone of a public water as defined in Chapter 1102:
Shoreland Management Overlay;
Within 50 feet of a creek or public ditch;
Wetland areas that are non-contiguous to the RCWD WMC extending
outward from the wetland boundary 75 feet for management class A
(Preserve), 50 feet for management class B (Manage 1), 30 feet for
management class C (Manage 2) and class D (Manage 3); and
Connecting greenways as described in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
3.Changes are proposed to the way that the preservation and mitigation standards are
defined and calculated.
Currently, the preservation and mitigation standards are listed in Table 6 (see
below) and vary based on the location of the tree(s) being removed.
Applicants must define the Basic Use Area and all Environmentally Sensitive
Areas (ESAs) for development before these calculations can be completed.
Proposed:
The proposed language removes the Basic Use Area language and
focuses instead on whether or not trees are located within an ESAs,
or outside of it.
A percentage of trees may be removed on a site without requiring
replacement. Tree removal above this percentage requires
replacement. Proposed percentages are:
o In residential districts: 30% of significant trees in ESAs
o In residential districts: 50% of significant trees outside of ESAs
o In mixed use, commercial, industrial, and public/semi-public
districts: 50% of significant trees outside of the ESAs and 70%
of significant trees outside the ESAs.
Tree replacement ratios are proposed to be established as follows:
o Specimen trees are to be replaced 1 inch for every 1 inch
removed
o Hardwood significant trees are to be replaced 1 inch for every
2 inches removed
o Common and coniferous significant trees are to be replaced 1
inch for every 4 inches removed
Calculations will now be done consistently using caliper inches, rather
than number of trees.
3
Table 6. Tree Preservation and Mitigation Standards
Tree Location: within Basic Tree Location: not within Basic Use Area
Use Area
Environmentally
Sensitive Area
Deciduous trees 6 inches Deciduous trees 6-12 Deciduous trees over 12
(ESASs) Category
DBH and over or evergreen inches DBH or evergreen inches DBH or evergreen
trees between 12 to 20 trees between 12 and 20 trees over 20 feet tall
feet tall feet tall
Non-ESAs No mitigation required Provide one tree per tree Provide two trees per tree
removed removed
Natural Resource Provide one tree per four Provide two trees per tree Provide three trees per
Enhancement Area trees removed removed tree removed
Natural Resource Provide one tree per two Provide two trees per tree Provide three trees per tree
Conservation Area trees removed removed removed
4.The information required to be provided on a tree survey has been adjusted to
ensure that developers provide consistent information to Staff. These adjustments
include:
A requirement for the developer to provide an electronic table which lists the
tree tag, tree species, tree type (common, coniferous, or hardwood), tree
size, whether the tree is in the ESAs, whether the tree will be removed or
saved, and the tree’s condition.
Clarification that certain types of trees are exempt from inclusion in the tree
survey, including those that are part of a commercial tree operation, those
transplanted from the site to another private lot or public space within the
City, and those located within the right-of-way of major roadways.
5.Incentives were added to encourage protection of existing tree stands. This includes
a provision to allow total replacement inches required to be reduced by 5% for every
0.25 acre of a significant tree stand that is preserved within a development, as well
as a credit for preserving specimen trees at a rate of 2 inches of replacement for one
inch preserved; up to 50% of the total required inches.
6.Warranty language was added to ensure that all preserved trees and all trees
planted as replacement trees are guaranteed to be alive and in good health
following the completion of the development.
4
Additional changes being proposed will be discussed with the Environmental Board. A copy of
the original ordinance language is attached with proposed redline updates and comments for
review.
Findings of Fact
Staff seeks public and Board input as to whether the proposed zoning ordinance amendment
meets the following findings of fact.
Per City Code Section 1007.015(4):
(e) The Planning and Zoning Board shall hold the public hearing and consider possible adverse
effects of the proposed amendment. Its judgement shall be based upon, but not limited to, the
following factors:
1. The proposed action is consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed action is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the
area.
3. The proposed action conforms with all performance standards contained herein.
4. The proposed action can be accommodated with existing public services and will not
overburden the city’s service capacity.
5. Traffic generation by the proposed action is within capabilities of streets serving the
property as described in § 1007.020(4)(d) of this chapter.
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Environmental Board reviewed the proposed amendments at its May 27, 2026 meeting.
Staff reviewed the Board’s feedback and incorporated applicable comments into the proposed
ordinance revisions.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff seeks the Planning & Zoning Board’s input regarding the proposed zoning ordinance text
amendment and findings of fact.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Draft Ordinance
5
§ 1007.001 RULES AND DEFINITIONS.
(2) Definitions. The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this chapter shall
be interpreted as herein defined:
TREE. Any of the following type of trees, as each is defined herein:
(a) CONIFEROUS TREE, CONIFEROUS. A woody plant bearing seeds and cones
which, at maturity, is at least 12 feet or more in height, having foliage on the outermost
portion of the branches year round, is at least 12 feet or more in height.
(b) DECIDUOUS TREE, DECIDUOUS. A woody plant which, at maturity, is at least 15
feet or more in height, having a defined crown, and which sheds leaves annually and at
maturity, is at least 15 feet or more in height.
(c) SIGNIFICANT TREE, SIGNIFICANT. A healthy tree measuring a minimum of six
inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) for deciduous trees, or a minimum of 12 feet
in height for coniferous trees. A tree that is structurally sound and healthy and that is
either a common tree at least twelve (12) inches dbh, a coniferous tree at least eight (8)
inches dbh, or a hardwood tree at least six (6) inches dbh.
(d) SIGNIFICANT TREE STAND, SIGNIFICANT. A grouping or cluster of coniferous
and/or deciduoussignificant trees with contiguous crown cover, occupying 500 or more
square feet of propertyat least one acre in size, which may be located on one or more
parcels.including areas extending onto adjacent properties., which are comprised of
deciduous trees six inches or larger DBH or coniferous trees 12 feet or higher in height.
(e) SPECIMEN TREE, SPECIMEN. A tree that is structurally sound and healthy and
that is either a common tree at least 30 inches dbh, a coniferous tree at least 18 inches
dbh, or a hardwood tree at least 24 inches dbh. A specimen tree is a significant tree. A
healthy hardwood tree measuring equal to or greater than 30 inches DBH and/or a
coniferous tree measuring 50 feet or greater in height.
§ 1007.049 SCREENING, LANDSCAPING, BUFFER YARDS AND TREE PRESERVATION.
(1) Purpose. To establish landscaping and tree preservation standards to promote high
quality site development, compatibility of uses, biodiversity, tree preservation, and to
enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the community.
(a) Definitions. For the purpose of the landscaping, screening and tree preservation
standards, the following definitions shall apply:
BASIC USE AREA. The area necessary for construction of the site's allowed use in
accordance with the following:
1. Commercial, industrial, and institutional uses include the area within the footprints
of buildings and vehicular hardscape and within 20 feet around those improvements
2. Residential subdivisions include the area within the street right-of-way and that
portion of a residential lot between the right-of-way and within 100 feet beyond and
parallel to the street right-of-way.
3. Surface water management ponds are not part of the basic use area.
BIODIVERSITY. The variety, distribution and abundance of living organisms in an
ecosystem.
DAMAGE. Action or inaction which does not follow good arboriculture practices.
Damage may include damage inflicted upon roots by machinery, changing the natural grade
above the root system or around the trunk, destruction of the natural shape or any action
which causes infection, infestation or decay.
DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (DBH). The width of a treeDiameter at breast height,
typically measured at four and one-half feet to six feet above the ground. Multi-stem trees
are considered one individual tree, and each stem must be measured 4.5 feet above the
base of the stem and added together to determine the diameter of the multi-stem tree.
DETENTION AREA. Area of a detention pond from the normal water level and up the side
slopes to ten feet offset from the high water level.
DISTURBANCE. Any construction, development, removals, earth movement, clearing or
other similar activity.
DRIP LINE. Imaginary line on the ground that is extended straight downward from the
outermost edge of the canopy.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA (ESA). An area that contains native vegetation,
natural features and/or natural resources:. These include surface water (rivers, lakes,
streams and ditches); shoreland and floodplain areas, especially riparian and wildlife
corridors; wetlands, sensitive groundwater (wellhead) protection areas and sensitive
geological features; state or federally listed (endangered, threatened or special concern)
plant and animal species and their habitat; natural plant communities, including forests,
woodlands and prairies, particularly those of high species diversity and other unique and
sensitive features. ESA's are categorized as Natural Resource Conservation Areas and
Natural Resource Enhancement Area.
TREE, COMMON. A deciduous tree such as aspen, elm, and any other tree notas defined
defined as a hardwood deciduous tree or a coniferous tree.
TREE, HARDWOOD. A deciduous tree
Technical Requirements. such as birch, cherry, hickory, ironwood, hard maples, oak,
hackberry, locust, and walnut.
FOUNDATION LANDSCAPE ZONE. An area located within fifteen feet of the building.
LARGE SHRUB. Large shrubs have a mature height over six feet.
LARGE TREE. Over story deciduous trees with a mature height of at least 40 feet.
MEDIUM SHRUB. Medium shrubs have a mature height of three to six feet.
MEDIUM TREE. Deciduous trees with a mature height over 18 feet and up to 39 feet.
NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION AREA. An area within the Shoreland District of DNR
Public Waters (lakes and creeks), 50 feet of a creek or public ditches, and areas within the
Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Wetland Management Corridor (WMC).
NATURAL RESOURCE ENHANCEMENT AREA. Includes wetland areas non-contiguous to
the RCWD WMC extending outward from wetland boundary 75 feet for management class A
(Preserve), 50 feet for management class B (Manage 1), 30 feet for management class C
(Manage 2) and class D (Manage 3); areas located within the 100-year (1% chance)
floodplain; and Woodland Preservations Areas.
REMOVAL. Actual removal or effective removal through actions resulting in the death of
a tree.
ROOT PROTECTION ZONE. An imaginary circle surrounding the tree trunk with a radius
distance of one foot per one inch of tree DBH (e.g., a 20 inch diameter tree has a Root
Protection Zone with a radius of 20 feet).
SCREEN. A barrier that hinders sight and, potentially, access.
SMALL SHRUB. Small shrubs have a mature height of less than three feet. Small shrubs
are interchangeable with perennials, ornamental grasses and groundcovers to fulfill
landscape standards.
SMALL TREE. Understory deciduous trees with a mature height of 18 feet and under.
UNDESIRABLE TREE, UNDESIRABLE. Trees that are dead, diseased, structurally weak,
invasive, or trees that are hazardous to people, infrastructure or buildings, or other trees as
.
VEHICULAR HARDSCAPE. Areas covered with hard surface intended for motor vehicles,
including but not limited to off-street loading spaces, parking lots, driveway, drop-offs, and
drive through facilities.
WETLAND MANAGEMENT CORRIDOR. A contiguous corridor encompassing high priority
wetland resources established by the Rice Creek Watershed District.
WOODLAND PRESERVATION AREA. A remnant woodland ecosystem that is generally
mapped in the City's Minnesota Land Cover Classification System, and although it may be
degraded it generally meets the criteria for one of the following types of ecosystems as
reasonably determined by the city: alder, aspen, black ash swamp, deciduous forest,
floodplain forest, lowland forest, maple-basswood, mixed hardwood swamp, northern
hardwood, oak forest, paper birch, saturated or seasonally flooded deciduous forest,
seasonally flooded deciduous forest, tamarack swamp, upland deciduous forest or
woodland and willow swamp.
(2) Landscaping standards. New residential platted subdivisions, mixed use, commercial,
institutional and industrial uses shall be subject to the landscaping standards unless
specifically excepted. The landscape standards have been divided into five categories:
canopy cover, foundation landscape, open areas landscape, buffer and screen, and
boulevard trees. Projects shall comply with the applicable requirements of all five
categories.
(3) Canopy cover standards. The purpose of this requirement is to mitigate the effects of
vehicular hardscape by establishing tree canopy cover to intercept rainfall, protect
pavement from sun deterioration, reduce the heat island affect, and improve aesthetics.
Canopy cover requirements do not apply to single-family residential development, multi-
family residential development without surface parking other than individual unit driveways
and permitted outdoor storage areas in Industrial Districts.
(a) The required minimum canopy coverage for all uses is 40%.
(b) The following equation shall be used to calculate required canopy coverage:
Vehicular Hardscape (Square Feet) x Canopy Cover Percent = Required Minimum
Canopy Cover (Square Feet)
The total of the assigned canopy coverage values for all the trees in or near the
vehicular hardscape must be equal or greater than the required minimum. Pervious
pavements are considered 50% hardscape.
(c) The assigned canopy coverage value of each tree is based on planting location, tree
size and anticipated tree canopy size 15 years after planting. The assigned canopy cover
value to each deciduous tree is described in the following table and illustrations:
Table 1
Assigned Canopy Cover Value
Within less than 7 to 12 feet from
Interior parking
Planting Location (for new trees)
7 feet of vehicular
lot islands
vehicular hardscape edge
hardscape edge
100 percent of
50% of the 25% of the
the canopy
Assigned Canopy Coverage Value
canopy square canopy square
square footage
footage footage
950 SF (or 1200
Square feet
SF in
Large Tree 600 SF 300 SF
(SF) of
islands of 3 or
canopy
more
coverage
trees)1200 SF
assigned to
Medium Tree 500 SF 250 SF 125 SF
each
Small Tree 250 SF 125 SF NA
deciduous
Existing Tree: 6 -
1900 SF 950 SF NA
tree
12" DBH
Existing Tree:
2850 SF 1425 SF NA
DBH
(d) Existing trees may be used to fulfill canopy coverage, as described in Table 5division
(9) below of this section, when the drip line has proximity to the edge of the hardscape;
therefore, existing trees do not need to be within less than seven feet of the vehicular
hardscape edge.
(e) Within off-street parking areas of 50 or more spaces, interior irrigated landscaped
islands, peninsulas or rain gardens shall be provided at a minimum rate of 100 square
feet per 25 surface spaces or fraction thereof. Such islands or peninsulas shall be
contained within raised, curbed beds
of parking, consistent with other applicable parking lot construction requirements of this
ordinance. It is not the intent of this section to relieve a project of the installation of
islands or peninsulas that are necessary to promote the safe and efficient flow of traffic,
regardless of parking lot size.
(f) No landscaping or screening shall interfere with drive or pedestrian visibility for
vehicle entering, circulating or exiting the premises.
(4) Foundation landscape standards. The purpose of these standards is to soften and
enhance building architecture, define access points, add color and seasonal interest, and to
blend buildings in with the natural environment. Foundation landscaping standards do not
apply to single family residential development.
(a) The foundation landscape planting standards are described in the following table:
Table 2
Foundation Landscape Standards
Per 100 linear feet (LF) of Building*
Location Trees and Shrubs Shrubs
Front and Public/Private Street 2 large 6 large
(b) The number of plantings shall be Lineal footage shall be Rrrounded to the nearest
tenth, with a minimum factor of one.
(c) Round all calculations to the nearest whole number of plants.
(d) The required plant materials shall be planted in the foundation landscape zone
adjacent to the building face where the requirement applies. The city may allow flexible
planting locations where service areas or other constraints make the standards difficult to
meet.
(e) Existing trees may be used to fulfill the foundation landscape standards as described
in division (9) below of this section.
(f) Smaller landscape materials may be substituted at the following rates:
1 Large Tree = 1.5 Medium or 2 Small Trees
1 Large Shrub = 1.5 Medium or 3 Small Shrubs
(g) One large tree may be substituted for every two large shrubs in lieu of the shrub
requirement at the discretion of the city.
(h) The design of landscaping for ground areas under the building roof overhang must
take into account the potential effects of runoff from the roof edge.
(i) Trees planted within 30 feet of the building shall be considered within the
foundation landscape zone.
(5) Open areas landscape standards. The purpose of these standards is to provide general
site beautification and high aesthetic quality with a mix of plant materials in open areas.
Open areas include disturbed site areas, that are not located within the foundation
landscape zone, vehicular hardscape area or the building footprint and include cul-de-sac
islands, boulevard medians, storm water management areas, and common areas in
multifamily sites that are not for recreation facilities. Open area landscaping standards do
not apply to single family residential lots. Open areas landscaping shall meet the following
standards.
(a) The open areas planting standards are described in the following table:
Table 3
Open Areas Landscape Standards
Per 2500 SF* Trees and Shrubs Shrubs
1 large 2 large
*Rounded to the nearest tenth, with a minimum factor of one.
(b) Round all calculations to the nearest whole number of plants.
(c) Only land above the normal water level shall be included in the open area
calculation for storm water detention areas. Planting shall be located above the normal
water level in detention areas. The city may require specific tree species in locations where
water levels vary.
(d) Existing trees may be used to fulfill open areas landscape standards as described in
Table 5 division (9) below of this section.
(e) Smaller landscape materials may be substituted at the following rates:
1 Large Tree = 1.5 Medium or 2 Small Trees
2 Large Shrub = 1.5 Medium or 3 Small Shrubs
(f) One large tree may be substituted for every two large shrubs in lieu of the shrub
requirement at the discretion of the city.
(g) Areas that are included in a project-specific natural resource management plan that
addresses vegetation are not subject to the open areas landscaping standards.
(6) Buffer and screen standards. The purpose of this requirement is to separate and
buffer different land use types, screen roads and parking, and screen utility and loading
areas. The location of buffers and screens are listed below, while the width of the buffer
yard can be found in the respective zoning districts. Buffers and screens shall meet the
following standards:
(a) Required screen location, height, and materials are described in the following table:
Table 4
Location Required Screen Height Required Screen Materials
Planting screen in
compliance with
Between a parking lot 30 inches
paragraph (6f)b2.
and public right of way or
private sidewalk where Or
parkingstreet where
A combination of
parking projects toward
berm and screen in
the public right-of-way or
compliance with
private streetsidewalk
division (6)(b) below.
Between residential uses 6 Feet measured from the
and arterial or collector low adjacent grade of the
street structure or the elevation of
Planting screen in
Between any
measured from which ever is compliance with (6)(b).
development and
higher to provide screening
adjacent, less intense, Or
residential land uses (this
Wall or fence and
includes across a street
plantings shall provide
from residential), but not
shrub cover for 50% of
on the side of a use
the wall or fence on the
considered to be the
exterior side.
front (as determined by
the Zoning
Or
Administrator)
A combination of berm
and screen in compliance
with division (6)(b).
Between loading/service
area and public view
Outdoor Storage Yards 10 Feet A wall or fence of permanent
materials and planting shall
provide shrub cover for 50%
of the wall or fencfence e on
the exterior side fence when
abutting residential land use .
At its discretion, the City
Council may approve a
modification or waiver from
these standards where the
affected lot line adjoins
another industrial property.
(b) All planting screens shall require at a minimum a double row of plants with triangulated
spacing (See illustration). Planting plans shall include species which are sized to appropriately
screen visibility within five years of planting. Small shrubs shall be a planted at a maximum
interval of three feet on center; medium shrubs shall be planted at a maximum interval of four
feet on center; and large shrubs shall be planted at a maximum interval of six feet on center
unless; otherwise authorized by the city.
(c) A wall or fence intended to provide a continuous year round screen shall block visibility
completely.
(d) In addition to the shrub cover required in the table above, all screens shall be planted
with large trees every 50 LF, medium trees every 35 LF, small trees every 25 LF, or some
combination thereof, along the length of the screen.
(e) Existing vegetative screens should be left in place unless composed of invasive species
or otherwise directed by the city. Existing screens may be enhanced with new plantings to
comply with the requirements.
(f) Berms shall be irrigated, have maximum side slopes of 3:1, and have no less than four
inches of topsoil.
(g) Permanent walls and fences shall be offset by a minimum of two feet at intervals of 75
feet maximum length for stability and visual relief (See illustration).
(h) Approved permanent wall/fence materials shall include wood, metal, masonry,
concrete stone, or other prefabricated and/or sustainable materials. Non-decorative concrete
block is prohibited for screening walls. Rock face block or other decorative material is required
for masonry walls. Chain link fences with slats are prohibited for screening walls.
(i) (i) Maintenance of the required buffer strip planting and/or fence shall be the
responsibility of the individual property owners or, if applicable, the homeowners
association.
(i)
districts
(7) Boulevard tree standards.
(a) Boulevard trees shall be required in all new residential subdivisions.
(b) Boulevard trees are required at the rate of one tree per lot frontage for single family
and two-family lots. Townhome and multi-family properties shall provide boulevard trees at a
rate of one tree per 70 linear feet of street frontage where property fronts any public or private
street.
(c) Boulevard trees shall be planted within the city maintained 14 feet of the curb line or as
otherwise determined by the City Forester.
(d) Existing trees may be used to fulfill boulevard tree standards at the city's discretion.
(e) The city may, at its discretion, purchase and install the required boulevard trees. In such
case, the city shall collect a standard fee per tree. Said fee shall be established by the City
Council and based on the estimated market rate cost to purchase and install trees within the
development site.
(8) Sod and ground cover. All areas not otherwise improved in compliance with the approved
site plans shall have a minimum depth of four inches of topsoil and be sodded including
boulevard areas. Exceptions to these criteria may be approved by the Zoning Administrator as
follows:
(a) Seed may be provided in lieu of sod in any of the following cases:
1. Where the seed is applied to future expansion areas as shown on the approved plans,
or
2. Where the seed is applied adjacent to natural areas or wetlands. Seed mixture shall be
approved by the city, or
3. For single family and two family residential properties, proper erosion control
measures shall be implemented and maintained until vegetation is established. Sod may be
required in areas subject to erosion as determined by the Building Official or City Engineer.
(b) Undisturbed areas containing existing viable natural vegetation which can be
maintained free of foreign and noxious plant materials.
(c) Areas designated as open space or future expansion areas properly planted and
maintained with native grasses or wild flowers indigenous to Minnesota. Seed mixture shall be
approved by the city.
(d) Use of mulch materials such as bark, wood chips, and decorative rock in support of
shrubs and foundation plantings.
(e) Native landscapes in compliance with M.S. § 412.925.
(9) General landscaping standards.
(a) All lot areas not used for off-street parking, off-street loading, sidewalks, driveways,
building sites, or other requirements shall be landscaped with grass, shrubs, trees or other
acceptable vegetation, or treatment as required by this chapter prior to issuance of a certificate
of occupancy. Exceptions to this requirement are listed in division (15) below of this section.
(b) Commercial, industrial, public/semi-public, institutional, and multi-family residential
uses shall be required to submit a site landscape plan, in compliance with § 1007.020, Site and
Building Plan Review, of this chapter, for approval by the city prior to issuance of a building
permit.
(c) Desirable existing trees may be used to fulfill canopy cover, foundation landscape, and
open areas landscape standards if applicable by placement. Desirable existing trees are valued
according to the following table:
Table 5
Existing Tree Value
deciduous trees under 6 deciduous trees between 6 deciduous trees over 12
inches DBH or evergreen to 12 inches DBH or inches DBH or evergreen
Tree Size
trees under 12 feet tall evergreen trees between 12 trees over 20 feet tall.
to 20 feet tall
Tree Value 1 large tree 2 large trees 3 large trees
(d) Plantings may be grouped if part of an approved landscape plan.
(e) Standards may be met with different sizes of trees and shrubs.
(f) New trees may fulfill canopy coverage, foundation landscape, landscape screen, and
open space standards simultaneously if applicable by location.
(g) An existing tree is considered to be removed if the tree trunk is damaged or if more
than 30% of the root protection zone area is disturbed during the construction process.
(h) The city may allow flexibility in landscape standards if there are conflicts with solar
power, wind power, water harvesting, food production, or other innovative measures proposed
for the site.
(i) The landscape plan shall be compared to all applicable CPTED (Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design) standards and reviewed by the Police Department.
(j) Trees and shrubs shall not be planted in the right-of-way without city authorization and
shall not be planted in easements without authorization from the holder of the easement.
(k) Turf slopes in excess of three to one (3:1) are prohibited.
(l) Commercial, industrial, multi-family, public/semi-public, and institutional uses shall
install irrigation systems to ensure survivability of landscape materials.
(m) hŅŅΏƭƷƩĻĻƷ ƦğƩƉźƓŭ ğƩĻğ ƌğƓķƭĭğƦźƓŭ.
a. All open off-street parking areas of six or more required spaces shall be landscaped
on all sides in compliance with § 1007.049.
b. Within off-street parking areas of 50 or more spaces, irrigated landscaped islands or
peninsulas or rain gardens shall be provided at a rate of 100 square feet per 25 surface spaces
or fraction thereof. Such islands or peninsulas shall be contained within raised, curbed beds
consistent with other applicable parking lot construction requirements of this ordinance. It is
not the intent of this section to relieve a project of the installation of islands or peninsulas that
are necessary to promote the safe and efficient flow of traffic, regardless of parking lot size.
c. No landscaping or screening shall interfere with drive or pedestrian visibility for
vehicle entering, circulating or exiting the premises.
(10) Tree Preservation and Replacement
(a) Purpose
Tree preservation and mitigation standards. The purpose of these standards is to protect
valuable trees and stands of vegetation, while not interfering with landowners' reasonable use
and development of property. The goal is to preserve higher quality natural areas and natural
features, minimize unnecessary loss of habitat, biodiversity and forest resources, and to replace
removed trees in areas where tree cover is most critical.
(b) Applicability
(1) Unless specifically excepted, tree preservation and mitigation standards apply to all
plats, site plans, conditional use permits, interim use permits, grading, building, and
other activity that requires a city permit or approval.
(1) (a) Tree preservation and mitigation standards are described in the following table:
(2) Table 6
Tree Preservation and Mitigation Standards
Tree Location: within Basic Tree Location: not within Basic Use Area
Use Area
Environmentally
Sensitive Area (ESA)
deciduous trees 6 inches deciduous trees 6-12 inches deciduous trees over 12
Category
DBH and over or evergreen DBH or evergreen trees inches DBH or evergreen
trees between 12 to 20 feet between 12 and 20 feet tall trees over 20 feet tall
tall
Non-ESA no mitigation required provide one tree per tree provide two trees per tree
removed removed
Natural Resource provide one tree per four provide two trees per tree provide three trees per tree
Enhancement Area trees removed removed removed
Natural Resource provide one tree per two provide two trees per tree provide three trees per tree
Conservation Area trees removed removed removed
(b) Trees used for mitigation may also fulfill the open areas landscape standards at the
discretion of the city.
(c) Trees with 30% of the roots damaged are considered to be removed and must be
mitigated for at the applicable rates.
(d) Undesirable trees are not subject to the tree preservation and mitigation standards.
(e) Areas where trees are being removed for ecological restoration in accordance with a
city approved restoration plan are not subject to the tree preservation and mitigation.
(2) fOn existing lots with existing buildings where no building or development activity that
requires a permit or approval from the city is occurring, the removal of trees is not
subject to tree preservation and mitigation standards.
(g) Replacement trees shall be planted on site.
(h) The applicant may request to pay a fee per tree in lieu of some or all of the trees
required for mitigation. At the city's discretion, the city may accept the fee for planting trees
within the general area of the development project. The city shall maintain a standard fee per
tree based on the estimated market rate cost to purchase and install trees.
(11) Landscaping guidelines and technical specifications. The selection, installation, and
maintenance of all planting materials shall be in compliance with the City's Landscaping
Guidelines and Technical Specifications Manual.
(b)(c) Tree Survey
(1) A tree survey is required for all property that contains a significant tree.
(2) The tree survey shall be the basis for the tree preservation plan, tree mitigation
standards, and the use of existing trees to fulfill landscape standards.
(3) The tree survey shall provide the following information for all significant and specimen
trees on a site:
1. In the basic use area and other areas where tree removal is proposed, for all significant
trees:
a. Tree tag
b. Tree lLocation
c. Root protection zones
i. For significant tree stands designated for preservation, tThe survey
should identify the location of the combined root protection zones of all
tree stands designated for preservation on the development property..
ii. On adjacent properties, the root protection zone of significant tree where
the root protection zone is within five feet of the development property.
d. Whether the tree will be removed or saved
e. ESAs on the site
(4) In addition to the tree survey, the applicant shall also provide an electronic table with
the following information:
a. Tree tag
b. Tree species
c.f. Tree to be removed or saved
d.g. Tree condition
(5)(6) For a new plat or new planned unit development, the tree survey shall be one
plan sheet and the tree preservation plan shall be a separate plan sheet.
(7) For a building permit for a new structure on an existing lot, the tree survey and
preservation information may be included on the lot survey typically required for a
building permit instead of on a separate document.
(6)(8) For a building permit for an addition to an existing structure, the tree survey
information may be provided in an informal medium that sufficiently conveys the
information.
(7) At the city's discretion, the tree survey requirement may be waived under the following
circumstances:
(8)(9) I in circumstances when sSignificant trees will not be removed and are not likely
to be impacted by construction based on construction limits shown on the grading plan.
(c) 2. Significant trees will only be removed within the basic use area and the basic use
area is not an ESA.
(d) Tree Preservation Plan.
(1) A tree preservation plan shall be required for all soil disturbance activities where tree
preservation and mitigation standards apply. A tree preservation plan shows how the
tree preservation and mitigation standards will be met and how preserved trees will be
protected during construction and other potentially harmful activities.
(1)(2) If a natural resource management plan has been approved for the site, the tree
preservation plan shall be in compliance with said plan.
(b) The tree preservation plan shall be based on the tree survey.
(2)(3) A tree preservation plan shall identify:
a. The basic use area and eEnvironmentally sensitive areas (ESAs).
b. The disturbance area.
c. Tree size (DBHdbh), species, condition, location, and root protection zone for all
significant trees to be preserved, or;
d. The combined root protection zone of all stands of trees designated for preservation,
whichever is applicable.
e.d. Location and type of tree protection fence.
f.e. Staging areas.
g.f. Temporary construction access routes when temporary site access is necessary
within root protection zone of any tree or tree stand designated for preservation.
a. Temporary access shall be routed in a manner that is least disruptive to the tree
or tree stand per the approval of the City Forester.
b. Temporary access roads shall not exceed 25 feet in width and shall be delineated
by snow fencing or safety fencing.
c. An eight-inch deep cover of wood chip mulch shall be placed over the temporary
access route to cushion the root protection zones from compaction.
h.g. Existing and proposed grading.
i.h. The plan shall show directional felling and trenching to separate root systems prior to
bulldozing trees or stumps if necessary to avoid damage to adjacent trees.
j.i. The plan shall be coordinated with utility planning so that utilities are installed in a
manner that protects trees intended to be saved.
(3) (e) Trees to be preserved shall be tagged in the field and keyed to the tree
preservation plan. The city may inspect the trees to verify compliance with the
preservation plan at any time during construction.
(f) If a natural resource management plan has been approved for the site, the tree
preservation plan shall be in compliance with said plan.
(g) The following shall occur prior to soil disturbance:
1. The tree preservation plan shall be approved by the city.
2. Fencing and all tree protection measures shall be installed and inspected by the
city.
3. Erosion control measures shall be installed and inspected by the city.
4. All required financial securities have been submitted.
5. Any required development agreement has been approved. (14) Tree
preservation during construction. Trees that are to be preserved must be protected by
the following methods unless otherwise approved by the city.
(a) Before land clearing, grading, or construction begins, the city approved tree
protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained around the root
protection zone of the trees to be protected. Fencing shall be a minimum of four feet
high and of a highly visible material, such as snow fence or polyethylene laminar safety
netting, and must be standing throughout the construction process. Cut roots with
clean, pruning cuts at the fence line prior to fence installation to avoid later tearing of
the roots. Signage shall be installed to instruct workers to stay out of the root protection
zone.
(b) Areas where development must encroach upon the root protection zone must be
identified on the tree preservation plan in which case the fencing shall be installed at
that edge.
(c) No actions that may harm the health of the tree; including but not limited to
construction, traffic, compaction, storage of equipment or materials including soil,
grading, or concrete washout areas; may occur in the root protection zone.
(d) Trees damaged by construction, or with more than 30% of the roots disturbed, shall
be counted as removed and mitigated at applicable rates.
(e) Tree protection measures shall remain in place until all grading and construction
activity is terminated.
(15) Final inspection. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the project
developer, builder, or representative shall certify in writing to the city that all elements
of the tree preservation plan and landscaping plan were completed. These must be
confirmed by the city. However, the city may issue a certificate of occupancy prior to
completion of landscaping in the following situations:
(a) If winter weather will prevent healthy planting practices, a security shall be posted
to ensure the remaining planting is accomplished and all planting must be installed by
June 15 the following spring. (b) A certificate of occupancy may be issued by the city
on residential lots prior to lawn seeding or sod, provided an escrow security is
submitted sufficient to ensure that the work will be completed and the date of
completion is specified.
(16) Non-compliance. If the city finds that the property is not in compliance with the
approved landscaping plan or tree preservation plan, it shall inform the property owner
or, if applicable, the homeowners association, regarding the non-compliance and
describe, in writing, the steps needed to bring the property into compliance within a
reasonable timeframe, not to exceed 60 calendar days. (17) Performance security.
The city may require performance security to ensure compliance with the requirements
of this chapter.
(a) The performance security shall extend for two years from the date of planting. The
form of the security (cash, letter of credit, or other form) shall be determined by the
city.
(b) If after notification of non-compliance the property owner or, if applicable, the
homeowners association, fails to achieve the compliance within 60 calendar days, the
city may exercise its authority to use the performance security to address compliance.
survey shows that no significant trees are on the development property or adjacent
properties that are near the construction area.If a tree survey shows that no significant
trees are on the development property or adjacent properties are near the construction
area, the city may waive the tree preservation plan requirement.
(e) Tree Removal
(1) Within any rural or residential zoning district or residential PUD, development may
remove or disturb up to 30% of the total diameter inches of significant trees within the
ESA and up to 50% of the total diameter inches of significant trees outside of the ESA
without requiring replacement. Any tree removal beyond this threshold shall require
replacement tree planting.
(2) Within any business, industrial, or non-residential PUD, development may remove or
disturb up to 50% of the total diameter inches of significant trees within the ESA and up
to 70% of the total diameter inches of significant trees on site without requiring
replacement. Any tree removal beyond this threshold shall require replacement tree
planting.
(1)(3) In the case of a development which includes both residential and non-residential
uses, tree removal shall be calculated individually for each portion of the development.
(f) Tree Replacement
(3)(5) Replacement trees shall be planted on site.
(6) The applicant may request to pay a cash fee per tree in lieu of some or all of the trees
required for mitigation. At the city's discretion, the city may accept the fee, or a
combination of cash payment and tree replacement in lieu of planting replacement
trees. Cash fees accepted by the City in lieu of (or in combination with) planting of
replacement trees shall be placed in the Tree Preservation Fund and used soley for
purchase, planting, and replacement of trees on publicly owned property or the
acquisition of forested lands in the City. for planting trees within the general area of the
development project. The city shall maintain a standard fee per tree based on the
estimated market rate cost to purchase and install trees as established by the City fee
schedule.
(f)(g) Process
(1) (e) Trees to be preserved shall be tagged in the field and keyed to the tree
preservation plan. The city may inspect the trees to verify compliance with the
preservation plan at any time during construction.
(2) If a natural resource management plan has been approved for the site, the tree
preservation plan shall be in compliance with said plan.
(3)(1) The following shall occur prior to soil disturbance:
a. The tree preservation plan shall be approved by the city.
b. Fencing and all tree protection measures shall be installed and inspected by the
city.
c. Erosion control measures shall be installed and inspected by the city.
d. All required financial securities have been submitted.
e. Any required development agreement has been approved.
(4)(2) Final inspection. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the project
developer, builder, or representative shall certify in writing to the city that all elements
of the tree preservation plan and landscaping plan were completed. These must be
confirmed by the city. However, the city may issue a certificate of occupancy prior to
completion of landscaping in the following situations:
a. If winter weather will prevent healthy planting practices, a security shall be
posted to ensure the remaining planting is accomplished and all planting must
be installed by June 15 the following spring.
b. A certificate of occupancy may be issued by the city on residential lots prior to
lawn seeding or sod, provided an escrow security is submitted sufficient to
ensure that the work will be completed and the date of completion is specified.
(5)(3) Non-compliance. If the city finds that the property is not in compliance with the
approved landscaping plan or tree preservation plan, it shall inform the property owner
or, if applicable, the homeowners association, regarding the non-compliance and
describe, in writing, the steps needed to bring the property into compliance within a
reasonable timeframe, not to exceed 60 calendar days.
(g)(h) Tree Protection Measures
(1) Tree preservation during constructionRequired Protective Measures. Trees that are to
be preserved must be protected by the following methods unless otherwise approved
by the city.
a. Before land clearing, grading, or construction begins, the city approved tree
protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained around the
root protection zone of the trees to be protected. Fencing shall be a minimum of
four feet high and of a highly visible material, such as snow fence or
polyethylene laminar safety netting, and must be standing throughout the
construction process. Cut roots with clean, pruning cuts at the fence line prior to
fence installation to avoid later tearing of the roots. Signage shall be installed to
instruct workers to stay out of the root protection zone.
b. Areas where development must encroach upon the root protection zone must
be identified on the tree preservation plan in which case the fencing shall be
installed at that edge.
b.c. Root protection should be provided for significant trees on adjacent lots to
protect existing trees and limit impacts on adjacent properties.
c.d. No actions that may harm the health of the tree; including but not limited to
construction, traffic, compaction, storage of equipment or materials including
soil, grading, or concrete washout areas; may occur in the root protection zone.
d.e. Trees damaged by construction, or with more than 30% of the roots
disturbed, shall be counted as removed and mitigated at applicable rates.
f. Tree protection measures shall remain in place until all grading and construction
activity is terminated.
(i) Security
(1) Performance security. The city may require performance security to ensure compliance
with the requirements of this chapter.
a. The performance security shall extend for two years from the date of planting.
The form of the security (cash, letter of credit, or other form) shall be
determined by the city.
a.b. If after notification of non-compliance the property owner or, if
applicable, the homeowners association, fails to achieve the compliance within
60 calendar days, the city may exercise its authority to use the performance
security to address compliance.
(j) Warranty
(h) Security
(2) Performance security. The city may require performance security to ensure compliance
with the requirements of this chapter.
a. The performance security shall extend for two years from the date of planting.
The form of the security (cash, letter of credit, or other form) shall be
determined by the city.
b. If after notification of non-compliance the property owner or, if applicable, the
homeowners association, fails to achieve the compliance within 60 calendar
days, the city may exercise its authority to use the performance security to
address compliance.
(Am. Ord. 13-23, passed 9-11-2023)
Cross-reference:
City fee schedule, see § 218.01
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7C
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner
MEETING DATE: August 12, 2026
REQUEST: Robinson South PUD Concept Plan/Concept Plan
CASE NUMBER: PZC2026-0011
APPLICANT: TCLD Land Holdings, LLC
4800 Olson Memorial Hwy, Ste 100
Golden Valley, MN 55422
OWNER: Robinson Landscaping, LLC
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, TCLD Land Holdings, LLC, submitted a land use application for Robinson
South PUD Concept Plan/Concept Plan (“Concept Plan”). They are proposing a master
planned development in the southeast quadrant of Main Street and Sunset Avenue. The
development contains approximately 153 gross acres and consists of a mix of 389
housing units and a private K-12 school.
Tentative Review Schedule:
Complete Application Date:July 14, 2026
60-Day Deadline:September 12, 2026
Environmental Board Meeting:July 29, 2026
Park Board Meeting:August 5, 2026
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting:August 12, 2026
City Council Work Session:September 8, 2026
City Council Meeting:N/A
The Land Use Application is for the following:
PUD Concept Plan/Concept Plan (“Concept Plan”)
1
Future land use applications may include:
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
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:
Applicant Narrative prepared by TCLD dated July 13, 2026
Robinson South Concept Plan prepared by Alliant dated July 13, 2026
Robinson South Concept-Utility Design prepared by Alliant dated July 13, 2026
Robinson South Concept-Land Use Existing prepared by Alliant dated July 13,
2026
Robinson South Land Use-Density Plan prepared by Alliant dated July 13, 2026
Robinson South Concept-Map Showing Surrounding Area prepared by Alliant
dated July 13, 2026
Robinson South Concept Photos From Surrounding Streets prepared by Alliant
dated July 13, 2026
Robinson South Concept Theoretical Yield Plan prepared by Alliant dated July 13,
2026
Robinson South Concept Wetland Exhibit prepared by Alliant dated July 13, 2026
Geotechnical Evaluation Report prepared by Bruan Intertec dated July 13, 2026
Wetland Delineation Memo prepared by Kjolhaug Environmental Services
Company, Inc. dated July 11, 2022
BACKGROUND
Current Proposal
Residential
Robinson South consists of single-family homes and townhomes. The total number of
housing units is 389. See the attached applicant’s narrative for a detailed description of
the development.
Housing Type# Units
Single Family 55 ft wide lots =130
Single Family 65 ft wide lots =178
Single Family 80 ft wide lots =8
2
Row Townhomes =73
Total Number of Units =389
Private School
A private K-12 school is proposed in the northwest quadrant of the development. The
applicant is currently working with Avail Academy.
Land Use and Open Space
The attached Land Use – Density Plan and following table detail the proposed land uses,
acres and percentages.
Land UseTotal Area (ac)%
Net - Single Family - 55 ft*21.8114.2%
Net - Single Family - 65 ft*37.0424.2%
Net - Single Family - 80 ft*2.091.4%
Townhomes2.201.4%
Private Road/Driveway1.641.1%
Public Roadway Right of Way22.1614.5%
Major Perimeter Right of Way5.533.6%
Transmission Easement*2.511.6%
Gas Pipeline Easement3.542.3%
Public Open Space2.321.5%
Private Open Space4.192.7%
County Ditch / Easement*5.713.7%
County Drainage Easement0.540.4%
Preserved Wetland0.990.6%
Stormwater Management14.879.7%
Compensatory Flood Storage9.996.5%
Net School Property16.1310.5%
Total Area153.27100.0%
*Areas Net of overlapping uses
3
The development provides open space with trails, ditches, stormwater ponds, etc.
creating multi-functional greenway corridors. Total open space equals 29.1%. The
private townhome area has 52% open space. The Concept Plan also shows several of the
single family lots abut open space.
ANALYSIS
Existing Conditions
Per the applicant’s narrative, the development site is currently in use as part of the
Robinson Landscaping, Inc. sod farm agricultural use. The property also includes a
residence and buildings used for operation of the sod farm. The site topography is very
flat with multiple ditches to provide drainage and an irrigation source.
Wetlands exist along the ditch corridors. A majority of the site is in the floodplain, and
mitigation will be utilized for stormwater management. A 100ft wide pipeline easement
and a 90ft wide transmission utility bisects the southeast quadrant of the site.
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use
2040 Future
DirectionZoningCurrent Land Use
Land Use
Mix of Residential
NorthR, Rural Agricultural
Densities and PR/C
PUD
SouthResidentialMedium Density
(Century Farm North)
EastR, RuralRural Residential Urban Reserve
City of BlaineCity of BlaineCity of Blaine
West
(Wetland/Open Space) (Wetland/Open Space)(Wetland/Open Space)
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Land Use
The proposed development area contains 4 different land use categories: Low density
residential (LDR), Medium density residential (MDR), High density residential (HDR), and
Planned Residential/Commercial (PRC). The City amended the 2040 Comprehensive Plan
land use areas in December 2025 to be consistent with the Main Street Master Plan.
Per the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the site is in Planning District 2. The Comprehensive
Plan states:
Planning District 2 includes Planned Residential/Commercial areas.
4
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.
Commercial development is proposed north of Main Street in the Del Webb/Pulte
Homes concept plan. In August 2025, the City approved the Main Street Master Plan.
Development within the plan area shall be consistent with the Master Plan. This is
discussed in more detail later in the staff report.
Density
The attached Land Use & Density table details the development’s general housing unit
range and density using Met Council’s density formula. It is important to note that the
16 acre private K-12 school is not included in these density calculations since it is not a
residential use.
The preliminary range of housing units allowed for the entire site is 364 to 545. The
proposed 389 housing units falls within this density range. The development’s overall
net density is 3.56 units per acre.
Staff Comments:
1.Land Use -Density Plan:
a.The private K-12 school area shall be subtracted from the gross area.
b.Stormwater pond area shall be subtracted from the gross area.
c.Each land use category (LDR, MDR, HDR) shall meet the individual
housing unit range.
i.For example, the HDR 156 housing units does not meet 229-305
unit range.
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.
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 2025, the
’s average annual number of units is 120. This is less than the 230 unit annual
allocation allowed.
5
With existing projects underway the project will be phased over multiple years to meet
growth management requirements.
Main Street Master Plan
In August 2025, the City approved the Main Street Master Plan. The Master Plan
outlines a vision to guide future development within a 962-acre study area in the city’s
northwestern corner. It also provides guidance on enhancing and conserving natural
resources, as well as integrating development with adjacent neighborhoods and existing
transportation networks. Although the Main Street Master Plan did not select a final
development plan, it does identify a preferred scenario to guide development withing
the study area.
The Robinson South Concept Plan is within the Main Street Master Plan study area and
will be reviewed against the Master Plan preferred scenario for consistency.
Preferred Development Scenario
The Preferred Development Scenario 2 master plan (Master Plan) identifies general
locations of minor drainage route, stormwater detention areas, pocket parks, planned
residential/commercial neighborhood, natural landscape, greenway system,
neighborhood park, major drainage route and priority wetlands.
In comparison, the Robinson South Concept Plan is generally consistent with the Master
Plan-Preferred Development Scenario.
Land Use Plan
As discussed, the proposed development area contains 4 different land use categories:
Low density residential (LDR), Medium density residential (MDR), High density
residential (HDR), and Planned Residential/Commercial (PRC).
The single family and townhome neighborhoods are located within the varying
residential land uses.
The 16 acre private K-12 school is in the Planned Residential/Commercial (PRC) land use
area. Per City Code Section 1007.024(4) Planned Unit Development, land that is guided
PRC uses the R-5, High Density Residential and Business District zoning development
standards. Per City Code Section 1007.115(11)(f): Public, educational, and religious uses
are allowed by conditional use permit in an R-5 zoning district.
In comparison, the Robinson South Concept Plan is generally consistent with the Master
Plan-Land Use Plan.
6
Staff Comments:
1.A comprehensive plan amendment may be required for the project to adjust the
land use boundaries.
2.The townhomes in the medium density land use area near the Robinson Drive
neighborhood shall be moved to high density areas consistent with the Main
Street Master Plan.
3.The private K-12 school will require site & building plan review and conditional
use permit as part of the PUD preliminary plan/preliminary plat process or
separate land use application.
Mobility-Roadway Network
th
Main Street is a principal arterial street, 4 Avenue is major collector street, and
Robinson Drive is a minor collector street. A roundabout exists at Main Street and
Sunset Avenue.
The Master Plan identifies the need and general locations for future minor collector
streets extending from Main Street to Century Trail, adjacent to the Planned
th
Residential/Commercial land use area (private K-12 school), and connection to 4
Avenue. Half-mile access and roundabout along Main Street are also identified.
In comparison, the Robinson South Concept Plan is generally consistent with the Master
Plan-Roadway Network with comments noted below. The City will be responsible for
th
making the connection from the development to 4 Street. The timing of this
connection is to be determined. There is no connection to Carl Street which is consistent
with the Master Plan.
Staff Comments:
1.A stronger east-west minor collector street shall be created to the east boundary
th
for future connection to 4 Avenue consistent with the Master Plan.
a.No lots shall directly access this minor collector street.
b.Trail shall be provided along this minor collector street.
2.The Century Trail and east-west collector street shall be shifted south.
a.80ft wide street right-of-way.
b.Trail on both sides.
3.Cul du sacs and private streets shall not exceed 500ft in length.
4.The plans shall show right in/right out access only at:
a. Robinson Drive and Sunset Avenue
b.Street north of Robinson Drive and Sunset Avenue
5.The Main Street and Sunset Avenue intersection shall comply with the 2024 Lino
Lakes Gateway Planning manual primary gateway elements such as monument
signs, landscaping, etc.
7
Mobility-Trails
The Main Street Master Plan identifies the need for trail corridors along the major and
minor collector streets. The Anoka County Regional trail is proposed along Main Street.
In comparison, the Robinson South Concept Plan is generally consistent with the Master
Plan-Trails. Trails are provided along minor collector streets. The trail near the
townhomes connects with the existing trail section that connects to Robinson Drive and
Century Farm North park.
Staff Comments:
1.A regional trail shall be constructed along the south side of CSAH 14 (Main
Street).
2.A trail shall be constructed along the east side of Sunset Avenue.
3.A trail shall be constructed along the east-west minor collector street to the east
lot line.
4.A trail shall be constructed along both sides of the Century Trail 80ft wide right-
of-section near Main Street.
5.Trail corridors shall be a minimum 30-40 feet in width above the high water
level.
6.The trail shown between Lots 83 and 84 to Lots 100-101 shall be evaluated.
Drainage
The Main Street Master Plan identifies the location of existing and future drainage
systems.
In comparison, the Robinson South Concept Plan is generally consistent with the Master
Plan-Drainage System. Major and minor drainage systems/ditches are incorporated into
the development and establish multi-functional greenway corridors.
Natural Systems
The Main Street Master Plan identifies the general location of the greenway and natural
resource enhancement system. The greenway system generally follows the drainage
systems.
In comparison, the Robinson South Concept Plan is generally consistent with the Master
Plan-Natural Systems plan. Multi-functional greenway corridors with trails, ditches and
open space are created throughout the development.
Conservation Framework
8
The Main Street Master Plan details a conservation framework for the Anoka County
ditches including maintenance easements, 50ft wide native buffers, and cross-sections.
If the Robinson South project moves forward, preliminary plans shall detail compliance
with the conservation framework especially along the Century Trail connection to Main
Street.
Staff Comments:
1.Buffers along Anoka County ditches shall be restored with native plantings.
Parks and Open Space
The Main Street Master Plan identifies locations of neighborhood park, pocket parks,
and open space.
In comparison, the Robinson South Concept Plan is generally consistent with the Master
Plan-Parks and Open Space plan. Per the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the existing
Century Farm North park to the south is the neighborhood park that services the area.
The park is currently undeveloped and park dedication fees from the Robinson South
project will help fund its development.
The Robinson South townhome neighborhood includes a private amenity area.
Staff Comments:
1.The county ditch easements, pipeline easement and overhead power easement
shall be open space consistent with Master Plan.
a.These easements shall not be within the single family lots.
2.Public trail costs will be credited to the developer.
3.Private amenity area costs will not be credited to the developer.
4.Protected Open Space Area signs shall be installed along lot lines abutting open
space.
Major Road Sections
The Main Street Master Plan details major road section cross sections with open
space/storm water detention.
If the Robinson South proposal moves forward, preliminary plans shall detail compliance
with the major road section requirements.
Staff Comments:
9
1.Along Main Street, more open space/stormwater detention separation
consistent with the Master Plan shall be provided.
2.Landscape buffers shall be provided along Main Street.
Utilities-Water Supply and Sanitary Sewer
The Main Street Master Plan details water supply and sanitary sewer requirements. See
Engineering Memo for more information.
If the Robinson South proposal moves forward, preliminary plans shall detail compliance
with the utility system.
Development Phasing Plan
The Main Street Master Plan details a development phasing plan based on the City’s
utility staging plan. The Robinson South Concept Plan is in Utility Staging Area 1A (2018-
2025).
Current Zoning and Land Use
Current Zoning R, Rural
Current Land Use Agricultural
Future Land Use per Low Density, Medium Density, High Density,
2040 Comp Plan Planned Residential/Commercial
Utility Staging Area Stage 1A (2018-2025)
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 their property developed. The property will need to be rezoned to
PUD, Planned Unit Development to allow for zoning flexibility.
PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District
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.
10
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.
Conventional Zoning District Guidelines and PUD Flexibility
Lot Width and Lot Sizes
The attached PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines Chart details
the PUD Land Use and correlating conventional residential zoning district requirements.
The chart also compares the proposed development to these guidelines.
The Robinson South Concept Plan proposes 55ft, 65ft, and 80ft wide single family lots.
The proposed lot depths are 120ft. PUD flexibility is required for the 55ft wide lots and
all lot depths.
More detailed information and analysis is required for the townhomes to determine if
PUD flexibility is required.
Staff Comments:
1.Per the subdivision ordinance, City Code Section 1001.098 Lots,
(1) Area. The minimum lot area, width and depth shall not be less than that
established by the Lino Lakes Zoning Chapter in effect at the time of adoption of
the final plat. Minimum lot area for urban lots shall consist of buildable land
exclusive of utility transmission easements or water course easements that
encumber lot development.
2.Minimum 125ft lot depths shall be established for all single family lots.
3.All single family lots shall meet the minimum lot area requirement based on Lot
Width x 125ft Lot Depth.
a.Example:
i.55ft x 125ft = 6,875sf
ii.65ft x 125ft = 8,125sf
iii.80ft x 125ft = 10,000sf
Setbacks
The following tables compare the conventional City ordinance requirements to the
proposed setbacks.
11
Conventional Zoning DistrictHouse Product
R-1 Single Family Residential80ft wide lots
R-2 Two Family Residential55ft and 65ft wide lots
R-3, Medium Density ResidentialTownhomes
City PUD
80ft Wide
OrdinanceProposed SetbacksFlexibility
Single Family
RequirementRequired?
Street ROWR-1 = 30ft25ftYes
Rear Lot LineR-1 = 30ft 25ftYes
R-1 =
Side Lot Line5ft garage/7.5ft / 7.5ftYes
10ft house
City PUD
55ft & 65ft Wide Single
OrdinanceProposed SetbacksFlexibility
Family
RequirementRequired?
Street ROWR-2 = 25ft25ftNo
Rear Lot LineR-2 = 25ft 25ftNo
R-2 =
Side Lot Line5ft garage/7.5ft / 7.5ftYes
10ft house
City PUD
TownhomesOrdinanceProposed SetbacksFlexibility
RequirementRequired?
Local or Minor Collector
R3 = 30 ft25ftYes
(from lot line)
Major Collector or Arterial
R3 = 40ft25ftYes
(from lot line)
Private StreetPrivate Street
25 ftNo.
(from back of curb)= 25 ft
Rear Lot LineR3 = 30 ft30 ftNo
Side Lot LineR3 = 10 ft10 ftNo
Staff Comments:
12
1.Staff does not recommend PUD flexibility on the townhome setbacks.
2.Townhome driveway lengths onto private driveways shall be a minimum 25ft.
3.City Code Section 1007.024(6) further details Urban Residential Planned Unit
Development requirements regarding municipal water and sanitary sewer
services, density, open space, neighborhood performance standards and yards.
The applicant shall demonstrate these requirements are met.
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 building design standard
requirements. The conventional residential zoning districts also provide addition
requirements. Sample color renderings of the single family and townhome elevations
are provided in the attached applicant’s narrative.
Staff Comments:
1.All housing units (single family and townhomes) should meet the minimum
requirements of City Code Section 1007.043. This includes minimum garage
footprint of 520sf.
2.Performance standards (architecture, parking spaces, lighting, landscaping, etc.)
will be fully evaluated in with the complete submittal of PUD Preliminary
Plan/Preliminary Plat.
3.Higher architectural standards may be required for PUD flexibility.
Subdivision Ordinance
Blocks and Lots
The Robinson South Concept Plan provides a mix of residential lots and blocks. Outlots
will contain floodplain mitigation, buffers, stormwater ponds, public and private open
space/parks etc.
Streets and Alleys
CSAH 14 (Main Street) is a Principal Arterial road. Internal streets consist of minor
collector, local streets, and private streets intended to serve the site. Public sidewalks
are provided along the streets.
Staff Comments:
1.Seventy-five (75) feet total of road right-of-way shall be dedicated along CSAH 14
(Main Street).
13
2.Sixty (60) feet total of road right-of-way shall be dedicated along CR 53 (Sunset
Avenue).
3.Sixty-six (66) feet of road right-of-way shall be dedicated for Robinson Drive.
4.Private streets shall be a minimum of 26 ft wide back to back.
5.Townhome driveway lengths shall be a minimum 25ft.
6.Cul du sacs shall not exceed 500ft in length.
7.Private streets shall not exceed 500ft in length.
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 buffers shall be required over open space, ditches,
wetlands, and greenway corridors.
4.Ditch maintenance easements shall be provided.
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control
The concept plan shows multiple stormwater ponds throughout the development. They
are part of the multi-purpose greenway corridor incorporating trails, stormwater
management, floodplain, ditches, wetlands, and open space.
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 minimum lot size and lot widths for conventional subdivisions and
other requirements of the Lino Lakes Zoning and Subdivision Chapters.
The submitted yield plan provides 205 single family lots, 22 twin homes and 386
townhomes totaling 613 housing units.
The proposed concept plan is 389 housing units.
Phasing Plan
Per the applicant’s narrative, the entire site will be mass graded in one phase to allow
for the creation of the storm water ponds and lakes. Development of the neighborhood
clusters with utilities and streets will be completed in multiple phases based on market
demand.
14
Mass grading is anticipated to begin Winter 2026/27 with the first phase of utilities and
streets completed by Summer/Fall 2027. Home construction to immediately follow
phase 1 infrastructure completion in 2027 with a full build out of the community taking
place over four to five years.
Traffic Study
A traffic study is not required at the time of concept plan review.
Staff Comments:
1.A traffic study is required with submission of the PUD Preliminary
Plan/Preliminary Plat. The study will be evaluated for compliance with the Main
Street AUAR.
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.
Staff Comments:
1.A noise study will be required with the PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat.
a.Berm and/or any noise mitigation requirements shall be measured from
side or rear yard ground elevations to top of berm or fence.
2.Twenty (20) ft wide landscaped buffers are required along Sunset Avenue
adjacent to the townhomes and along Main Street adjacent to the single family
lots.
Main Street Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR)
The City adopted the Main Street AUAR in August 2025. The development is within the
AUAR area. All development within the study area must comply with the AUAR
mitigation plan.
Staff Comment:
1.The applicant shall show compliance with the AUAR mitigation plan with
submission of the PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat.
Wetlands
15
The concept plan identifies existing wetlands running parallel to both Sunset Avenue (CR
53) and Main Street (CSAH 14). Previous wetland delineations reviewed by the Rice
Creek Watershed District (RCWD) have identified these as severely degraded, partially
drained and excavated wetlands. These wetlands have been converted to private
drainage ditches serving existing sod farm operations. The City recommends that the
developer pursue sequencing flexibility to impact these wetland areas. The expansion
of county road right of way and roadway improvements, multi-use trail improvements
and municipal buffer requirements for both adjacent residential purposes and surface
water management features will make it difficult to preserve in their current
form. Filling may allow for creation of higher quality upland buffers adjacent to water
features along both corridors.
The wetlands along the east lot line are within the Wetland Management Corridor.
The wetland exhibit indicates 1.77 acres of wetlands are preserved and 1.42 acres are
impacted. Any wetland impacts are required to meet WCA requirements and provide
mitigation.
Staff Comments:
1.Wetlands within the Wetland Management Corridor require an average 50ft
wide buffer (minimum 25ft).
2.Wetlands outside the Wetland Management Corridor require a minimum 10ft
wide buffer.
3.Wetlands and buffers are not allowed on the single family lots.
4.Developer should pursue sequencing flexibility to impact these wetland areas
along the County roads.
Floodplain
The 2015 FEMA Floodplain Map indicates Zone A flood plain on the site. The site will be
graded and flood storage and stormwater ponds incorporated into the development.
Any floodplain impacts are subject to City requirements per City Code Chapter 1103.
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 may be required for development if there are
floodplain impacts.
Additional City and Government Agency Review Comments
Anoka County Highway Department, July 27, 2026 email:
16
o RI/RO on Sunset Avenue is acceptable.
o Roundabout on CSAH 14 (Main Street) is acceptable.
o Further discussion with the County is needed regarding RI/RO onto CSAH
14 (Main Street).
Centennial ISD#12 and Forest Lake #831 inquired about the private K-12 school.
Lino Lakes Police Department received the concept plan and had no comments.
Lino Lakes Fire Department reviewed the concept plan and had no comments.
City Engineer comments are provided in the attached memo.
Environmental Board comments are provided in the attached memo.
The August 5, 2026 Park Board did not meet due to a lack of a quorum. Per the
staff report, the Public Services Director recommended:
1.Park Dedication cash-in-lieu of land. Dollars will be designated for development
of Century Farms North Park. Credit for trail construction to be determined.
2.Trail Connections to incorporate into the design:
a.The future Anoka County Regional Trail along the south side of Main
Street should be depicted.
b.A trail is needed along Sunset Avenue and should be depicted.
PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat
The City’s review and comments on the concept plan’s relation to the 2040
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:
(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 Main Street Master Plan was adopted by City Council in August 2025. The Robinson
South Concept Plan implements the master plan.
17
(b)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 Robinson South Concept Plan preserves and enhances the wildlife habitat, unique
natural resources, existing vegetation, natural topography, geologic features and
reduces the negative impact on the environment by creating a multi-functional
greenway corridor with wider ditch easements, stormwater management, trail system
and open space. The greenway corridor will also be protected by a vegetative buffer that
provides additional protection to the natural resources.
The site provides opportunity to implement a stormwater reuse system for irrigation
purposes. The system should be evaluated and implemented to the greatest extent
feasible to offset the use of municipal water for irrigation.
(c)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 Robinson South Concept Plan creates a mixed use residential development with a
private K-12 school. Stormwater management and floodplain mitigation are
incorporated into the multifunctional greenway corridor. Several single family lots abut
open space.
(d)Efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets
thereby lowering development costs and public investments.
Private streets and reduced lot widths result in efficient, smaller networks of utilities and
streets. This lowers development costs and public investments.
(e)Mix of land use types.
The Robinson South Concept Plan includes a mix of residential housing types
(townhomes and single family lots) within low, medium and high density land uses. A
private K-12 school is also proposed.
(f)Provision of a housing type or target housing price that is desirable to the
City.
The Robinson South Concept Plan proposes a mix of residential housing types consisting
of townhomes and varying single family lot sizes. This variety in housing types supports
life-cycle housing that is desirable to the City.
18
(g) 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 may be achieved in the Robinson
South concept plan:
Preserving open space, providing park dedication and trails, a nd/or providing
stormwater management areas, in excess of minimum standards to implement
the greenway system
Restoring/enhancing ecological systems
Managing stormwater using natural filtration and other ecologically based
approaches
Providing life-cycle and affordable housing
Providing infrastructure that benefits community beyond the project site that
would otherwise not be financially feasible
Summary
Public Benefit Gained:
1.Implementation of Main Street Master Plan.
2.Construction of a variety of housing types including single family lots and
townhomes that supports life-cycle housing.
3.Creation of a multi-functional greenway corridor and storm water management
system.
4.Preservation, protection, and enhancement of ditch system and natural
resources.
5.Efficient use of land and private streets resulting in smaller network of utilities
and streets.
6.Creation and preservation of open space that is accessible to the public.
7.Construction of regional trail corridor along Main Street
8.More parkland dedication fees available for Century Farm North park
development.
9.Wider landscape buffers and trail corridors.
Flexibility Provided:
1.Reduced lot depth from 125 and 135ft to 120ft for all lots.
a.Note: staff recommends minimum 125ft depth for all lots.
2.80ft wide lots:
a.Decreased lot size from 10,800sf to 9,600sf
b.Decreased street right-of-way setback from 30ft to 25ft
c.Decreased rear lot line setback from 30ft to 25ft
19
d.Decreased side lot line setback from 10ft to 7.5ft
3.65ft wide lots:
a.Decreased side lot line setback from 10ft to 7.5ft
4.55ft wide lots:
a.Decreased lot size from 7,500sf to 6,600sf
b.Decreased lot width from 60ft to 55ft
c.Decreased side lot line setback from 10ft to 7.5ft
5.Townhomes:
a.Decreased local or minor collector street right-of-way setback from 30ft
to 25ft
b.Decreased major collector or arterial street right-of-way from 40ft to
25ft.
c.Note: staff does not recommend PUD flexibility on the townhome
setbacks.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting feedback from the Planning & Zoning Board:
1.Are there other Benefits Gained or Flexibility Provided?
2.Should the applicant provide additional public benefits to be considered for PUD
zoning?
a.Examples could be more open space, enhanced greenway corridor, ,
additional buffers, higher architectural & building standards, additional
landscaping etc.
3.Should the applicant hold a neighborhood meeting prior to PUD Preliminary
Plan/Preliminary Plat submittal?
Additional Staff Comments:
1.A PUD Design Guidelines Booklet shall be drafted detailing the entire
development’s regulations such as building and parking setbacks, architectural
standards, building heights, landscaping, signage, etc.
2.A private entity shall own and maintain the outlots containing open space,
private streets, storm ponds, landscaping, etc.
3.The City will maintain the public streets, public trails, and stormwater ponds.
4. A minimum of 50% of the gross townhome land area shall be reserved as
common open space for townhomes.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Site Location & Aerial Map
2.Applicant Narrative
3.Concept Plan with Aerial Map
20
4.Land Use & Density Plan
5.Surrounding Area Map
6.Future Land Use Plan
7.Yield Plan
8.Wetland Plan
9.Density Chart
10.PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines Chart
11.Main Street Master Plan
12.City Engineer Memo dated August 5, 2026
13.Environmental Memo dated August 4, 2026
21
Nbjo!Tusffu
Concept Plan Submittal Narrative
Robinson South, Lino Lakes, Minnesota
July 13, 2026
Twin Cities Land Development is pleased to make application for Concept Plan review for
the Robinson Property south of Main Street. We are interested in obtaining feedback and
direction from the Commissions, City Council and City Staff regarding the development
proposal. The
Main Street Master Plan and AUAR. Included in this narrative are key items from the City
Checklist.
DEVELOPMENT TEAM / CONSULTANTS:
Developer:
TCLD Land Holdings, LLC
Ben Schmidt, President
ben@tclanddev.com (612) 716-3047
Angela Meyer, Senior Development Manager
anglea@tclanddev.com (714) 501-7482
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 100
Golden Valley, MN 55422
Surveyor/Land Planning/Engineering/Landscape:
Alliant Engineering, Inc.
733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Wetlands:
Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc.
2500 Shadywood Road, Suite 130
Orono, MN 55331
Environmental/Geotechnical:
Braun Intertec
11001 Hampshire Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55438
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 1 of 9
9
PROPERTY / DEVELOPMENT SITE INFORMATION:
Legal Description:
The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
EXCEPT the south 250 feet of the west 460 feet thereof,
ALSO EXCEPT that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter described as follows:
Commencing at
the Northwest corner of said Northwest Quarter Section 7; thence South 00 degrees 03 minutes 04
seconds West
assumed bearing along the west line of said Northwest Quarter, a distance of 60.07 feet; thence
North 88 degrees
10 minutes 44 seconds East, a distance of 33.02 feet to the easterly right of way of County Road 53
and the point
of beginning; thence South 00 degrees 03 minutes 04 seconds West along said easterly right of way,
a distance of
360.00 feet; thence South 89 degrees 56 minutes 56 seconds East, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence
North 00
degrees 03 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 330.63 feet; thence North 44 degrees 06 minutes
54 seconds
East, a distance of 43.10 feet to the southerly right of way of County Road No. 14; thence South 88
degrees 10
minutes 44 seconds West along said southerly right of way, a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of
beginning there
terminating, Anoka County, Minnesota.
The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
The Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
EXCEPTING from the above described land, Parcel 19, Parcel 20 and Parcel 21, Anoka County
Highway Right-of-way
Plat No. 50.
Abstract Property
Address: 310 Main Street, Lino Lakes, MN.
PIDs: 073122220001 = 35.3509 acres
073122210001 = 39.0331 acres
073122120001 = 38.9757 acres
073122130001 = 39.9127 acres
Total Acres = 153.2724 acres
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 2 of 9
Existing Site Description
The development site is currently in use as part of the Robinson Landscaping, Inc. sod farm
agricultural use. The property also includes a residence and buildings used for operation of
the sod farm. The site topography is very flat with multiple ditches to provide drainage and
an irrigation source.
The property is bound by Main Street (CSAH 14) to the north and Sunset Ave (CR 53) to the
west. The County has previously requested 75-feet of Right of Way dedication from the
centerline of Main Street and 60-feet of Right of Way dedication from the centerline of
Sunset Avenue; both requests are depicted on the Concept Plan.
Other roadway access points have been provided to the property through the Century Farm
development to the south at Cardinal Way, Robinson Drive, and Century Trail. Additionally,
a pedestrian trail has been stubbed to the property from Century Farm Addition to the south,
just west of the Cardinal Way street connection.
Adequate public water and sanitary sewer is available to the property from Century Farm
development to the south at Cardinal Way, Robinson Drive, and Century Trail.
The development site has been historically used for agriculture and currently has no
significant tree removal required to construct the development.
Braun Intertec performed a Geotechnical Evaluation Report, dated July 13, 2026, on the site.
The results are summarized below, with peat levels ranging from 0.5-feet to 8-feet in depth
and water levels ranging from 4-feet to 9-feet in depth.
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 3 of 9
Land use and Zoning Designations
The development property is guided for several different
Comprehensive Plan Main Street Master Plan including:
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Planned Residential/Commercial.
Land uses for properties adjacent to the site are guided with consistent uses:
To West: City limits with Blaine (Lino Lakes land use N/A)
To North: Includes a combination of the 4 land uses on the development site
To East: Low density residential
To South: Medium density residential
The development site is currently zoned entirely as R - Rural. The requested zoning for the
site will establish a PUD zoning for the entire development site, compatible and consistent
The zoning for the properties abutting the site include:
To West: City limits with Blaine (Lino Lakes zoning N/A)
To North: R - Rural
To East: R - Rural
To South: PUD (mixed residential neighborhood)
DEVELOPMENT FEEDBACK REQUEST
Proposed Development Plan Summary
The applicant proposes to provide the City of Lino Lakes with a mixed-use development that
includes a variety of residential housing options catering to all spectrums of consumers and
to satisfy the market demand and a private K-12 school. The housing styles will be grouped
together within clusters or pods as follows:
55-feet wide single-family lots (min lot area = 6,600 sf)
65-feet wide single-family lots (min lot area = 7,800 sf)
80-feet wide single-family lots (min lot area = 9,600 sf)
Row style townhomes
The proposed typical single family lot design standards include:
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 4 of 9
The proposed typical townhome design standards include:
Other miscellaneous proposed design standards include:
o cul-de-sac roadway
o typical residential roadway
- north segment of Century Trail connection to future RAB
private roadways
County road ROW dedication:
o - CSAH 14
o CR 53
Right in right out (RIRO) connection to CSAH 14
Connections to existing roadway stubs from Century Farm development
Proposed public roadway and utility extension to land east of the development site.
location shown in plan
-cul-de-sac roadways
Preservation of many onsite wetland/ditch areas with proposed buffers in
accordance with RCWD requirements
county ditch.
Construction of substantial ponding and lake areas that will be an amenity to Main
Street view corridor and to the various housing types proposed within the project.
The main county ditch system will be preserved and protected while the newly
created ponding and lakes will provide for stormwater management goals and
floodplain mitigation.
Future school to be final designed and approved through future land use application
conceptual school design shown in provided plan
monument sign in the northwest corner of the project in the southeast quadrant of
Main Street and Sunset Ave
Project proposes Public Open space along county ditch and in public trail segments
outside public right of way.
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 5 of 9
Proposed Land Use / Density Summary
The base density range for the property has been estimated from the Main Street Master
Plan established land uses. The net developable area was calculated ranges by deducting
non-developable areas from gross land area for the existing property. The density ranges
from a minimum of 489 units to a maximum of 711 units at full development. This base
density range was then used to create the required Theoretical Yield Plan. See following
calculations for the current land use base density range for the property:
The proposed Concept Plan provides for a total of 389 units on the site.
55-feet wide Single Family Lots: 130
65-feet wide Single Family Lots: 178
80-feet wide Single Family Lots: 8
Row Townhomes: 73
TOTAL HOUSING UNITS: 389 UNITS
The proposed plan does propose density below the current density range for the property
per the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The project does propose density within the target
range for the Low and Medium Density areas but the plan has less units in the High Density
area. The project also is proposing a school in replacement of the Comprehensive Plan
Planned Residential / Commercial area along with converting some High Density Residential
to School. The proposed 389 units does result in a net density of 3.18 units/ acre for the
entire property, see following table for calculation:
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 6 of 9
HOUSING TYPE EXAMPLES
55-family lots
65-family lots:
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 7 of 9
80-family lots:
Row style townhomes:
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 8 of 9
TIMING/PHASING/STAGING
The entire site will be mass graded in one phase to allow for the creation of the storm water
ponds and lakes. Development of the neighborhood clusters with utilities and streets will be
completed in multiple phases based on market demand.
Mass grading is anticipated to begin Winter 2026/27 with the first phase of utilities and
streets completed by Summer/Fall 2027. Home construction to immediately follow phase 1
infrastructure completion in 2027 with a full build out of the community taking place over
four to five years.
CONCLUSION
The applicant respectfully requests feedback and direction on the concept plan and planned
unit development from the Commissions, City Council and City Staff. We believe the
concept plan will allow for a development that is consistent with goals and objectives
for this area and create a community that will enhance Lino Lakes and the surrounding area.
Concept Plan Submittal July 13, 2026
Robinson South Page 9 of 9
Land Use & Density - Proposed
GrossPreserved ***Major / CountyCounty RoadwayPipeline *Transmission **PublicCounty Ditch/Floodplain PrivateNetDensityUnitUnitProposedResulting
Land UseAreaWetlandsROWPond EasementEasementEasementOpen SpaceEasementCompensatorySchoolAreaRangeRange (Low)Range (High)UnitsDensity
LDR81.760.211.453.542.511.645.714.2962.421.6-3.099.9187.31862.98
MDR9.360.350.240.108.664.0-6.034.752.0475.42
HDR46.450.151.830.585.7038.196.0-8.0229.1305.51564.08
Planned Res/Comm = Private School12.570.292.010.549.730.00NANANANA
Planned Res/Comm = Private School3.1403.140.00NANANANA
Totals153.270.995.530.540.000.002.325.719.99109.27NA3645453893.56
* Area Excludes Wetland Overlap Area, Does Include Transmission and Ditch Easement Overlaps
** Area Excludes Pipeline Easement Overlap, Does Include Ditch Easement Overlap
*** Area Only Inclues Wetland Area Outside of Major / County Road ROW Dedication
City Comment: Need to net out entire 16 acre private school area and stormwater ponds.
ROBINSON SOUTH PUD CONCEPT PLAN
PUD Land Use and Conventional Zoning District Guidelines Chart
Robinson South Concept Plan dated 7-13-26
Development Standards/GuidelinesProposed Development
Correlating ConventionalLotLotLotLotLotLotPUD Flexibility
PUD Land UseZoning DistrictProposed Housing Type or UseWidth (ft)Depth (ft)Size (sf)Width (ft)Depth (ft)Size (sf)Required?
Low Density ResR-1X, Single Family ExecutiveNA, no 90' lots proposed9013512,825NANANANA
1
Yes
R-1, Single Family 80' wide proposed8013510,800801209,600
R-2, Two Family Residential 65' wide proposed601257,500651207,800Yes
Medium Density ResR-2, Two Family Residential 55' wide proposed601257,500551206,600Yes
R-3, Medium Density ResidentialTownhomes proposed100NA24,000800NA370,775No
2
R-2, Two Family Residential
High Density Res 55' wide proposed601257,500551206,600Yes
R-3, Medium Density ResidentialTownhomes proposed100NA24,000800NA370,775No
Note: Comp Plan Amendment required to change land use boundaries.
1. 80ft wide lots are 120 ft deep; however, there is a 45ft wide ditch to the south providing more separation from Carl Street.
2. R-2 Development standards allowed in High Density per PUD.
3. Staff recommends all single family lot depths be a minimum 125ft.
7/30/2026City of Lino LakesPUD Land Use-Conventional Zoning Robinson South PUD Concept Plan
Scale: 1”= 600’-0”
0’300’600’
SCENARIO 2
‘SOUTH OF MAIN’
ET
TRE
N S
AI
M
NATURAL LANDSCAPE
TOWNHOME/MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
STORMWATER DETENTION AREA
/ LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD -SCALE
COMMERCIAL
POCKET PARK
GREENWAY SYSTEM & NATURAL
ALTERNATIVE
RESOURCE ENHANCEMENT AREA
POCKET PARK
STORMWATER DETENTION AREA
PRIORITY WETLANDS
MAJOR DRAINAGE ROUTE
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
MINOR DRAINAGE ROUTE
MINOR DRAINAGE ROUTE
PRIORITY WETLANDS
*Master plan exhibits are diagrammatic
in nature, for AUAR study purposes only in nature, for AUAR study purposes only
MAPPING NORTHWEST MAIN - MAIN STREET MASTER PLAN
AUGUST 25, 2025PREFERRED DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO | 23
Memorandum
To:Katie Larsen, Lino Lakes City Planner
From:Kris Keller PE, WSB
Diane Hankee PE, Lino Lakes City Engineer
Date:August 5, 2026
Re:Robinson South
Concept Plan Review
037352-000
As requested by City staff, WSB reviewed the Concept Plans for the Robinson South Addition for
a PUD prepared by Alliant and received July 13, 2026. The site is located south of Main Street
(CSAH 14), east of Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53), and north of Robinson Drive and Carl Street. A
Main Street Master Plan and Environmental Assessment Worksheet, that included the proposed
development area, was completed in 2025. Our comments were made on the following
documents:
Robinson South Concept Plan prepared by Alliant, received July 13, 2026.
Engineering
•Grading
The Robinson South 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.Townhome units 1-8, 27-38 should have additional separation from the wetlands.
2.HWL of wetlands, ditches, and ponds shall be outside of proposed lots.
3.In addition to maintenance easement required by RCWD for the ditch systems.
The Master Plan identifies native buffers averaging 50 feet wide and minimum of
25 feet wide measured from the top of bank.
4.Construction plans should include the City of Lino Lakes general specifications
and standard detail plates for street and utility construction.
•Stormwater Management
The proposed Robinson South 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 Robinson South development to Carl Street. ACD 10-22-32
continues south under Carl Street and ultimately discharges to Marshan Lake.
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 2
Anoka County and Rice Creek Watershed District should review the preliminary drainage
design concurrent to the City’s preliminary plat reviews.
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 5-10 feet in
depth. The applicant will be required to meet all City of Lino Lakes ordinances and RCWD
rules for surface water management.
Comments:
1.Based on groundwater levels, infiltration basins are not likely on site, filtration or
sedimentation basins appear to be more appropriate.
2.Stormwater infrastructure must be reasonably accessible for future maintenance.
3.The Developer shall incorporate stormwater reuse systems as part of the project
which will require a water balance study be included with the next submittal.
•Water Supply
The Development can be served by the City’s existing water supply system assuming the
proposed Well No. 7 is constructed in 2027. The City is constructing a water treatment
plant for manganese removal which will be placed in service in the fall of 2026 and will
provide adequate treatment capacity for the Development.
The existing watermains include a 12-inch diameter ductile iron pipe (DIP) watermain
along Robinson Drive and Century Trail south of the study area, 8-inch DIP watermain on
Carl Street (west cul-de-sac), 10-inch DIP watermain stub for the Robinson Property off of
Cardinal Way, and two 12-inch DIP watermain stubs at the intersection of Robinson Drive
and Century Trail.
Water distribution in the Development will include watermain loops varying in size from 8-
inch to 12-inch diameter.
Comments:
1.The water system shall include the installation of a 10-inch diameter
watermain from 7902 Sunset Ave. to Main Street for future extension to the
north. It shall also include a 12-inch diameter watermain extended along
Century Trail to Main St for future extension to the north.
2.The City plans to complete a trunk water system loop from the east side of
the development site to the existing system at Woodduck Trail and Main
Street.
3.The applicant to verify water pressure is adequate within the development site
including commercial and multifamily locations.
•Sanitary Sewer
The Development is identified as a Stage 1A and 1B Planned Service Areas in the 2040
Comprehensive Plan and is located in the 2I sanitary sub-district.
Robinson South – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 3
The City’s existing sanitary sewer system has capacity for 300-500 more units in the entire
Sanitary Sewer District 2. The City is currently completing a study to evaluate the West
Side Relief interceptor alignments south of the site as outlined in the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan. This is to address the existing gravity sewers and lift stations downstream of the site
whose capacity is largely consumed by existing flows. The West Side Relief Sewer is
needed to free up capacity by diverting existing sewers in sub-district 2E and to serve new
development area.
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
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.
Comments:
1. 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
th
(CSAH 53) north of Robinson Drive and east of 4 Avenue. The concept plan includes an
extension of Century Trail from Robinson Drive to Main Street (CSAH 14), a roundabout at
Century Trail and Main Street (CSAH 14). A connection from the site to Robinson Drive at
Cardinal Way. A new right-in/right-out access to Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) between
Robinson Drive and Main Street (CSAH 14) and a new right-in/right-out access to Main Street
(CSAH 14) between Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) and Century Trail.
1.Traffic study to include Intersections:
Sunset Ave/Main St
Main St/4th Ave
Main St/Lake Dr
Sunset Ave/Robinson Dr
Sunset Ave/Century Trl
Sunset Ave/Lilac St
Lilac St/4th Ave (might be changed to AWS-WSB to analyze)
New intersections with Sunset Ave
New intersections with Main St
Per Anoka County Main St and Lexington Ave & Lake Drive and Apollo Drive
Analysis to include:
Existing (use 2025 counts from study)
Year 2030 Build and No-Build (to compare with AUAR)
Year 2045 Build and No-Build (to compare with AUAR)
Assume same growth rates
Distribution updated with school traffic
Assume connection to 4th Ave
Projected ADT on: Robinson Dr, Century Trl, new connection to 4th Ave
Turn Lane warrants
Mitigation Analysis
Robinson South – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 4
Recommended improvements
2.Access to the site of off County roads will be coordinated with Anoka County. Century
Trail and Main St intersection are planned as a roundabout. The other site access to
county roadways, at a minimum, will be restricted to right-in/right-out.
3.A trail should be included along both Main St and Sunset Avenue for the length of the
site. The Main St trail is to meet regional trail design standards per MnDOT.
•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, ditch systems, and the Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10-22-32
trunk ditch system. 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:
1.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.
2.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 for the 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. Separate trail easements will need
to be dedicated.
Robinson South – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 5
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 Permit
2.City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Grading
3.Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
4.Minnesota Department of Health
5.Rice Creek Watershed District Permit
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.
Robinson South – Concept Plan - Engineering Review
Environmental Memo
To:Katie Larsen, City Planner
From:Tom Hoffman, Environmental CoordinatorTom Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator
Date:August 4, 2026
Re: Environmental Comments – Robinson South TCLD Concept Plan
Environmental Board had recommended the following at their July 29, 2026 meeting:
1. An erosion control plan will be submitted to the city for the proposed
development and will require compliance with the City’s erosion and sediment
control standards
2.A SWPPP will be required for the project, ensure that the SWPPP meets all
requirements on the NPDES permit including section 5.1-5.26
3.The project will disturb more than an acre of soil and will be required to obtain an
NPDES permit. Proof of permit shall be required before construction.
4.Refer to the AUAR Mitigation plan for specific requirements within the proposed
project area. The area falls within the Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR and will be
required to meet the mitigation requirements.
5.Floodplain alterations will require submittal of appropriate Letter of Map Change
to FEMA to document changes to floodplain boundaries.
6.Provide totals for floodplain fill and impacts within the project area along with
calculations for compensatory storage being provided.
a.Calculations and modeling will need to be verified that changes to the
floodplain do not impact adjacent properties up or downstream of the
project.
7.Follow sequencing process of wetland avoidance, minimization, and mitigation as
outlined in the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). If wetlands are altered, follow
the applicable City of Lino Lakes, WCA, RCWD, and USACE Permitting.
a.Provide totals of wetland impacts, both permanent and temporary.
b.Include wetland banking mitigation form
8. Stormwater management BMP’s shall be constructed in accordance with City,
RCWD, and MIDS requirements.
a.Developments are encouraged to use best practices to reduce chloride
uses in snow and ice removal.
9.City Engineer will review stormwater management requirements to confirm they
meet all requirements.
10.Evaluation of the feasibility of stormwater reuse for all developments will be
required as part of the AUAR.
a.The City recommends planting native and drought tolerant species to
minimize irrigation requirements.
11.Provide maintenance and access bench for ACD system 10-22-32. A 20-foot buffer
will be maintained on each side of the ditch as required by RCWD to allow for
regular maintenance.
12.A DNR temporary water appropriation permit will be required for any dewatering
needed for construction.
13.Invasive species will be controlled during site construction. Additionally
appropriate measures will be taken to control the spread of invasive species
during construction and landscaping. Refer to the AUAR mitigation sheet for
additional information.
14.If applicable tree clearing activities will be restricted to winter months (November
1- March 31). If winter tree clearing is not feasible, technical consultation with
the USFWS may be required.
15.Boulevard trees are required at the rate of one (1) tree per lot frontage for single
family and two-family lots.
a.Townhomes and multi-family properties require one tree per 70 feet of
linear feet of road frontage.
b.Open areas shall be landscaped. Landscape screening and buffers shall be
installed along CSAH 14/Main Street.
16.Reseed herbaceous areas with native seed mixes where possible to avoid impacts
to the monarch butterfly and rusty patch bumble bee.
17.Many state-listed plant species were identified by the DNR having potential to be
affected by the proposed development scenarios.
a.A qualified surveyor will need to determine if suitable habitat exists within
the activity of impact.
b.Conduct a survey prior to any project activities, the survey will determine
next steps for avoidance, minimization, and permitting.
18.DNR required specific mitigation measures to avoid impacts to state-listed
threatened Blandings turtle.
a.Limit erosion and wetland impacts.
b.Check bare ground, trenches, holes, and depressions during construction
activities.
c. Develop a Blanding’s turtle mitigation plan.
19.Consult with USFWS to determine appropriate mitigation strategies for activities
near the Bald Eagle nest.
20. Implement Conservation Design Framework, including conservation of ESA’s and
buffering natural resources.
Page 2
21.Any native plantings that are being installed should have a management plan and
maintenance schedule moving forward. Areas that will be maintained by the HOA
should develop a management plan.
22.Minimize blue light, up light, and backlight to the extent practicable.
23. Master plan show 180’ set back from Main street. Current plans show anywhere
from 78-37’.
24. Provide a 20’ wide landscaped buffer in the backyards of homes adjacent to Main
street. Current design with set back and narrow stormwater ponding will not
meet this requirement.
25.Current plans show lots ending prior to ACD 10-22-32, this area should either be
put into an outlot or covered by easements. Work with Rice Creek on final design.
26.Existing stormwater pond on the se corner of the roundabout appears to be
removed with the proposed school design. This pond may change shape and
location but still needs to provide function for the drainage in that area.
27.Include a map showing the areas of flood plain storage with overall calculations
for the entire site.
28.HWL should be contained outside of private property and contained within the
basins and buffer areas.
29.Wetland buffers should all be located outside of lots, currently shown wetland
buffers in rear yards.
30.Confirm all WMC areas throughout the project area, the east side of the project
appears to be within the WMC and would require additional buffering.
31.Lot 29 shows buffer going into the side of the building pad, lot 29 likely needs to
be removed.
32.Are wetlands along Sunset and Main St being protected with the project or
mitigated. With the addition of pedestrian facilities and site grading it doesn’t
seem feasible to protect those wetlands.
33.Drainage will need to be maintained along the county ditch system.
Page 3
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7D
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner
MEETING DATE: August 12, 2026
REQUEST:Natures Refuge North Second Addition PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
CASE NUMBER: FP2026-0009
APPLICANT: M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St Paul, LLC
Attn: Emily Becker
5354 Parkdale Drive, Suite 100
St Louis Park, MN 55416
OWNER: Same
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St Paul, LLC., submitted a land use application for
Natures Refuge North Second Addition PUD Final Plan/Final Plat. The final plat is for 48 single
family villa lots. This is the last phase/plat of this development.
Tentative Review Schedule:
Complete Application Date:July 14, 2026
60-Day Deadline:September 12, 2026
Environmental Board Meeting:N/A
Park Board Meeting:N/A
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting:August 12, 2026
City Council Work Session:September 14, 2026
City Council Meeting:September 14, 2026
This staff report is based on the following information:
nd
Natures Refuge North 2 Addition Sanitary Sewer, Watermain, Storm Sewer and Street
Construction Plans prepared by Carlson Engineering dated July 10, 2026
1
nd
Natures Refuge North 2 Addition Landscape Plan prepared by Carlson Engineering
dated July 10, 2026
Natures Refuge North Grading Development and Erosion Control Plans prepared by
Carlson Engineering dates July 10, 2026
Natures Refuge North Second Addition Final Plat prepared by Carlson Engineering
received on July 13, 2026
Title Commitment dated April 16, 2026
BACKGROUND
On May 12, 2025, the City Council passed Resolution No. 25-61 approving the Natures Refuge
PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat. The Council staff report and resolution detail the
project’s consistency with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and compliance with the City Code.
ANALYSIS
PUD Preliminary Plan
The PUD Preliminary Plan is the master plan of the entire development. The Natures Refuge
North PUD Preliminary Plan consists of the following housing products and units:
PUD Preliminary Plan
Housing Product# Units
60ft Wide Single Family Villas94
Preliminary Plat
The original preliminary plat contained 93 single family lots and 5 outlots. A condition of
preliminary plat approval was that Outlot E be platted as a lot. The preliminary plat was revised
and this condition has been met. The total single family lot count is now 94.
Phasing Plan
The development is proposed to be constructed in two (2) phases. This final plat is for Phase 2.
Outlot A is a future single family lot. It is not currently feasible for this outlot to be platted as a
lot due to grades. If the property to the north develops, Outlot A may be platted into a lot in
the future.
Phase# Lots
145
248
2
Future Phase (Outlot A)1
Total94
PUD Final Plan
The PUD Final Plan is for a specific stage or phase of the PUD Preliminary Plan. The Natures
Refuge North Second Addition PUD Final Plan consists of the following housing products and
units:
PUD Final Plan
Housing Product# Units
60ft Wide Single Family Villas48
Final Plat
The final plat contains the following lots and outlots:
Lot or OutlotPurposeOwnership
Lots and Blocks48 single family lotsPrivate
AFuture 1 lot developmentPrivate
As noted above, Outlot A is a future single family lot. It is not currently feasible for this outlot
to be platted as a lot due to grades. If the property to the north develops, Outlot A may be
plated into a lot in the future.
Public Land Dedication
The City will collect cash fee in lieu of land dedication and provide credit for trail construction
costs. The following is a summary:
Natures Refuge North Second Addition
Total # Units =48
x Park Dedication Fee$3,800
= Cash in Lieu Value$182,400
(Trail Construction Costs)($35,880)
3
TOTAL CASH FEE DUE =$146,520
WMC Buffer Declaration and Conservation Easements
WMC Buffer Declaration and Conservation Easements were recorded over the open space and
wetland outlots with the First Addition. There are no additional declarations or easements
required with the Second Addition.
Title Commitment
The City Attorney reviewed the title commitment and notes the title work shall be updated to
reflect proper ownership and plat signatures.
Agreements
Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
o The stormwater maintenance for public facilities are covered under the City’s
Programmatic Stormwater Management Agreement. Borrow areas / lakes area
are maintained by the HOA.
Development Agreement and Final Plat
o A Development Agreement will be prepared by the City and shall be executed.
Site Improvement Performance Agreement
o Not applicable.
Findings of Fact
Per City Code Section 1001.057 Review, Approval or Denial:
(1) The Planning and Zoning Board shall consider the final plat and the Community
Development Department shall forward the Planning and Zoning Board recommendations to
the City Council. The following requirements shall be met before consideration of the final plat
by the Planning and Zoning Board:
(a)The final plat shall substantially conform to the approved preliminary plat and phasing
plan;
The final plat substantially conforms with the preliminary plat and phasing plan.
(b)For plats that consist solely of individual single family residential lots, final plat
applications for subsequent phases shall not be approved until building permits have
4
been issued for 40% of lots in the preceding phase. This division applies only when the
preceding phase consists of 40 or more lots; and
The development is proposed to be constructed in two (2) phases. Phase 1 has 45 lots, and 22
permits have been issued (49%).
(c)Conditions attached to approval of the preliminary plat shall be substantially fulfilled or
secured by the development agreement, as appropriate.
The conditions of the preliminary plat have been substantially fulfilled. Securities will be
required with a Development Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Natures Refuge North Second Addition PUD Final Plan/Final
Plat with the following conditions:
1.The conditions detailed Resolution No. 25-61 and Resolution No. 25-118 remain in
effect.
2.A trail easement shall be recorded over the trails and corridors after the trails have been
constructed.
3.The HOA documents shall be amended to include the newly platted lots.
The following items shall be addressed prior to releasing the final plat:
1.All comments from the City Attorney.
a.The title work shall be updated to reflect proper ownership and plat signatures.
The following items shall be addressed prior to releasing any building permits within the plat:
1.All comments from the City Engineer memo dated August 5, 2026.
2.All comments from the Environmental Coordinator memo dated August 6, 2025.
3.Recorded copies of the following documents shall be provided to the City:
a.Final plat
b.Development Agreement
c.Amended HOA documents
ATTACHMENTS
1.Land Use Plan
2.Preliminary Plat
3.Final Plat
4.City Engineer Memo dated August 5, 2026
5.Environmental Coordinator Memo dated August 6, 2026
5
Memorandum
To:Katie Larsen, Lino Lakes City Planner
From:Kris Keller PE, WSB
Diane Hankee PE, Lino Lakes City Engineer
Date:August 5, 2026
Re:Natures Refuge North 2nd Addition - Final Plat
Engineering Review - 037446-000
nd
WSB’s review of the Final Plat submittal for the Natures Refuge North 2 Addition in Lino Lakes,
MN, prepared by Carlson and received September 10, 2025. Our comments were made on the
following documents:
nd
Natures Refuge North 2 Addition Sanitary Sewer, Water Main, Storm Sewer, and Street
Construction Plans prepared by Carlson, dated July 10, 2026.
nd
Natures Refuge North 2 Addition Final Plat prepared by Carlson
The following review comments should be responded to in writing by the applicant. There are
additional redline comments on the plan set that should be responded to as well. Not all redline
comments are in the review memo.
Engineering
•General
nd
The Natures Refuge North 2 Addition is the second phase of the overall Natures Refuge
North development. The current project proposes the remaining 48 villa lots and associated
infrastructure. This property was originally part of a larger development of which an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared. The evaluation concluded that
the project did not have the potential for significant environmental effects.
•Grading
nd
The Natures Refuge North 2 Addition includes grading for the remaining 48 villa lots as
well as extensions of Fernwood Drive, Violet Lane and Ashwood Lane to Andall Street in
adjacent Arena Acres .
Comments:
1.Final grading plan consistent with approved Natures Refuge North Preliminary Plat
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2025
Page 2
•Stormwater Management
Stormwater management for the Natures Refuge North Addition consists of storm sewer
draining streets and yards, two sedimentation basins, and a large basin excavated for fill
material. The stormwater systems shall meet the City’s and Rice Creek Watershed District’s
(RCWD) Stormwater Management requirements. All proposed future public streets must
meet City design standards. Existing and proposed discharge rates are summarized below.
Pre- and Post- Development Discharge Rates (cfs)
Condition2-Year10-Year100-Year10-Day Snowmelt
Needed if basins
Existing0.260.958.68
landlocked
Needed if basins
Proposed0.451.077.46
landlocked
1.Storm sewer capacity calculations will be needed for the proposed storm sewer along
Ashwood Lane.
2.Inlet spread and run calculations will be needed to confirm public roads are designed
in accordance with City standards of maintaining an 8’ drivable lane during the 3-year
storm event.
3.The SWMP modeling must be updated to factor in the proposed routing of water via
storm sewer running west along Ashwood Lane. The wetland FES inlets will drain the
low spots differently than the latest submitted modeling.
a.This updated drainage may also impact wetland bounce/inundation
calculations.
•Water Supply
The proposed water system extension is consistent with the preliminary plat. This addition
of the development is being served by 12- inch, or 8- inch diameter ductile iron pipe (DIP)
water main with 1-inch Type K copper services being extended to each lot.
Comments:
1.See redline comments on attached plans
2.Verify potential conflicts at all utility crossings
a.Insulate when separation between storm sewer and watermain or forcemain
is less than 36"
•Sanitary Sewer
The proposed sanitary sewer is consistent with the preliminary plat. This addition of the
development is being served by 8-inch diameter poly-vinyl chloride (PVC) pipe along with
4-inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC service pipe to each lot.
Comments:
1.None
nd
Nature Refuge North 2 Addition Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2025
Page 3
•Transportation
The proposed roadways are consistent with the preliminary plat. The work in this addition
includes constructing Fernwood Drive, Violet Lane, and Ashwood Lane. Fernwood Drive
and Violet Lane are proposed to be 32’ wide from back-of-curb to back-of-curb, and
Ashwood Lane is proposed to be 24’ wide from back-of-curb to back-of-curb.
Trails and sidewalks
A trail and sidewalks are proposed to be installed consistent with the preliminary plat
including extending from Fernwood Drive to Haywood Drive. Reference the City
Planner’s report for further trail and sidewalk details.
Comments:
1.Ashwood Lane is to be 24’ wide face of curb to face of curb (26’ B-B)
•Wetlands and Environment
Wetlands and mitigation plan reviewed and approved during the Preliminary Plat.
Comments:
1.Wetland mitigation work (wetland creation and wetland restoration)to be
completed and documentation submitted to the City.
•Landscaping
nd
A Landscape Plan for Natures Refuge North 2 Addition has been submitted and will be
reviewed by staff and the City’s Environmental Coordinator. The Environmental Coordinator
will provide separate comments.
•Floodplain
nd
The Natures Refuge North 2 Addition does not impact the existing floodplain.
•Drainage and Utility Easements
Roadways are proposed within right-of-way and lots include standard drainage and utility
easements. Larger drainage and utility easements will be required to be provided over
any utilities outside the right of way and any surface water management features.
Comments:
1.Provide minimum 10' drainage and utility easement on either side of the storm
sewer (minimum 20' centered)
Development Agreement
A development agreement will be required with the final plat.
nd
Nature Refuge North 2 Addition Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2025
Page 4
Grading Agreement
Grading agreement not required at this time.
•Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
The stormwater maintenance for public facilities in the Natures Refuge North Addition will be
covered under the City’s Programmatic Stormwater Management Agreement after the
facilities have been installed and accepted by the City. Borrow areas / Lakes area will be
maintained by the HOA.
•Permits Required
Potential permits may include some of the following and others:
1.NPDES General Construction Permit
2.City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Construction
3.Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
4.Minnesota Department of Health
5.Rice Creek Watershed District Permit
6.US Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit
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.
nd
Nature Refuge North 2 Addition Engineering Review
Environmental Memo
To:Katie Larsen, City Planner
From:Tom Hoffman, Environmental CoordinatorTom Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator
Date:August 6, 2026
nd
Re: Environmental Comments – Natures Refuge North 2 Addition
Environmental Coordinator had recommended the following comments:
1.Include any removals of trees for storm sewer work and Ashwood. Any
additional proposed removals should be included in the plan.
2.Further evaluation of the proposed storm sewer along Ashwood will be
required. Provide information for change in HWL, Bounce, and inundation
for the adjacent wetland.
3.Any stormwater that can be routed to Natures Refuge North swales or ponds
should be directed to remain on site. Portions of lot 1 adjacent to Ashwood
and Fernwood show portions of the yard draining into the FES and not the
adjacent swale.
4.Grading of the proposed storm sewer needs to be adjusted to allow for a
swale or drainage over the proposed pipe to allow the existing yards to drain.
Currently it appears along the west end the grade is increasing that would
not allow water to drain and would push drainage on to the private property.
5.Consider raising the FES on both existing low points in the wetland fill area.
The south side of the road FES is proposed lower than the existing low point.
Some inundation in these areas is acceptable. Drainage should be held
onsite where feasible and the storm should act as an emergency overflow
and to allow drainage during large events to prevent flooding.
6.Provide a restoration and stabilization plan for the storm sewer
improvements.
7.Corner lots require two boulevard trees. Ashwood and Fernwood would
each require two boulevard trees one for each frontage. Coniferous trees
should not be included for boulevard plantings.
8.Landscaping along Ashwood should be completed to prevent future
encroachment into the sidewalk and road. Recommend planting overstory
trees along with coniferous and ornamental trees. Limiting the number of
trees to provide spacing, diversity, and variance in height is recommended.
9.Use of native shrubs in the understory is recommended along Ashwood,
Dogwood, Forsythia, Ninebark, and Viburnum would all be native shrubs to
provide screening and allow for a diversity of planting along with over story
and canopy trees.
Page 2
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7E
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner
MEETING DATE: August 12, 2026
TOPIC:Harvest Grange Final Plat
CASE NUMBER: FP2026-0002
APPLICANT: Twin Cities Land Holding, LLC
Attn: Ben Schmidt and Christine Cook
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 100
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
OWNER: Multiple (Rehbein, Nelson, Shudy)
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, Twin Cities Land Holding, LLC, submitted a land use application for final plat for a
residential subdivision called Harvest Grange. The final plat contains 30 single family lots and
65 townhome lots for a total of 95 residential lots.
Tentative Review Schedule:
Complete Application Date:July 13, 2026
60-Day Deadline:September 11, 2026
Environmental Board Meeting:N/A
Park Board Meeting:N/A
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting:August 12, 2026
City Council Work Session:September 14, 2026
City Council Meeting:September 14, 2026
This staff report is based on the following information:
Applicant Narrative dated July 10, 2026
Harvest Grange Preliminary Plat Plan Set prepared by Carlson Engineering revision date
June 24, 2026
1
Harvest Grange Grading, Development & Erosion Control Plans prepared by Carlson
Engineering revision date July 23, 2026
Land Use Plan prepared by Carlson Engineering revision date May 11, 2026
Net Area Exhibit prepared by Carlson Engineering revision date May 11, 2026
Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Carlson Engineering revision date June 29,
2026
Harvest Grange Final Plat
Title Commitment dated June 8, 2026
BACKGROUND
On June 8, 2026, the City Council passed Resolution No. 26-23 approving the preliminary plat.
The Council staff report and resolution detail the project’s consistency with the City’s
Comprehensive Plan and compliance with the City Code.
ANALYSIS
Preliminary Plat
The preliminary plat contains the following lots and blocks:
Lot or OutlotPurposeOwnership
Lots and Blocks30 single family lotsPrivate
Lots and Blocks65 townhome lotsPrivate
Lot 41, Block 12 townhome common lots
HOA
Lot 56, Block 2and Private Streets
Wetlands, buffers,
Outlot Astormwater ponds, HOA
floodplain mitigation
Outlot BWetlands and bufferHOA
Wetlands, buffer,
Outlot CCity
floodplain mitigation
Phasing Plan
The development is proposed to be constructed in one (1) phase.
Final Plat
The final plat contains the same lots, blocks, and outlots as the above noted preliminary plat.
2
Public Land Dedication
The City will collect a cash fee in lieu of land dedication.
Harvest Grange
Total # Units =95
x Park Dedication Fee$3,800
= Cash in Lieu Value$361,000
Title Commitment
The City Attorney reviewed the title commitment and final plat. The title commitment needs to
be updated to match the final plat.
Agreements
Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
o The stormwater maintenance for public facilities (Pond 100 and 200) in the
Harvest Grange development will be covered under the City’s Programmatic
Stormwater Management Agreement after the facilities have been installed and
accepted by the City.
o The stormwater maintenance of the borrow areas will be maintained by the HOA
and a Declaration for Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities will be required.
Both the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) and the City of Lino Lakes shall
be parties to the Declaration.
Development Agreement and Final Plat
o A Development Agreement will be prepared by the City and shall be executed.
Site Improvement Performance Agreement
o Not applicable.
Findings of Fact
Per City Code Section 1001.057 Review, Approval or Denial:
(1) The Planning and Zoning Board shall consider the final plat and the Community
Development Department shall forward the Planning and Zoning Board recommendations to
the City Council. The following requirements shall be met before consideration of the final plat
by the Planning and Zoning Board:
3
(a)The final plat shall substantially conform to the approved preliminary plat and phasing
plan;
The final plat substantially conforms with the preliminary plat and phasing plan.
(b)For plats that consist solely of individual single family residential lots, final plat
applications for subsequent phases shall not be approved until building permits have
been issued for 40% of lots in the preceding phase. This division applies only when the
preceding phase consists of 40 or more lots; and
NA. The development is proposed to be constructed in one (1) phase.
(c)Conditions attached to approval of the preliminary plat shall be substantially fulfilled or
secured by the development agreement, as appropriate.
The conditions of the preliminary plat have been substantially fulfilled. Securities will be
required with a Development Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Harvest Grange final plat with the following conditions:
1. Outlot A, Outlot B, private streets, cluster mailbox units (CBU’s), and monument sign
shall be owned and maintained by an HOA.
2.Outlot C shall be owned and maintained by the City.
3.The private street shall gain access from the public street and shall maintain the street
drainage with concrete curb and gutter per City Standard Specifications for
Construction. Private street access on urban and rural streets shall have at a minimum a
five-foot bituminous or concrete apron. The remainder of the private street shall be
designed, constructed and surfaced as approved by the City Engineer.
th
4.All townhome units adjacent to 20 Avenue (CSAH 54) shall be constructed in such a
way that the exterior to interior sound level attenuation is at least 30dB(A) as detailed in
the noise study.
a.Window areas shall require a minimum STC 30 glazing.
5.The developer shall submit to the City the MPCA SSTA Abandonment Reporting Form as
proof that the private septic system has been properly removed.
6.The developer shall submit to the City the MDH Well and Boring Sealing Record as proof
that the private well has been properly capped.
The following items shall be addressed prior to releasing the final plat:
1.Additional road right-of-way shall be dedicated along CSAH 54 near Cedar Street to fit
the proposed roundabout and all sidewalks, trails, ramps, etc.
2.All comments from the City Attorney.
a.The title commitment needs to be updated to match the final plat.
4
The following items shall be addressed prior to issuing building permits:
1.All comments from the City Engineer memo dated August 5, 2026.
2.All comments from the Environmental Coordinator memo dated July 23, 2026.
3.All comments from Anoka County Highway Department.
4.A FEMA LOMR will be required prior to issuing building permits for impacted lots within
the floodplain.
5.Recorded copies of the following documents shall be provided to the City:
a.Final plat
b.Development Agreement
c.Declaration of Maintenance for Stormwater Facilities
d.Deeds
i.Outlots A and B to HOA.
ii.Outlot C to City.
6.Copies of the following documents shall be provided to the City:
a.MPCA SSTA Abandonment Reporting Form
b.MDH Well and Boring Sealing Record
ATTACHMENTS
1.Preliminary Plat
2.Final Plat
3.City Engineer Memo dated August 5, 2026
4.Environmental Coordinator Memo dated July 23, 2026
5
Memorandum
To:Katie Larsen, Lino Lakes City Planner
From:Kris Keller PE, WSB
Diane Hankee PE, Lino Lakes City Engineer
Date:August 5, 2026
Re:Harvest Grange (formerly Nelson-Rehbein) Parcels
Final Plat Review
037530-000
WSB’s review of the Final Plat for the Harvest Grange (formerly Nelson-Rehbein) development
in Lino Lakes, MN, prepared by Carlson Engineering and received July 13, 2026. Our comments
were made on the following documents:
Harvest Grange – Final Plat Submittal prepared by Carlson Engineering, dated June 24,
2026.
The following review comments should be responded to in writing by the applicant.
Engineering
•General
th
The Harvest Grange development includes approximately 25 acres west of 20 Avenue
(CSAH 54), between Red Oak Lane and West Cedar Street. The current conceptual project
proposes 30 single family lots and 67 Townhome lots (2 common) (97 lots total) and
associated infrastructure.
•Grading
The Harvest Grange development includes site grading for the 97 lots/units as well as
extensions of Heritage Avenue, and other local public street (Bluestem Drive) and private
streets (Harvest Way, Autumn Court, Golden Lane).
Comments
1.See additional red line comments on plan sheets
•Stormwater Management
Stormwater management for the Harvest Grange site consists of a two sedimentation
basins to provide rate control and water quality treatment. Additional grading is proposed
for borrow material and floodplain fill mitigation. There is a significant amount of offsite
flows from the east and south that will be passed through the site via an existing ditch
system. Existing and proposed discharge rates are summarized below.
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 2
Pre- and Post- Development Discharge Rates (cfs)
Condition2-Year10-Year100-Year10-Day Snowmelt
Needed if basins
Existing30.9465.31130.15
landlocked
Currently Needed if basins
13.0229.7163.74
Proposedlandlocked
Comments
1.More detailed utility design will be required in future submittals to review
constructability and conflicts. More comments may be generated at that time.
Carlson Response (5/8/26) Noted.
WSB Response/Comment (5/27/2026) Comment remains open for future
submittals.
Carlson Response (7/13/26) Attached final plans for review.
WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) See markup on plans for utility crossings.
2.The existing ditch system needs to cleared and cleaned out and regraded with the
project. Please incorporate into the final construction plans according.
Carlson Response (5/8/26) To be discussed. This may cause wetland impacts.
WSB Response/Comment (5/27/2026) Ditch maintenance is required and not
considered wetland impact if addressing erosion.
Carlson Response (7/13/26) Discussions with RCWD and city in process.WSB
Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Site visit – Ditch is being replaced with pipe and
otherwise can remain as wetland. Maintenance of wetlands not required. Will
th
remove sediment downstream 20 Ave culvert crossing. Applicant to included the
Drainageway cleanout exhibit information on the grading plan also. Or include the
exhibit in the plan set.
3.WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Inlet spread and run calculations, especially
at sag points, are needed to confirm public roads are designed in accordance with
City standards of maintaining an 8’ drivable lane during the 3-year storm event.
4.WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) The FES upstream of STMH 1000 is shown
with an invert of 902 in the plans, but an invert of 901 in the model.
•Water Supply
Water supply for the Harvest Grange development will be served by an existing 16-inch
diameter trunk watermain along 20th Avenue (CSAH 54) that will be looped through the site
to an existing 8” diameter watermain within Heritage Avenue. Otherwise, the development
will include a water system with predominately 8- inch diameter ductile iron pipe (DIP) water
main with 1-inch Type K copper services being extended to each lot. An additional water
stub will be extended to the north along Street D for looping and future development.
The development is in the City’s Drinking Water Study Management Area and has
moderate vulnerability and would be subject to those requirements.
Harvest Grange Submittal - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 3
The City’s water system has the pumping capacity to supply the proposed project.
However, due to the City’s limited firm capacity each project is being evaluated on a case-
by-case basis to determine its impact on the system’s peak day demand.
Comments
1.WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Discussion of use of HDPE vs PVC C900
for directional drilling
2.WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Applicant to verify water pressure is
adequate for all locations within the development. All proposed units are required
to be on the municipal water supply.
•Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary sewer collection for the Harvest Grange development will be served by the
existing 8-inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) sanitary sewer within Heritage Avenue and will be
extended north to serve the site. The site will be served along with 4-inch Schedule 40
PVC service pipe to each lot. An additional sanitary sewer stub will be extended to the
north along Bluestem Drive
Comments
1.WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) No comments
•Transportation
The Harvest Grange property is adjacent to 20th Avenue (CSAH 54) which is A-Minor
Arterial Reliever, Heritage Avenue and Red Oak Lane, which are local roads. The
applicant is showing connections with the right of way to Heritage Avenue in the south
portion of the development and at 20th Avenue (CSAH 54) across from Cedar Street. The
intersection of 20th Avenue and Cedar Street was reviewed with Anoka County and the
project traffic engineer. It was determined that a southbound right turn lane on 20th
Avenue is required. A northbound left turn lane was considered; however, with the
planned future roundabout at this location, an additional turn lane is not required with this
phase of development.
A traffic study has been completed for the proposed development. The Level Of Service
analysis of intersection capacity meets the City’s Ordinance. The proposed traffic volume
increase on local roads is well within the capacity of the roadway. The City of Lino Lakes’
Transportation Plan details the importance of neighborhood street connections.
Trails and sidewalks
Additional trails and sidewalks will be required along the interior and connector roads as
directed by the City Planner.
Comments
Harvest Grange Submittal - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 4
1.Anoka County to verify turn lane requirements at the temporary right-in, right-out.
Carlson Response (5/8/26) This is being coordinated with the county.
WSB Response/Comment (5/27/2026) A southbound right-turn lane is shown at the
access across from Cedar Street. Add required signing and striping for the turn lane
on final plans.
Carlson Response (7/13/26) Noted – turn lane plans attached. Responses to
ACHD letter attached.
WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Provide final approval letter from Anoka
County
2.Provide proposed signing and pavement marking on future site plans.
Carlson Response (5/8/26) To be shown on final construction plans.
WSB Response/Comment (5/27/2026) To be verified in a future submittal.
Carlson Response (7/13/26) See attached final plans.
WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Bluestem Dr/Golden Ln intersection okay;
Discuss remaining horizontal curves that are less than 200’ and potential need for
additional reduced speed signage
3.Provide street profiles with horizontal and vertical curves that meet 30 MPH
stopping sight distance requirements
Carlson Response (5/8/26) Unable to adjust street horizontal curves due to site
conditions. Vertical curves may be adjusted as necessary, reduced speed limit
signs can be added for streets that do not meet 30 MPH requirements.
WSB Response/Comment (5/27/2026) Adjust curves or add advisory signage for
curves based on MUTCD guidance.
Carlson Response (7/13/26) 15 MPH Reduced speed warning sign (yellow) added
for curve along Street D / Street A.
WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Bluestem Dr/Golden Ln intersection okay;
Discuss remaining horizontal curves that are less than 200’ and potential need for
additional reduced speed signage
4.WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Push the streetlight at Heritage connection to
the north to be between the existing red oak and Bluestream.
a.Add street light at Bluestream and 20th Street
5.WSB Response/Comment (8/5/2026) Provide how the proposed turn lane curb and
gutter terminate in the middle of the existing business entrance?
•Landscaping
A Landscape Plan for the Harvest Grange development has been submitted and is being
reviewed by staff and the City’s Environmental Coordinator. The Environmental Coordinator
will provide separate additional comments.
•Floodplain
The site includes ~5% Zone A Floodplain. The Base Flood Elevation is currently
shown as 901.18 per RCWD and will need to be approved by FEMA but, typically,
the RCWD elevation is accepted by FEMA. A LOMR will be required as well as
applicable floodplain mitigation prior to the issuance of building permits for affected
Harvest Grange Submittal - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 5
lots. The LOMR-F application will need to be submitted post grading. The
floodplain cut and fill figure indicates a net increase in floodplain volume, this must
be maintained for RCWD and FEMA floodplain permitting.
•Drainage and Utility Easements
Roadways are proposed within right-of-way and lots include standard drainage and utility
easements. Larger drainage and utility easements will be required to be provided over
any utilities outside the right of way and any surface water management features. The
western 60’ feet of CSAH 54 should be dedicated as right of way to Anoka County as well
as an additional trail easement.
Conservation easements will be required over wetlands. Standard side yard drainage and
utility easements and easements over public utilities will be required.
Comments
1.Reference in proposed roundabout at Cedar to verify that right of way and
setbacks are sufficiently provided
Development Agreement
A development agreement will be required with the final plat.
Grading Agreement
Grading agreement not required at this time.
•Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
The stormwater maintenance for public facilities (Pond 100 and 200) in the Harvest Grange
development will be covered under the City’s Programmatic Stormwater Management
Agreement after the facilities have been installed and accepted by the City.
The stormwater maintenance of the borrow areas will be maintained by the HOA and a
Declaration for Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities will be required. Both the Rice Creek
Watershed District (RCWD) and the City of Lino Lakes shall be parties to the Declaration.
•Permits Required
Required permits will be determined at the time of preliminary plat submittal. Potential
permits may include some of the following and others:
1.NPDES General Construction Permit
2.City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Construction
3.Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
4.Minnesota Department of Health
5.Rice Creek Watershed District Permit
6.Anoka County Right-of-Way Permit
7.FEMA CLOMR and LOMR
Harvest Grange Submittal - Engineering Review
Ms. Katie Larsen
08/05/2026
Page 6
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.
Harvest Grange Submittal - Engineering Review
Environmental Memo
To:Katie Larsen, City Planner
From:Tom Hoffman, Environmental CoordinatorTom Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator
Date:July 23, 2026
Re: Environmental Comments – Harvest Grange Preliminary Plat
The Environmental Board recommended the following at their January 28, 2026 meeting:
1.Stormwater management to be reviewed by City Engineer.
a.Use of stormwater for irrigation purposes for the site should be evaluated
and if feasible, required as part of site development. Larger stormwater
ponds constructed for fill should be evaluated for water reuse.
b.Infiltration is not feasible onsite.
2.Final wetland banking mitigation credits shall be submitted to the city with
confirmation of the bank location.
a.Waiting on final NOD for Shudy Wetland updates
3.Floodplain alterations shall be completed through RCWD and FEMA for any
changes. Any LOMR-F should be completed by the developer to ensure property
owners aren’t required to obtain flood insurance.
a.Floodplain mitigation is being completed onsite and is meeting the
required replacement ratio. Any changes within the floodplain or
mitigation areas shall be submitted to the city and watershed for review.
4.Several green ash trees are shown in the tree inventory as being saved. Based on
the widespread nature of EAB in Lino Lakes, the majority of Ash are infected or
dead.
a. If the ash tree hasn’t been treated for EAB in the past, removal should be
evaluated as part of the project to limit dead trees and maintenance
issues after home construction.
5.Seed mixes should be updated to MNDOT seed mix design numbers for final
plans. Please provide more site-specific mixes for each location.
a.Native weed free seed mixes should be proposed to promote wildlife
habitat and native ecosystems.
6.Low maintenance turf should be evaluated throughout the development.
Ground covers should be drought resistant to reduce the need for irrigation use.
7. Plans show 10’ turf maintenance area. 10’ is not a large enough access area to
provide future maintenance and trucking. Lot 25 block one should show
maintenance access extending into the drainage and utility easement.
a.Turf is acceptable through the yards, but should be native ground cover
along the basin and through outlot A.
b.Lot 38 of the town homes appears to have turf going into the buffer area
along the drainage swale. Additional buffer should be provided where
possible to enhance sediment and pollutant removal.
8.Provide maintenance access to manhole between lots 37 and 38. Between the
retaining wall and drainage swale access for future maintenance looks difficult.
9. EOF’s between the stormwater basins and drainage swale should be stabilized to
prevent future maintenance and erosion concerns.
10.Confirm ownership and maintenance for the drainage swale, understanding is
that the city would maintain pipe crossings conveying public drainage. The rest
of the system would be privately owned.
11.Provide final calculations and plans for the water re-use irrigation system.
a.Include maps of green space to be irrigated.
b.Maintenance and Use agreements will need to be completed for water
re-use.
i.To be included with final plans
12.The project will disturb more than an acre of soil and will be required to obtain an
NPDES permit. Proof of permit shall be required before construction.
a.Provide Copy of NPDES Permit
b.A SWPPP shall be required in additional submittals as required by the
MPCA meeting sections 5.2-5.26
c.Final erosion and sediment control will be reviewed with future
submittals
13.Tree removal should be completed in the fall or winter to minimize impacts to
migrating or nesting bat populations
Page 2
14.Recommend planting no more than 30% of a genus for tree planting.
Ornamentals currently show 50% for Crab apple.
15.Currently have 33 boulevard trees show for 30 lots, including to corners. Lot 6
Block 2 has 3 trees. Confirm calculations to reflect additional tree.
16.Driveways on the town homes do not show turf or vegetation between each unit.
Provided additional detail on the areas between driveways and the type of
ground cover.
a.Plans show cross hatching on the landscape plan but there is no legend
showing what type of vegetation is proposed. Assuming it is turf grass in
between the town home driveway.
b.Plans show no detail of landscaping for the front of the town homes.
Provide a landscape detail showing planting of the front foundations and
between driveways.
17.On the landscape plan add a detail or comment of where the 27 required
boulevard trees are for the town homes. I’m having a hard time distinguishing
open space and boulevard trees in these areas to verify requirements.
a.Boulevard trees should be spaced between the driveways were feasible
to break up the impervious and provide shade.
Page 3