The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09/29/2008 Council PacketWORK SESSION AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Monday, September 29, 2008 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION DRAFT 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW Community Room (not televised) 5:30 — 7:30 p.m. 1. Plan Overview 2. Land Use Map 3. Staging Map 4. Growth Management 5. Resource Management System Plan 6. Implementation 7. Set Next Meeting Date CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT : September 10, 201 . 6:31 P.M. : 10:08 P.M. Michael Hyden, Perry Laden, Robert Nelson, Brian Pogalz (Vice Chair), Rob Rafferty, Michael Root, Paul Tralle (Chair) : None : Paul Bengtson, Michael Grochala, Jeff Smyser, Jim Studenski I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Tralle called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. on April 9, 2008. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 9, 2008 Mr. Laden made a MOTION to approve the July 9, 2008 Minutes. Motion was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 - 0. (2 abstained) IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Tralle declared Open Mike at 6:34 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike. Mr. Pogalz made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:35 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Root. Motion carried 6 - 0. V. ACTION ITEMS A. Recommendation to the City Council regarding approval of the Draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 10, 2008 Page 2 Jeff Smyser, City Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Smyser explained the process that led to the drafting of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Smyser stated that the draft plan was well received by the other boards, and a few minor corrections were suggested. Ciara Schlicting, Bonestroo consultant firm, provided an overview of the Comprehensive Plan and pointed out some of the proposed corrections. Ms. Schlicting's presentation included key components of each chapter as well as implementation plans to support the visions, goals & policies. One suggested modification was the extension of the trail along Elmcrest Ave. Ms. Schlicting added that staff recommended additional designated bike routes along Sunset & County Road J per citizen comments. She also pointed out some corrections that should be made to the Future Roadway System maps. As a result of the joint meeting of the Environmental Board and Park Board, a text revision was recommended in Chapter 11 regarding the city taking over the tile system west of 20th Avenue. Board Members requested additional information regarding the Urban Reserve designation. Ms. Schlicting stated that most growing communities currently use Urban Reserve as a designation. She noted that Met Council began using the designation of Urban Reserve during the 1996 regional framework, and she is not aware of any legal challenges regarding the use of Urban Reserve. She explained that the key benefit of Urban Reserve is to keep larger parcels intact so that master planning can be done to achieve the goals of the plan. She explained that if large parcels are carved into smaller lots, then it becomes more difficult to provide necessary services that interconnect to other parcels. Board Members discussed development and staging. Ms. Schlicting described that although there would be no cap on development, staging areas would allow for projected growth that could be accommodated for in each staging area. She noted that the issue of rate versus quality of development was discussed at length by the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Panel. Mr. Smyser stated that page 3 -25 of the 2030 Draft Comprehensive Plan contains the Growth Management Policy Framework Outline. He explained that when the city approaches the 10 -year threshold to when the next staging area would begin, the City Council would need to determine whether or not the city is ready to open up that next staging area. He explained that inadequate infrastructure may determine that new development areas are not ready for development. He noted that development within a staging area would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment prior to the designated time. Mr. Tralle opened the Public Hearing at 7:30 p.m. Doug Koppy, 6689 East Shadow Lake Dr., and Bill Princeton, 7023- 256th St., were in attendance to represent the Rice Creek Snowmobile Trail Club. They asked if the city DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 10, 2008 Page 3 had considered the existing snowmobile trails that are present in Lino Lakes. They stated that it appears that some of the proposed city trails go over the snowmobile trails that have existed for 25 years. They noted that these are DNR sponsored trails. Mr. Koppy distributed a map of the existing snowmobile trails. He was concerned that the city would be taking the existing trails away. He added that Mr. VonDeLinde (Anoka County Parks Dept.) is aware of the existing trails. He stated that the city's map is not definitive enough to show the exact location of the trails, but the location of city trails has caused the club problems in the past. He stated that they would like to be involved in discussions of trail locations. He added that some areas of the city include snowmobile trails that run alongside of paved trails. City Staff responded that the majority of the snowmobile trails in the city are within the regional park, and are therefore not under the city's jurisdiction. Mr. Grochala said that the city did consider this issue when locating the trail behind the YMCA in Lino Lakes. Staff noted that language would be added to the plan recognizing snowmobile trails. Dan Waldoch Jr., 559 Lois Ln., Lino Lakes stated he is a 58 -yr. resident. Mr. Waldoch was present to discuss the proposed change for 1001 Main St. He noted that these properties are in an estate and to settle the trust they will be sold in the future. He stated that they are currently zoned with a 10 -acre minimum to provide a number of buildable sites. He said that the new proposed Urban Reserve will reduce it to two conforming lots and one non - conforming lot. He added that this will reduce the value of the parcels. He requested that the minimum lot size does not change and thanked the board for their consideration. Jeff Joyer, 8174 Lake Drive, stated he has been a resident since 1978. He noted that his parcel is the "front door" to the Waldoch Farm/Center. Mr. Joyer spoke about three groups of parcels. He thanked the board for this amazing process and noted that he was a former Planning & Zoning Board Member & task force member. Mr. Joyer commended the board's efforts. Mr. Joyer distributed a handout he had created showing the location of the parcels he referred to as "Parcel A," "Parcel B," and Parcel C," in addition to the Family Trust parcel. He noted that staff had spent a number of hours with his family describing the proposed impact to these parcels. Mr. Joyer explained the size of the parcels and the use of the land, as well as the history of owners. He noted that utilities are currently at the intersection of Lake Dr. & Main St. He stated that with each plan revision, the parcels have been rezoned and the required lot size has increased. He was concerned that the next generations will not have an opportunity to build. He said the current proposed plan pushes development too far into the future and noted it was a bit of a shock to discover the recent change to his site. Mr. Joyer explained that three years ago they proposed to add a year -round retail center to their existing garden center, and were told by the city that it would only be possible if they brought in sewer and water and fire suppression throughout the greenhouses. He stated that today they are faced with the fact that they cannot build commercial without sewer and water, and that utilities will not be available until after 2030. He stated this makes it difficult to have a viable growing business or for the next generation to continue in a viable manner. He said this is creating an environment with few options for owners to build and grow. He offered a solution could be to allow a 30 -acre parcel in the Urban DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 10, 2008 Page 4 Reserve to have commercial. He pointed out that all three parcels directly adjoin the area where sewer will be provided. He wondered how the council proposes to provide utilities to existing properties without the extension to a new commercial development. He stated that a very abrupt line has been drawn along these parcels. Mr. Joyer stated that he would prefer to develop on his property prior to the proposed staging timeline, and provided specific recommendations for staff and the board to consider for each of the three parcels. He noted that he had discussed these recommendations with staff and he would welcome an option for change. Mr. Joyer added that the parcel that is held in a family trust has been pastured and farmed for 92 years, and that this is not necessarily a practical solution for the future. Michael Grochala, Community Development Director, provided some insight to the process leading to the proposed changes to these parcels. Mr. Grochala noted that the 2007 map referenced by Mr. Joyer is the full build map included within the draft plan. The full build map identifies the Joyer property as future commercial and high density residential. In the short term (2030 Plan) the area is shown as Urban Reserve. The location of the Urban Reserve was determined by evaluating the staging plan. Both the development forecasts and the sanitary sewer capacity was analyzed to guide the location of the stage 1 and stage 2 lines. He explained that there are five sewer districts in the city, each with sub - districts. Staging in each sewer district is planned to ensure there will be sewer capacity and to ensure a rational development sequence. He pointed out that the Joyer property was located in Sewer District 2. The City does not currently have capacity within the system to service all of district 2. He noted that staff identified the areas that have the existing necessary infrastructure for development. The plan is to bring a trunk reliever up the west side of the city that will free up capacity in the rest of District 2. Without the reliever, capacity is limited to the point that only the Stage 1 area can be served. He explained that the sod farms would need to develop in order to allow for expansion into the Waldoch area. He added that the plan is to reserve capacity for existing unsewered neighborhoods prior to allocating service to new development areas. He pointed out that the Waldoch property and the Joyer property will be serviced by separate lines, and the city is not projecting enough growth to bring utilities to all this land in the foreseeable future. Mr. Grochala pointed out that keeping these properties Urban Reserve at one unit per forty acres would alleviate conflict as future development occurs. He noted that staff would have no issue with moving Parcel C, as identified, into the Stage 1 growth area, as it is immediately adjacent to the utilities from the Pine Glen subdivision. He noted that a review of the Comp Plan every two years could provide opportunity for revisions if development, such as the sod farms, should occur earlier than anticipated. Board Members voiced their understanding that reserving capacity is one of the mechanisms to control growth before it is ready to occur. Development at this location will be dictated by what develops to the south, and that although a parcel may be moved from Stage 2 to Stage 1, development will still not occur until utilities are present. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 10, 2008 Page 5 Mr. Smyser explained that capacity for utilities is of utmost importance and that the problem with the last plan was that it did not consider the availability of service to areas. The city is trying to avoid misleading property owners, and reiterated that the expectations of the past could not be fulfilled, so staff is trying to avoid creating this problem again. Mr. Tralle called for a 10- minute recess at 8:35 p.m. Mr. Tralle reconvened the meeting at 8:48 p.m. Board members discussed the proposed revisions to the parcels. Staff explained that the need for fire suppression for the expansion of retail space at the garden center is a state fire code requirement. Regarding the staging areas, staff noted that a city always has to identify needs and draw a line, as development drives the installation of a pipe. Staff pointed out that a residential area along Orange St. and Maple Street with lots of around 10,000 sq. ft. with on -site sewer systems will require sewer service soon from a public health standpoint. The city needs to plan for service to that area. Board Members further discussed the Urban Reserve designation. Some members thought that Parcels A & B should be designated at one unit per ten acres versus permanent rural. They were reminded that any parcel designated as Urban Reserve will remain as such until someone comes in with a development proposal. Staff noted that most property owners will wait to develop when sewer is available. Board Members asked if staff had considered cluster developments. Staff replied that clustering works well in permanently unsewered areas. But, as soon as a cluster system is created, it becomes difficult to finance service to adjoining parcels when necessary, which sometimes causes a donut hole for infrastructure. Staff reminded the board that part of the city's growth management strategy is to provide a fully functional system. Staff reiterated that the Urban Reserve designation is just a holding area for development. The whole point of long term planning for full build out is to avoid these types of issues and problems in the future. Board members discussed the consideration of reducing the Urban Reserve requirements to one unit per ten acres. Those in favor of reducing the requirements stated that they understand the value of master planning, but acknowledge that it may cause limitations to families. Those against changing the requirements stated it would complicate things for the city, pointing out that this issue was discussed for a long time during the Comp Plan process. Board members stated that they understand that Urban Reserve is just a designation, and that the point is to maximize planning for optimal path for roads, neighborhoods and businesses although it may be a burden to some land owners. Staff reminded the board that there are areas in need of service, and the city would be remiss if they are not trying to service an area that could be a public health hazard. Staff explained the need to plan efficiently based on public, health, welfare and safety, and the need to deal with existing homes rather than future potential homes. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 10, 2008 Page 6 Board Members asked if Parcel B could be changed to Mixed Use. Ms. Schlicting replied that a Mixed Use designation would provide for flexibility. Mr. Grochala reiterated that they could amend the staging of Parcel B, but that development will drive the timing regardless. Board members were concerned that the Waldoch Farm could not expand their business. Staff pointed out that in order to expand, a business needs to be consistent with the full build plan of the city. Mr. Joyer's property is currently guided medium density, which means the existing business is in conflict with city's existing comprehensive plan. The proposed plan will eliminate this conflict. Once again, staff reminded the board that the current fire and building code requirements include a sprinkling suppression system for a retail business. In addition, the current city code states that no future commercial development is allowed without utilities. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to amend the 2030 Comp Plan by changing the Full Build Land Use designation of Parcel A from Commercial and High Density Residential to Mixed Use. Motion was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0. Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to amend the 2030 Comp Plan by changing the Staging Plan designation of Parcel B from Stage 3 to Stage 2. Motion was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. Board Members questioned if there would be any impediment to the city if this parcel was added to Stage 2. Staff explained that accommodations would have to be made to keep within the agreed upon growth forecast. Motion failed 3 — 4. (Hyden, Laden, Pogalz and Rafferty voting nay.) Mr. Laden made a MOTION to amend the 2030 Comp Plan by changing the Staging Plan designation of Parcel C from Stage 3 to Stage 1. Motion was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0. Deb Waldoch, 559 Lois Ln., commented about the sewer line near the end of Main St. near the Waldoch farm. Mr. Grochala explained that the existing sanitary sewer line is there, but that the depth of the line is too shallow to serve the Waldoch area. Area 2C, the Waldoch area, would require a new lift station in order to be developed. Board Members asked why the lift station in Pine Glen was designed to provide for a small area only. Mr. Studenski explained that the system is made up of trunk lines and service lines. He explained that large pipes run on Lake Drive and Main Street, and that the elevations of land cause a difference in the location of service. Cost & feasibility is considered with each service pipe. Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to recommend changing Urban Reserve to a density of one unit per ten acres. Motion was supported by Mr. Tralle. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 10, 2008 Page 7 Mr. Laden pointed out that after many meetings and work of the Comp Plan Advisory Panel, the board is drastically changing something that the panel had agreed on. Motion carried 4 -3. (Hyden, Laden and Pogalz voting nay.) Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 10:00 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 6 -0. Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to recommend approval of the Draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan as amended to the city council. Motion was supported by Mr. Root. Mr. Smyser added that a resident came into city hall earlier that day and requested a revision to move a three -acre parcel and a one -acre parcel into Stage 1 growth area. Mr. Smyser stated that staff is comfortable with the requested change because the sewer pipe is near and the additional few homes would not create a capacity problem. Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to amend the motion on the table to include the revision of the staging plan to include two small parcels on Birch St. into Stage 1. Motion was supported by Mr. Tralle. Mr. Rafferty thanked city staff and the P &Z Board members. Mr. Rafferty stated that he is not comfortable with the openness of the plan, but is in favor of the previous type of plan. Mr. Rafferty has a reservation to express a positive vote, but will do his best to ensure that the plan is everything it should be. Motion carried 5 — 1. (Rafferty voting Nay.) VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. None VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 10:08 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6 -0. Respectfully submitted, Dawn Bugge Community Development Assistant DRAFT MINUTES Lino Lakes 2030 Draft Comprehensive Plan Revisions Introduction The Lino Lakes 2030 Draft Comprehensive Plan was presented to the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Panel at several meetings during August of 2008 to obtain the panel's input on the draft plan. The Advisory Panel supported the overall content of the draft plan, but suggested several minor revisions. Following the Advisory Panel review, the draft plan was presented in August to the City's Environmental Board, Park and Recreation Board, and Economic Development Advisory Committee for their review and input. The plan was also presented at a public open house held on September 3`d. On September 10th, the plan was presented to the Planning and Zoning Board for review and recommendation for approval by the City Council. The Planning and Zoning Board suggested several revisions to the plan, but voted to recommend the plan for Council approval. Based on input received from the Advisory Panel, the Environmental Board, the Parks and Recreation Board, Economic Development Advisory Committee, the Planning and Zoning Board, and the public, a number of revisions were made to the draft plan provided previously to the Council. These revisions are summarized below. Chapter 3: Land Use Plan 1) Rural Land Use category name changed to Permanent Rural on all land use maps and text referencing this category throughout chapter. 2) Increased allowable density within Urban Reserve from 1 unit per 40 acres to 1 unit per 10 acres, which is consistent with current practices. References to 1 unit /40 acres eliminated and changed to 1 unit /10 acres throughout this chapter. 3) Figure 3 -2 Full Build Out Future Land Use Map: Parcel east of Lake Drive and north of Main Street that is currently guided for Commercial(18.6 acres) and High Density Residential (16.3 acres) changed to Mixed Use (Page 3 -12). Revised Figure 3 -2 is attached and the changes are summarized below: Previous Full Build Future Land Use Revised Full Build Future Land Use 1 4) Figure 3 -3 2030 Future Land Use Map: Parcel (3.5 acres) south of CSAH 14 guided for Urban Reserve taken out of Urban Reserve, guided as Medium Density Residential (Page 3 -13). Revised Figure 3 -3 is attached and the changes are summarized below: Previous 2030 Future Land Use 2.4 a) f4 I I m m Revised 2030 Future Land Use 2 a Cb _O m This change is also reflected on Figure 3 -4 Utility Staging Map, as the parcel was changed from Stage 3 Planned Service Area to Stage 1 Planned Service Area (Page 3 -23). Revised Figure 3 -4 is attached and the changes are summarized below: Previous Utility Staging Revised Utility Staging ■■;;111 ■... Oak Ln. • •• -• •.. .. ■ • • • • • 2 5) Figure 3 -3 2030 Future Land Use Map): Parcel (1.6 acres) south of Birch Street guided for Urban Reserve taken out of Urban Reserve, guided as Low Density Residential (Page 3 -13). Revised Figure 3 -3 is attached and the changes are summarized below: Previous 2030 Future Land Use Revised 2030 Future Land Use This change is also reflected on Figure 3 -4 Utility Staging Map, as the parcel was changed from Stage 3 Planned Service Area to Stage 1 Planned Service Area (Page 3 -23). Revised Figure 3 -4 is attached and the changes are summarized below: Previous Utility Staging Revised Utility Staging U 6) Added clarification to descriptions of Medium and High Density Residential that these areas will be served by municipal sewer and water (Page 3 -15). 7) Clarified Utility Staging requirements to state that development outside of the current staging area will be limited to 1 unit per 10 acres. Development will be limited to 1 unit per 10 acres until municipal sewer and water services are available (Page 3 -22). 8) Revised titles of Tables 3 -5 and 3 -6 to "Capacity for New Households" and "Capacity for New Employment" (Page 3 -24). Tables also appear in Chapter 4: Housing Plan (Page 4 -14) and Chapter 5: Economic Development (Page 5 -11). 9) Reduced number of Mixed Use acres in Table 3 -5 to include only Mixed Use acres dedicated to residential uses. 3 10) Added the following statement to the official controls strategies in the Implementation Section (Page 3 -28): "A zoning district or districts will be established as 'holding zones.' These holding zones are acceptable in all land use categories until development occurs. The site will then be zoned to the district appropriate to the land use category." This statement was also added to the official controls discussion in Chapter 11: Implementation (Page 11 -1). 11) Changed the reference from land use map to Comprehensive Plan in the first official controls strategy (Page 3 -28). The statement now reads "Update the zoning map to eliminate inconsistencies with the Comprehensive P /an. "This statement was also revised in Chapter 11: Implementation (Page 11 -1). Chapter 4: Housing Plan 12) Added housing unit totals in each community to Charts 4 -2, 4 -3, and 4 -4 (Page 4 -5 through 4 -7). 13) Revised implementation strategy concerning the completion of a senior housing market study to state that the City will cooperate with developers or other agencies to assess senior housing needs in the community as appropriate (Page 4 -19). Same strategy is also revised in Chapter 11: Implementation (Page 11 -4). Chapter 6: Transportation Plan 14) Added reference to new roadway from CSAH 54 /CSAH 34 intersection to Main Street (Page 6 -12). 15) Added reference to the need for improvements prior to 2030 for CSAH 34 from CSAH 49 to CSAH 54, and statement that the County and City will initiate a special study in the fall of 2008 to determine the appropriate design (Page 6 -13). 16) Several changes to Figures 6.6 Traffic Forecast (Post -2030 Full Build -Out) and 6.7 Future Roadway System (Post -2030) were made and these revised maps are attached. Major changes are related to: o moving Peltier Lake Drive to the east, o correcting the classification of 77th St E to a local road (verses a collector), and o including an extension of Elmcrest from 80th St E to the City of Columbus Chapter 10: Planning Districts 17) Removed reference to transferring jurisdiction of ditch and clay tile system, west of 20th Avenue, to the City (Page 10 -29). 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: September 26, 2008 TO: City Council FROM: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director RE: 2030 Comprehensive Plan Review Our first council work session to review the draft Comprehensive Plan is scheduled for 5:30 p.m., Monday, September 26, 2008 at City Hall in the Community Room. Enclosed for your review are the following meeting materials: 1. Agenda 2. Revisions Memo 3. Revised Maps • Fig. 3 -2, Full Build Out Future Land Use Map • Fig. 3 -3, 2030 Future Land Use Map • Fig. 3 -4, Utility Staging Map • Fig. 6.1, Roadway Network • Fig. 6.3, Proposed Functional Classification System • Fig. 6.4, 2030 Traffic Forecasts • Fig. 6.5, Future Roadway System (2030) • Fig. 6.6, Post -2030 Traffic Forecasts • Fig. 6.7, Future Roadway System (Post 2030) • Fig. 6.8, Transit Service and Facilities 4. Draft P & Z minutes from the September 10, 2008 Public Hearing PLEASE REMEMBER TO BRING your copy of the draft Comprehensive Plan which was distributed at the September 2, 2008 work session. S: \Community Development \Comp Plan Process \COUNCIL REVIEW\9 -29 -08 Work Session\MEMO 9 -29 -08 WS.doc ai in Main 80th St. E 5 i Oak Ln. Peltier Lake EEO George Watch Lake Marshan Lake Peltier Lake L City of C lllll MUM Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Centerville Regional Park Reserve Lake Rice Lake nm Reshanau Lake Birch St. h St. 1 Baldwin Lake l 2 0 2 Cedar Lake Amelia Lake Ash St. Otter Lake Full Build Out Future Land Use Map City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update -rigum 3- L •j _,, 1 Municipal Boundary MO Industrial L----\ Permanent Rural Civic /Institutional Low Density Residential Park/Open Space N Medium Density Residential Private Airfield Ell High Density Residential Right -of -Way 4,000 0 4,000 MO Commercial Open Water FeetPrepared by Bonestrc r" r Mixed Use K: /acivewod✓Gisserver 0 00 586- 06001 -O linolakescomplan/Full build oul.m. C I T 0 [IN KE5 September 22, 200 L Rondeau Lake Peltier Lake 140 L- 1 1 George Watch Lake Peltier Lake Marshan Lake Lake Centerville • ��li�,i.ap � loin i.M/ .A (♦ — ,°ill Reshanau Lake i_ ••_Liil Birch St. 64th St*E Cedar Lake Amelia Lake Ash St. Otter Lake 2030 Future Land Use Map City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 4,000 0 jam j Municipal Boundary Permanent Rural Urban Reserve Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential 4,000 MN High Density Residential Feet ® Commercial f -N9ure 3 -3 fallS Mixed Use Industrial NI Civic /Institutional NI Park/Open Space Private Airfield Right-of-Way Open Water CIT_ LNCE� September 22, 200 Prepared by Bonestro K: /arty vwork/Gisserver /000586 - 06001 -0 linoIakescomplan203011u.rry JLIl.•4•.sf_tf.il tl lulu •a11.J1. -au JUL" i- • -a•J,y a1. lam.• i- •- L:11L \LJll21ALl1L.lLAtJ • • :._aw.•a.NlYliiit7il�ryt .•• /�jjL YIJIYL�IY AVLLll SAI J-PA. AAA O. ILI AP••• cA 53 • 153 • • • 4 • • • 1 • Lilac St • • • • Elm St: 14 23 • "�• •• • Marshan • Lake • f • Peltier Lake . JUU•Li...-v-WV, •Jlt AYa3nl1.A• •,JUll• • •,••• Q • • •• • i. • • • • : City o t01:1" •,q • r' Rice .• Lake Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve • • Centerville Lake 9.• • • • Reshanau Lake t i • 3. C i • • ti • • • r Baldwin : Lake • • re • C O a s 07 • 'O Birch St. • • : • •-•-•-• r S Amelia Cedar :•4••1,ake Lake _% • • 2 '. o AshySt. 1- .. .. _ L Otter .•• : Lake i •._•_a•A.."•1,”•.3l▪ r- auL.•u.a -u sa.a..JU.IUAU.aAa•u•u •i.•_aL ▪ rrr111-•-ru7-r••111111-671vTrr rIls- •••▪ •r•r :4•••• •'' :34 •i Utility Staging Map City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update L\ N 4,000 0 4,000 Feet ••... j Municipal Boundary ,.,5 Stage 1 Planned Service Area (2008 -2020) h,,; Stage 2 Planned Service Area (2020 -2030) Stage 3 Planned Service Area (Post 2030) No Service Area Figure, 3• 4 MCES Interceptors NM Regional Park Reserve Wetlands Open Water Right -of -Way cir O [IN( L KE September 22, 200 Prepared by Bonestrc K /activework/Gis_server /000588- 06001 -0 li nelakescompla n/stag irg.m) 53 Columbus pW 2 140 ROOD \AIS IV" CARL ST OAK LN 771)$' ST W w W ■R z' 7 � EOF, ?E 0'4.,:H LA 77TH ST E o_. F = WJ cr APOLLO DR ELM ST MAIN ST Ceritervifle 80TH ST E 84 4 BIRCH ST HOLLY DR E LINDA AVE'. PINE RD AMELIA LAKE HOLLY DR Shoreview North Oaks A84 T_ILE LAM White Bear Twp 5Al /■ EI4 Roadway Network City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Freeway Lakes CSAH Streams County Road School Open Space/ City Parks Municipal Roads County Parks 4,000 0 4,000 Lino Lakes City Limits Feet Figure 6. C I T Y U KE� June 30, 200 Prepared by SRF Consulting Group, In INMaps15833 \mxd \FinalFigures \Figure 6- 1_IOadway_,network m " Columbus @FORCE W TGH1A,k£ CE UTERI/IL LE Lase LINDA AV PINE RD North Oaks Proposed Functional Classification System City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update ® Existing Full Access Interchange ® Existing Partial Access Interchange (Future Full Access) • Future Full Access Interchange N 4,000 0 4,000 Feet 111111111.111111111111 Principal Arterial A Minor Reliever A Minor Expander A Minor Connector B Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local Future Roadway White Bear Twp Lakes School Open Space/ City Parks County Parks Lino Lakes City Limits [IN Figure 6.: KEc Prepared by SRF Consulting Group, In i'\ Maps\ 5833 \mxd\Summe.ryFigures\Figure, 6.3 „FFC.rro Columbus 1000 000 24 10500 140 53 800 OAK LW 00'3 3000 MARl4,1, LAKE ttl ST 3200 4900 0 0 co 0 14200 TeT C;ircie Pities BIRCH ST 16900 F- " 2600 CN A LE 1,.,E •- tj 15900 4400 41000 WW1 84 700 4000 HOLLY DR E 2400 0 LINDAAVE ' Cr WHITE PINE RD z g 0 o 49 : 'cij3C 14900 Shoreview r§ 10900 62ND 2500 L Et, AP L E 12 4 WI/ KJKSCJ:! 21 North Oaks 1; 300 'EF ,4KF H ST E 0 White Bear Twp 2030 Traffic Forecasts (AADT) City of Linn Lakes 2008 Comnrehensive Plan Undate ® Existing Full Access Interchange 320 - 1,999 Lakes Streams Existing Partial Access Interchange 2,000 - 10,000 Future Full Access Interchange 10,001 - 20,000 imil■ 20,001 - 40,000 40,001 - 66,000 4,000 0 4,000 Feet School Open Space/ City Parks County Parks Lino Lakes City Limits Figure 6.4 C t T 0 1 KEc June 30, 2001 Prepared by SRF Consulting Gmup, Inc J \Maps \5(<33 \Summan/Figures1Figure_6-04...2030_volumes.mx, Columbus The appropriate design of CSAH 34 will be determined through a special study to be conducted by the city and county in fall 2008. North Oaks r H ST E 1 I 1I,IAKL i i White Bear Twp Future Roadway System (2030) City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update ® Existing Full Access Interchange Recommended Lanes* Existing Partial Access Interchange Six -Lane Divided Four -Lane Divided / \ ® Future Full Access Interchange Two -Lane N 4,000 0 4,000 Feet For Major and Minor Collectors, Minor Arterials and Principal Arterials except I -35W and I -35E INS Lakes Streams School Open Space/ City Parks County Parks Lino Lakes City Limits Figure 6.5 June 30, 200 Prepared by SRF Cunsutting Group, In' •J Maps\ 5833 \mxd \SumrnaryFigures\Figure_6 - 052030„ lanes. rn.% Columbus 77TH ST E 7,000 FELTIEP L4KE O HOLLY D'' E 2,400 11200 Shoreview North Oaks/ NAL () EA E f 4KF ,White Bear Twp Post - 2030 Traffic Forecast (AADT, Full Build -Out) City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update ® Existing Full Access Interchange ® Existing Partial Access Interchange (Future Full Access) ® Future Full Access Interchange N 4,000 0 4,000 micimmommo Feet 320 - 1,999 Lakes 2,000 - 10,000 Streams 10,001 - 20,000 School Open Space/ City Parks 20,001 - 40,000 County Parks 40,001 - 73,000 Lino Lakes City Limits Figure 6.6 [IN Q KE( June 30, 200 Prepared by SRF Consulting Group, In J:1Maps\ 5833' d\SummanyFigure;\Fgure_6. •08_F8. volumes.nu 28 Columbus .4(E RD — 1,000 o 0 E. C:t O ;000 0 9 000 3,400 140 53 ROAD AK LN do° 0 0 0 APO MAIN ST 13,100 41 36,000 9, P 111(.=,:S 100 43' LIND \M-Illt5 I Shoreview 15,900 CO • §.1 ;14 8 i-- - 2,600 400 HOLLY DR E 2,400 62ND $ 2,500 9,600 isle)11 7 North Oaks H ST E White Bear Twp Future Roadway System (Post-2030) City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update ® Existing Full Access Interchange Recommended Lanes* ED Access Existing Partial Acss Interchange Six-Lane Divided (Future Full Access) Four-Lane Divided • Future Full Access Interchange -- Two-Lane N #,### Traffic Forecast 2030 ' For Major and Minor Collectors, Minor Arterials and Principal Arterials except 4,000 0 4,000 1-35W and 1-35E Feet Lakes Streams IIIIII School Open Space/ City Parks County Parks . ' Lino Lakes City Limits Figure 6.7 0 ' C I Y IIN , 'AKE( June 30, 200; Prepared by SRF Consulting Group, In; JAMapst5833 tmxd1SummaryFigurestrigure_6-07;;FB_Ianessrix 53 ROAD J a l Nur W N • I', Columbus W' c 0 —4 \,OIS CARL ST x 153 lit 77TH ST W 77TH ST E 0 5 a WF 4 BIRCH ST • a c LINDA AVE 11 WHI E PINE RD I °% . F eview 62ND ST` • HOLLY DR N North Oaks COWRY 84 80TH ST E Hug White Bear Twp Transit Service and Facilities City of Lino Lakes 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Park & Ride Locations 4,000 0 4,000 i Feet Active BPlanned IMAM Bus Service X Surfside Seaplane Base/ Lino Air Park Lakes Streams School Open Space/ City Parks County Parks Lino Lakes City Limits Figure 6.8 CITY LN.i K. June 30, 2001 Prepared by SRF Consulting Group, Im J:Maps\5833 \Hued \SummaryFigures\Figure 6- 8_transy.mx